University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

School culture and its impact on PBIS implementation

(USC Thesis Other)

School culture and its impact on PBIS implementation

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

SCHOOL CULTURE AND ITS IMPACT ON PBIS IMPLEMENTATION

By

Maria Stamatogiannakis

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

© Copyright by Maria Stamatogiannakis 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Maria Stamatogiannakis certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Courtney Malloy
Maria Ott
Kathy Stowe, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract

Demand exists for behavior interventions that address the growing racial disparities seen
in disciplinary action, as well as the number of exclusionary practices used in K-12 schools every
year. One such disciplinary reform effort to address these demands has resulted in a movement
promoting Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS). Although the benefits of PBIS
programs are well studied, data suggests that PBIS must be implemented with fidelity to be
effective. This study sought to understand teachers’ perceptions of school culture and its
influence on PBIS implementation efforts. Additionally, this study probed teachers’ needs at
different systems levels in promoting a culture that supports PBIS. Using Bronfenbrenner’s
Ecological Systems Theory, elements within a teachers’ environment were identified and their
relationship to school culture were detailed in the literature review. The researcher employed a
qualitative methodology to examine the unique perceptions of ten middle school teachers in one
school district. Findings revealed that tenets of a strong school culture enhance teachers’ PBIS
implementation abilities and are essential for successful implementation. Specifically, factors
including collaboration and shared expectations created an environment where teachers openly
gave feedback, showed support, developed deeper understanding, and asked for help. Finally,
resources such as funding and professional development opportunities, as well as supportive
leadership from both administrators and teachers, increased teachers’ likelihood to promote
supportive aspects of their school’s culture. The study highlights the importance of considering
school culture when planning and implementing PBIS programs to ensure its success.
Understanding the relationship between school culture and evidence-based programs like PBIS
will support schools in their mission to provide equitable behavior interventions for all students.
Keywords: school culture, PBIS, implementation, middle school teachers

v

Acknowledgments

First, I am incredibly grateful to have been advised by Dr. Kathy Stowe, who has been a
steadfast presence throughout this journey. I would like to thank her for her support, guidance,
patience, and encouragement during these past three years. Her mentorship and expertise have
been invaluable in shaping my research questions, guiding my data analysis, refining my writing,
and easing my worries.
I would also like to extend my heartfelt thanks to the participants of my study, who
generously shared their time and insights with me. Without their willingness to engage in this
research, this dissertation would not have been possible.
I am grateful to the members of my dissertation committee, Dr. Malloy and Dr. Ott, for
their valuable feedback, critical insights, and encouragement. Their thoughtful questions and
suggestions challenged me to think deeply about my research and pushed me to produce the best
possible work.
I would like to acknowledge the love and support of my cohort, who provided friendship,
humor, and a listening ear throughout this process. Their belief in my abilities and their
willingness to provide a sounding board for my ideas were invaluable in keeping me motivated
and focused.
These acknowledgments would be incomplete without addressing the wonderful and
unwavering motivation I’ve had from my family. I am deeply grateful to my parents, Alixe and
Nick, for their love and encouragement, and for the priority they have always placed on my
education. Your willingness to make sacrifices to ensure my success have been a constant source
of inspiration and motivation.

vi
Lastly, and most of all, thank you to Andrew for your constant love and support
throughout this process. You always knew what was needed, whether it was a snack, a laugh, or
a shoulder to cry on. At many times, you believed in me more than I believed in myself and that
unwavering support and guidance is what allowed me to persevere. I am so grateful to have you
as a partner in life, and I can’t wait to see where our next chapter goes.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. x
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 4
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 9
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 11
Research Questions ……………………………………………………………………...12
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................. 13
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................. 15
Definition of Terms ........................................................................................................... 16
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 17
Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................................. 19
School Culture Versus School Climate ............................................................................. 20
Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory: An Overview .......................................... 25
Teacher's Self-Efficacy ..................................................................................................... 41
Supports at Different Systems Levels ............................................................................... 43
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 47
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 49
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 51
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 51
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 52
Research Setting ................................................................................................................ 53

viii

The Researcher .................................................................................................................. 55
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 57
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 59
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 60
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 61
Ethics ................................................................................................................................. 62
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 64
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 64
Findings for Research Question 1 ..................................................................................... 66
Findings for Research Question 2 ..................................................................................... 82
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 95
Chapter Five: Discussions and Recommendations ....................................................................... 97
Discusson of Findings ....................................................................................................... 97
Recommendations for Practice ....................................................................................... 103
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 108
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 110
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 111
References ................................................................................................................................... 114
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 138

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Research Questions as Instrumentation 53
Table 2: Participant Demographics 65
Table 3: Interview Analysis Categorization in Theme 1 67
Table 4: Findings of Sub-Themes in Theme 2 72
Table 5: High-Frequency Word Analysis in Theme 3 77
Table 6: Findings of Sub-Themes in Theme 1 83
Table 7: Findings of Sub-Themes in Theme 2 89

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 49

1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study

Introduction

School culture is a core tenet of effective school systems (Clifford et al., 2012; Dufour &
Fullan, 2013; Fiore, 2013; Gruenert, 2005; Hargreaves, 1995; Louis & Lee, 2016; Nehez &
Blossing, 2022; Shafer, 2018). Researchers who have studied culture demonstrate relationships
between culture and performance, including student achievement and teacher motivation (Bayar
& Karaduman, 2021; Deal & Peterson, 2016; Gruenert & Whitaker, 2017; Shafer, 2018;
Wagner; 2016). School culture is a multifaceted phenomenon that encompasses the shared
norms, values, and beliefs that shape how people perceive, think, and feel in their school
environment (Schein, 1992; Stolp & Smith, 1995). It is a qualitative factor that should be
leveraged by school administrators to drive efficacy. Studies of culture in all industries suggest
that it is critical to an organization’s success and is a determining factor in how well an
organization will respond and adapt to state, local, or federally mandated change (Deal &
Peterson, 2006; Deal & Peterson, 2016; Schein, 1992; Tamir & Gannon-Shilon, 2020). Given the
well-documented influence of school culture on several facets of achievement, this study looks to
understand the impact of culture on teacher self-efficacy with a focus on Positive Behavior
Intervention Support (PBIS) implementation efforts.
A significant issue facing education is the proper implementation of behavior
interventions that promote positive student outcomes. School discipline has been a contested
topic in the American education system for several decades. Disciplinary measures are intended
to decrease the likelihood of future misbehaviors, and historically, legislators and school leaders
have looked to punitive measures to maintain order (Payne & Welch, 2015). After nearly two
decades of punitive measures being the leading disciplinary action, legislators, superintendents,

2
administrators, parents, and teachers began calling attention to the disparate outcomes of these
behavior interventions (Bacher-Hicks et al., 2019; Boudreau, 2019; Curran, 2016). In 2014, The
U.S Department of Education and U.S Department of Justice issued a joint statement providing
guidance to schools in meeting federal obligations to administer non-discriminatory discipline.
Political influence and legal mandates have asserted the importance of teacher performance and
student outcomes. One result has been a focus on evidence-based practices to enhance student
outcomes (Kretlow & Bartholomew, 2010). In 2015, ESSA replaced the No Child Left Behind
Act of 2002 and became the nation’s leading primary education legislation, ensuring that public
schools provide a quality education for all kids. (ESSA, 2015). One tenet of this quality
education is the betterment of school safety and school climate as a means of improving student
outcomes (ESSA, 2015).
Many approaches have emerged to meet the growing demand for improving students’
learning and school experience. Schools have adopted evidence-based programs aimed at
enhancing students’ social and emotional competencies (Anderson, 2020; Becker et al., 2013).
The Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) assists schools in
making social and emotional learning an integral part of education through the identification of
emotional and behavioral competencies such as: self-awareness, self-management, responsible
decision-making, relationship skills, and social awareness (CASEL, n.d).
Reform efforts have been underway, requiring overhauls in the organizational structure
and culture of schools. One such disciplinary reform effort to address CASEL’s emotional and
behavioral competencies has resulted in a movement promoting positive behavioral
interventions. Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a muti-tiered system of
support (MTSS) designed as a prevention-oriented framework for strengthening the

3
implementation of interventions to support all students' academic, social, emotional, and
behavioral capabilities (Cressey et al., 2014; Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). Originally created to
distribute evidence-based interventions for students with Behavior Disorder I, the tenets of PBIS
have since shifted to focus on school-wide behavior support for all students (Sugai & Simonsen,
2012). Moreover, it is a framework that prioritizes preventative measures, including a range of
behavioral and academic programs, administered based on a 3-tier approach (Rivas, 2020; Sugai
& Simonsen, 2012). Particular strategies utilized at each tier are determined by the unique needs
of the student (Evanovich & Scott, 2016). As such, the emphasis is on the process rather than a
prescribed curriculum or practice (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). Advocates argue that PBIS can
reduce disparities in punitive consequences through the implementation of evidence-based
practices to support all students (Simonsen et al., 2008). Key implementation features to
facilitate successful implementation include: (a) identifying meaningful outcomes, (b)
establishing and investing in school-wide outcomes, (c) selecting and utilizing contextually
appropriate practices, and (d) collecting and using data to make decisions (Simonsen et al.,
2008). In addition to these four implementation features, literature suggests a necessary focus on
staff behaviors to promote success amongst all students (Evanovich & Scott, 2016).
These implementation components reveal the need to address the environment, or culture,
of a school prior to enactment of new strategies. In addition, these factors all have a direct
influence on teachers, creating a demand for more research focusing on the lived experiences of
teachers regarding self-efficacy and its impact on PBIS practices. Intervention outcomes are
directly impacted by the effectiveness of the primary implementer, which in many cases is the
teacher (Forman et al., 2009; Heck, 2009; Nichols et al., 2020). This knowledge makes it
imperative to dedicate more research to the topic of teacher self-efficacy and its relation to

4
school culture. Moreover, creating and maintaining environments characterized by prevention,
intervention, justice, and equity requires buy-in and promotion by teachers and staff, and more
research needs to be done in this area to support effective PBIS implementation.
School cultures are complex entities that develop over time as teachers, students,
families, and communities work together to combat crises and celebrate accomplishments (Deal
& Peterson, 2009; Deal & Peterson, 2016; Schein, 1985). Research continues to show the impact
of school culture on a variety of outcomes, including self-efficacy (Deal & Peterson, 2016;
Waters et al., 2004). Given the extensive research available on the importance of school culture
and on behavioral reform efforts separately, more research is needed on school culture and the
role it plays in such efforts. This study sought to understand the perceived relationship between
school cultures and PBIS implementation. Furthermore, this study addressed systems of support
needed by teachers when attempting to promote positive cultures.
Background of the Problem
Changes impacting education are often the result of nationwide school reform efforts.
School reform is an umbrella term for initiatives that intend to improve school outcomes (Doss et
al., 2020). Historically, school reform efforts have been characterized by external policies such
as No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) (Deal &
Peterson, 2016; Hess & McShane, 2018). Many of these external efforts have been modeled off
successful businesses with a focus on measurable outcomes (U.S Department of Education,
2007). While topics regarding state and federal mandates have dominated the literature on
educational reform efforts, there is increasing interest in investigating the development of school
culture to aid educational reform efforts within schools (Deal & Peterson, 2016). When
examining school reform efforts, research findings indicate that imposed policies and mandates

5
are less likely to be successful without cultural support (Deal & Peterson, 2016; Tamir &
Gannon-Shilon, 2020; Doss & Goke Akinniranye, 2020). Positive cultural factors drive success
and influence school functions (Deal & Peterson, 2016; Fullan, 2007). Furthermore, a strong
school culture may assist school improvement efforts during times of national reform (Tamir &
Gannon-Shilon, 2020).
Reform efforts that result in sustained change require research-based approaches which
facilitate buy-in from all stakeholders (Lightner et al., 2020; McKinney, & Reeves, 2014;
Woulfin, 2018;). One such reform effort is school discipline. Research has highlighted
relationships between suspensions and negative long-term outcomes (Bacher-Hicks et al., 2019;
Boudreau, 2019; Curran, 2016). A study focused on the causal impact of harsh discipline
strategies linked suspensions and other punishments with lower graduation rates, lower academic
achievement, lower college enrollment rates, and higher engagement in criminal justice systems
(Bacher-Hicks et al., 2020). The frequency of these outcomes is exacerbated when
disaggregating according to gender, race, and ability (Bacher-Hicks et al., 2020; Berwick, 2015;
Camera, 2019; NCES, 2019; Payne & Welch, 2015).
Educators typically have one goal regarding school discipline: to create and sustain safe
learning environments where all students can grow (Grennberg et al., 2014). The best solution
for creating and sustaining these learning environments has been debated for the past four
decades, starting with the emergence of zero tolerance policies in the early 1980s (APA, 2008;
Stahl, 2016). The U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and
Improvement defines zero tolerance policies as ones that mandate predetermined consequences
or punishments for specific offenses (Stahl, 2016). Originally conceived as a drug enforcement
strategy, the term was widely adopted in schools in the early 1990s. By the late twentieth

6
century, almost 80 percent of schools across America had adopted zero tolerance policies (Kang-
Brown et al., 2013). These policies materialized in schools through exclusionary practices
utilized for a wide range of infractions. As a result, the annual number of suspensions doubled
between 1974 and 2001, and the number of resource officers increased by 38 percent (Teske,
2011).
While schools predominantly adopted zero-tolerance policies throughout the early 2000s,
a nationwide switch-over has begun in the time since, as districts are moving away from these
exclusionary disciplinary actions. Many leaders have called for new policies that support
students staying in school. In 2011, the Department of Education and the Department of Justice
introduced the Supportive School Discipline Initiative (Steinberg & Lacoe, 2016). This
unprecedented effort promoted school discipline practices that keep students engaged in school
while holding them accountable for their actions. Suspensions and expulsions subsequently
dropped 20 percent in the two years after this initiative was implemented (Steinberg & Lacoe,
2017). Changes are also occurring at the state and district levels, with a focus on strategies such
as PBIS and restorative justice practices (Steinberg & Lacoe, 2017). Research throughout the last
two decades has led to an overhaul of discipline policies, and this has led to broader
implementation of trauma-informed strategies in K-12 schools (APA, 2008; Archibold, 2014;
Gregory & Evans, 2020; Payne & Welch, 2015). New federal guidance released in 2014
provided explicit strategies for developing equitable discipline practices (U.S. Department of
Education, 2014), giving educators and administrators much to consider when designing their
new approach to discipline (Archibold, 2014).
The following year, President Obama signed ESSA, a new education law dedicated to a
longstanding commitment to equal opportunities for all students (U.S Department of Education,

7
n.d). Although not a new concept, PBIS gained notoriety following ESSA’s adoption. Newly
authorized in this legislation is the flexible Student Support and Academic Enrichment grant
program (von Ravensberg, 2020). This grant program is intended to help schools meet ESSA’s
goals through implementing targeted programs to improve student outcomes (von Ravensberg,
2020). ESSA authorizes schools to spend their funding on 3 categories of activity: (a) supporting
well-rounded educational opportunities, (b) supporting safe and healthy students, and (c)
supporting the effective use of technology. Furthermore, section b specifically states using funds
to implement schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports (von Ravensberg, 2020).
A 2018 survey based on ESSA funding found that 63% of districts reported they would spend
their money on making students safer (Ujifusa, 2018). When asked which approach they would
consider, 61% of districts planned to spend it on PBIS. Now one of the most widely adopted
disciplinary frameworks in schools and districts (Horner & Sugai, 2015), PBIS has been adopted
in over 25,000 schools across the country (Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports, 2018).
While many existing studies tout the benefits of PBIS and successful implementation
factors (Bradshaw et al., 2008; Bradshaw, et al., 2012; Evanovich & Scott, 2016; Freeman et al.,
2016; George et al., 2018; Horner, et al., 2009; Horner & Sugai, 2015; Sprick et al., 2017), few
exist on school culture’s impact on implementation factors. Furthermore, several studies suggest
challenges associated with implementation efforts, citing problems including administrator and
teacher buy-in, complex student issues, lack of parental involvement, and lack of shared value
for PBIS (Lohrmann et al., 2008; McDaniel et. al, 2017; Pinkelman et al., 2015; Tyre &
Feuerborn, 2017). Teacher buy-in is often cited as a critical component to successful execution
(James & Sewell, 2015; Macy & Wheeler, 2020; McDaniel et al., 2018), however there is limited

8
research exploring the elements within a school system that can affect buy-in and support. It is
well documented that reform efforts will likely be more successful if time is given to develop
educator support (Datnow and Castellano, 2000; Datnow and Stringfield, 2000; Doss & Goke
Akinniranye, 2020). In striving to adopt student-centered behavior systems and comply with new
state and federal mandates, concerns have surfaced that address discrepancies in PBIS practices,
many of which stem from issues within the school’s culture (Sólorzano, 2017; von Ravensberg,
2020)
School culture impacts many facets of student outcomes, including teacher self-efficacy
(Barni et al., 2019; Bobbett, 2001; Klassen et al., 2011; Rouse, 2021). Teacher self-efficacy
refers to the confidence a teacher has regarding their ability to influence student learning
(Klassen et al., 2011). While examining school culture and teacher development, research
findings indicate a link between self-efficacy and motivation. Furthermore, research
demonstrates teachers with higher levels of self-efficacy are more likely to be open to new
strategies, set more challenging goals, and modify methods when faced with difficulties
(Lazarides & Warner, 2020). The benefits of developing self-efficacious teachers are two-fold:
teachers are more satisfied with their jobs and students show more motivation and academic
achievement (Lazarides & Warner, 2020). Given the documented connections between culture
and self-efficacy (Barni et al., 2019; Bobbett, 2001; Hosford & O’Sullivan, 2016; Klassen et al.,
2011; Liu et al., 2020; Shen et al., 2012; Rouse, 2021), as well as teacher self-efficacy and
student outcomes (Achurra & Villardón, 2012; Freeman, 2008; Mojavezu & Tamiz, 2012;
Shahzad & Naureen, 2017), it is imperative to further investigate how school culture can impact
self-efficacy through the lens of PBIS implementation.
Despite the many issues that may arise during school reform efforts, schools with strong

9
cultures are more prepared to overcome these challenges (Huget et al., 2014; Lightner et al.,
2018; O’Connor et al., 2005; Taylor et al., 2004). There is a growing body of research that
demonstrates the relationship between school culture and student outcomes (Deal & Peterson,
2016; Gruenert & Whitaker, 2017; Shafer, 2018; Wagner, 2016), as well as school culture and
teacher efficacy (MacNeil et al., 2009; Sterling; 2016). Although this importance is recognized,
there is a limited amount of research available that analyzes the impact that culture has on a
teacher’s efficacy in executing certain practices, such as PBIS.
Statement of the Problem
Research reveals a need in K-12 schools for equitable behavior strategies that avoid
exclusionary practices (Payne & Welch, 2015; Westrup, 2015; Gregory et al., 2016; Pavlacic et
al., 2022). A recent report found that while Black students make up 15.5% of students in
America, they represent 39% of all students being suspended (Government Accountability
Office, 2018). Other studies highlight disproportionalities based on race, gender, and ability
(Bacher-Hicks et al., 2020; Berwick, 2015; Camera, 2019; NCES, 2019; Payne & Welch, 2015).
Many districts have turned to PBIS as a tool for mitigating suspensions, maintaining student
engagement, and developing students’ social-emotional capabilities. PBIS can be a powerful tool
for fostering relationships and reducing time spent out of the classroom (Gage et al., 2020), but
recent research suggests more needs to be done to ensure fidelity of implementation (George et
al., 2018; Flannery, et al., 2013; Noltemyer et al., 2019).
While many school districts have reported lower suspension and expulsion rates and
higher graduation rates in recent years (Felton, 2017), teachers are reporting frustrations with
PBIS practices (Tyre & Feuerborn, 2021). The problem is not simply ineffective practices.
Rather, the issue involves misunderstanding, misapplication, and misalignment in values and

10
ideologies (Tyre & Feuerborn, 2021). This includes addressing teachers’ underlying assumptions
and uncovering the biases that may impact implementation. For many schools, making the
change from exclusionary practices to PBIS will require a shift in the beliefs, values, and
mindsets of staff members, as expressed in their buy-in to certain structures (Muhammed, 2009).
Literature emphasizes the challenges that many schools and districts face when
administering these practices (Kincaid et al., 2007; Tyre & Feuerborn, 2021). PBIS require the
support and buy-in of teachers, as they are the ones tracking student behaviors, intervening in the
moment, and referring students for more support. This support and buy-in requires a shift in the
underlying assumptions of school personnel as they may still be tied to the former beliefs of the
organization (Muhammed, 2009; Schein, 1992). Underlying assumptions are deeply
representative of the school culture and are therefore critical to address when implementing new
policies (Schein, 1992). Given the detrimental and disproportionate impact exclusionary
measures have on minority students and the growing connection between PBIS and positive
student outcomes, this study sought to understand what conditions lead to these practices being
most successfully implemented. It is imperative to address the role school culture plays in
teachers’ self-efficacy and in turn, teachers’ perceived ability to execute PBIS to address
behavior concerns.
School culture has been studied as a means for efficiently responding to new changes and
championing teachers to support and promote new policies (Balkar, 2015; Kraft & Falken, 2015;
Tamir & Gannon-Shilon, 2020). Seminal research on organizational culture supports the belief
that teacher’s interpretations of culture have an impact on “personal investment”, motivation, and
self-efficacy (Schein, 1990; Yukl, 1989). More recent research supports these beliefs, laying
claim to a direct link between school culture and teacher outcomes (Hosford & O’Sullivan, 2016;

11
Liu et al., 2020; Shen et al., 2012). A positive school culture can promote rapid improvement and
enable teachers to perform to their potential (Kraft & Falken, 2015). In seeking to better
understand behavioral reform efforts, one can begin by examining school culture and teachers’
needs in promoting a culture that not only tolerates behavioral changes but embraces them. The
issue of how school culture aids behavioral reform efforts remains inconclusive, demanding
further analysis as reform efforts are consistently underway in American schools.
With the growing popularity of PBIS programs and the known effect of school culture on
other school-related outcomes, it is evident that more research should be dedicated to the effects
of school culture on PBIS implementation. Specifically, research should focus on school
culture’s impact on a teacher’s perceived implementation abilities, as teacher buy-in is vital to
PBIS. Furthermore, a clear understanding of the support needed by teachers to value and endorse
this culture has yet to be fully investigated.
Purpose of the Study
This study sought to examine how perceptions of school culture can influence PBIS
implementation. Additionally, this research explored the supports needed by teachers to promote
a culture supportive of PBIS. A growing need for targeted discipline policy reforms has been
identified in research and recognized by educators, politicians, and psychologists across America
(Skiba & Losen, 2016; Thomas, 2019). Demand exists for behavior interventions that address the
growing racial disparities seen in disciplinary action, as well as the alarming number of
exclusionary practices used in K-12 schools every year. These practices have come to yield
negative outcomes for students, with a heightened concentration on students from marginalized
communities (Bacher-Hicks et al., 2019; Boudreau, 2019; Curran, 2016). While work is being
done on the creation and implementation of programs at the school, district, and state levels

12
(Gregory & Evans, 2020), a clear understanding of how school culture may affect its successful
implementation has yet to be fully attained. This study builds on to the existing body of
knowledge on PBIS as a behavior intervention.
Teacher effectiveness is directly related to intervention outcomes for students (Forman et
al., 2009; Heck, 2009; Nichols et al., 2020). Consequently, teacher self-efficacy is explored as it
is a leading construct in understanding how teachers commit to trying new approaches (Bandura,
1997; Zee & Koomen, 2016). A teacher’s belief about their capabilities influences their
perceptions regarding successful implementation of evidence-based practices (Nichols et al.,
2020). Given this relation, it is critical to better understand how school culture may impact
perceptions of self-efficacy to improve PBIS implementation. Additionally, effective PBIS
implementation depends on the buy-in and support of teachers and staff, requiring an in depth
look at the supports needed by teachers to promote such an environment.
Research Questions
The research questions developed for this study are constructed to uncover the
relationship between school culture and effective implementation strategies to support PBIS. In
addition, this study aims to find what teachers need at different systems levels within their
environment to promote cultures where PBIS can be properly implemented. This inquiry pursues
the following research questions:
1. What are teachers’ perceptions of school culture and the ways it influences PBIS
implementation?
2. What are the teachers' needs at the different systems levels to promote a school
culture that supports PBIS?

13
Significance of the Study
Continuous cultural, educational, and technological developments necessitate schools to
implement organizational changes at a rapid pace. Schools need to be adaptive and flexible,
ready to implement new policies as federal and state mandates change. Literature since the 1930s
has pointed to school culture as being integral to creating sustainable school change (Waller,
1932; Tamir & Gannon-Shilon, 2020). Furthermore, school culture has been shown to
significantly impact teacher motivation and efficacy (Bandura, 1993; Moolenar et al., 2012; Naz
& Rashid, 2021; Stokes, 2016) and student outcomes (Amtu et al., 2020; Peterson & Deal, 2009;
Stolp, 1994). Similarly, school discipline has been examined as an important contributing factor
to the success of schools (Whisman & Hammer, 2014; Gregory et al., 2021). Because both
factors are intimately linked to a school’s success, it becomes necessary to address both school
culture and discipline together, rather than just separately.
Educational reform efforts have been underway to reduce the effects of school
disciplinary policies. Punitive systems have come under intense scrutiny as research has
highlighted inequitable outcomes for minority students (APA, 2008; Payne & Welch, 2015;
Curran, 2016; Welsh & Little, 2018; Lacoe & Steinberg, 2019; Bacher-Hicks et al., 2020; Cruz
et al., 2021; Gerlinger et al., 2021; Sorensen et al., 2022). Exclusionary practices have also
shown to have deleterious long-term effects, such as lower graduation rates, lower academic
achievement, lower college enrollment rates, and higher engagement in criminal justice systems
(APA, 2008; Payne & Welch, 2015; Curran, 2016; Bacher-Hicks et al., 2020; Cruz et al., 2021;
Gerlinger et al., 2021; Sorensen et al., 2022). These factors have led school districts to adopt new
policies to positively impact student outcomes such as PBIS.

14
Although the benefits of PBIS programs have been well studied, data suggests that PBIS
must be implemented with fidelity to be effective (Hubbard, 2020; Marchant et al., 2020; von
Ravensberg, 2020). When addressing fidelity, issues arise such as ineffective communication
(Coffey & Horner, 2012; Ross et al., 2012), lack of administrative support (Adelman & Taylor,
2003;, insubstantial training (Horner & Sugai, 2015) and limited teacher buy-in (Wilson et al.,
2009). This issue is exacerbated when focusing on high-poverty schools. A study conducted by
RAND in 2019 found that over 75% of teachers in high-poverty schools reported a disorderly
and unsafe environment as opposed to under 25% in low-poverty schools. Furthermore, many
high-poverty schools have reported greater levels of teacher turnover, a condition that has direct
links to school culture (Emmanuel, 2019). Other factors associated with school culture include,
but are not limited to, student achievement, teacher motivation, community involvement, and
sustainable school improvement (Lee & Louis, 2019). These documented connections, along
with continuous behavioral reform efforts, necessitate further research on the relationships
between school culture and PBIS programs.
This study sought to guide current administrators and teachers in understanding what
support is needed at different systems levels to facilitate a positive school culture that will
support behavioral reform efforts. School culture isn’t limited to behavioral reforms. Teachers
and principals can use the results of this study to cultivate a culture that will guide schools
through a myriad of reform efforts. Furthermore, a comprehensive understanding of school
culture’s impact on implementation can better inform districts on the teacher preparation needed
beforehand.
While school culture is extensively documented for its positive connection to student
outcomes, limited research exists on the link between educators’ beliefs and student outcomes

15
(Muhammed, 2009; Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968). Schools are complex entities made up of
individuals who each bring their own personal experiences yet are expected to perform and
operate under one common mission. Individuals, teachers included, form perceptions based on
their positionalities that can lead to misinterpretations. This issue is compounded when looking
at student versus teacher demographics. Despite growing racial student diversity, the racial
make-up of teachers is predominately white (NCES, 2018). It is imperative for teachers to buy
into and support a schools’ mission toward equity and inclusion. This study sought to provide
insight on the support needed by teachers at different systems level to promote school cultures
that aid PBIS methodologies. These findings can assist teacher development programs in
creating curriculum to promote culturally relevant mindsets.
Students will ultimately be the greatest benefactor of research focused on school culture
and school discipline. A growing body of research shows evidence of links between punitive
school discipline and lower academic achievement (Baumann & Krskova, 2016; Myers et al.,
1987; Welsh & Little, 2018; Whisman & Hammer, 2014), as well as school culture and student
achievement (Akram & Shah, 2018; Cunningham, 2003; Davis, 2018; Demirtas, 2010;
Piotrowsky, 2016; 2009; Quin et al., 2015). Students will continue to prosper as more literature
is dedicated to the whole-group efforts needed to cultivate SEL-focused environments.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This study sought to examine middle school teachers’ perceptions regarding the impact
that school culture has on their confidence to effectively execute PBIS and understand what is
needed by teachers at different systems levels to promote a supportive school culture.
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory assisted in gaining an in-depth insight into how
school culture can impact perceived implementation abilities. This theory argues that

16
environment impacts outcome. Bronfenbrenner’s theory claims there is a reciprocal relationship
between an individual and the systems levels within their environment. Specifically, the unit of
analysis for this study was middle school teachers and the macrosystem’s, exosystem’s, and
microsystem’s effect on them. Moreover, through Bronfenbrenner’s model, this study analyzed
how an organization’s culture influences teachers’ implementation of PBIS.
Using Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model as a guide, this study employed qualitative
methods to obtain rich and meaningful data from selected middle school teachers. To fully
understand teachers’ perceptions regarding school cultures’ influence, semi-structured interviews
were conducted, and school documents were analyzed for deeper investigation.
Definitions
Many educational terms are relevant to this study and are referenced throughout. For the
purpose of this study, the terms are defined as follows:
A. Exclusionary Practices: any type of school disciplinary action that removes or excludes a
student from his or her usual educational setting, including an in-school suspension, out
of-school suspension, expulsion, a disciplinary alternative placement, or a juvenile justice
placement (American Bar Association, 2018).
B. Mentorship: A person of high organizational or specific career status who by mutual
consent takes an active interest or role in the career development of another person
(Gehrke, 2001).
C. Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS): a muti-tiered system of support
(MTSS) designed as a prevention-oriented framework for strengthening the
implementation of interventions to support all students' academic, social, emotional, and
behavioral capabilities (Cressey et al., 2014; Sugai & Simonsen, 2012).

17
D. Professional Learning Communities (PLCs): a collaborative process in which educators
engage in collective inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the students
they serve (DuFour & Eaker, 2009).
E. School Culture: the guiding beliefs and values evident in the way a school operates
(Fullan, 2007).
F. Self-Efficacy: a judgment of one's own capabilities to bring about desired outcomes of
student engagement and learning (Lazarides & Warner, 2020)
G. Zero Tolerance Policies: a philosophy that mandated the application of severe pre-
determined consequences for unsafe or unacceptable student behaviors (American
Psychological Association, 2008).
Organization of the Study
This study examines the perceived impact that school culture has on PBIS
implementation and teachers’ needs in promoting a supportive school culture. Chapter One
provides an overview of the study and establish its importance for school leaders. Chapter Two
provides a review of the literature, focusing on the history of zero tolerance policies, the rise of
PBIS, school culture and its impact on reform efforts, teacher self-efficacy, and the different
systems levels within a school. This chapter also details Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems
Theory and its application as a theoretical framework for this study. Chapter Three discusses the
research methodology, including the reasoning behind a qualitative approach and the sampling
processes utilized. This chapter also included information about the study’s instrumentation
process for collecting and analyzing data as well as a conceptual map. Chapter Four will report
on the findings of the study as they respond to the research questions posed in Chapter One and
discuss results in conjunction with existing literature. Chapter Five will provide an analysis and

18
synthesis of the findings as well as the implications for current professionals and
recommendations for future research.

19
Chapter Two: Literature Review
This chapter provides an overview of the literature related to school culture and its
comprised systems that may impact teachers when implementing PBIS practices. To further
understand school culture’s influence, this literature review will begin by delineating the
difference between school culture and climate. It will examine the differences and reasoning for
a focus on culture. To better understand the purpose of each topic, this review will next engage
in a comprehensive examination of Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model. After understanding has
been established, the review will probe a teacher’s environment, looking at the different systems
levels that collectively contribute to the overall school culture and influence a teacher’s behavior.
The environment comprises of different levels, including the microsystem, exosystem,
macrosystem, and chronosystem. For the purposes of this study, this review will focus on these
four levels, examining the factors that compose each system, their impact on middle-school
teachers, and their relationship to the development and maintenance of school culture. The
chronosystem will first be analyzed as it encompasses all other systems levels. Changes within
the chronosystem have a direct influence on all other systems. Within this section, a
comprehensive review of zero-tolerance policies will be conducted and its influence on school
policy. The review will continue to the macrosystem, exosystem, and finally the microsystem.
This top-down approach will present a holistic understanding of the system that makes up a
school culture and the possible factors impacting a teacher’s implementation abilities, also
referred to as self-efficacy in this study. Literature regarding self-efficacy will then be explored
with a focus on the connection between school culture and teacher self-efficacy.
Bronfenbrenner’s theory claims there is a reciprocal relationship between an individual
and their environment. The bilateral nature of these systems levels necessitates a deeper

20
investigation into the influence a teacher has on school culture, and more specifically, a teacher’s
needs in promoting a school culture that supports PBIS. This review will examine different
methods of support at different systems levels. This chapter concludes with discussion on the
conceptual framework aligned with this study.
School Culture Versus School Climate
Before beginning an in-depth analysis of the meaning and significance of school culture,
it is important to note the differences between culture and climate. Though both are important,
these concepts are not interchangeable. Each separate term comprises different elements, making
it easier for leaders to determine how to approach it. School culture is a multifaceted entity that
encompasses the shared norms, values, and beliefs that shape how people perceive, think, and
feel in their school environment (Gruenert & Whitaker, 2015; Schein, 1992; Stolp & Smith,
1995). School climate is defined as the quality of school life (Gruenert & Whitaker, 2015; Kane
et al., 2016). Elements of school climate include the different factors that contribute to the
overall atmosphere and mood of the particular school. (Kane et al., 2016).
Despite these differences, studies of climate and culture in all industries suggest that it is
critical to an organization’s success and is a determining factor in how well an organization will
respond and adapt to change (Schein, 1992; Deal & Peterson, 2002; Deal & Peterson, 2016;
Tamir & Gannon-Shilon, 2021).While both benefit the development of organizations, this study
will focus on an organization’s culture as expressed by effects of the climate. The following
section will detail the literature behind this decision and its impact on the study at hand.
Early definitions of school culture describe how unseen human factors of a school impact
day-to-day practices and behaviors within a school. Literature by Muhammed (2009), Fullan
(2007), Peterson and Deal (2002), and Stolp and Smith (1995) guide this focus on culture over

21
climate. School climate may tell us what structures are in place to support PBIS implementation
efforts, but culture tells us the extent to which teachers find purpose in those structures. In other
words, what is the purpose behind this structure and is it an effective tool? School culture
influences the way a school staff thinks, feels, and acts. For example, a school culture will
impact how motivated they are to participate, what they talk about in private, the degree of
support they give to colleagues and attitudes toward collaboration. A focus on certain systems
within a schools’ environment will reveal these beliefs.
While climate is integral to the overall conversation of school culture, this study focuses
on school culture to better understand how the norms, values, beliefs, and traditions can impact
the systems within a teachers’ environment and therefore his or her self-efficacy. Elements of
school culture can vary from school to school, but some common components include shared
values, a vision and mission, withstanding traditions, strong and supportive relationships, open
lines of communication, professional development opportunities, and support for students and
teacher learning. These elements will be explored through analysis of different systems within a
schools’ environment. School culture can reflect the extent to which teachers feel included and
appreciated, ultimately effecting their motivation (Hinde, 2004). A focus on culture allows for a
broader conversation on the interrelationships within a school system that can ultimately impact
a teacher’s confidence when implementing programs such as PBIS. This literature review
explores the connection between school culture and different tenets of school effectiveness,
including teacher motivation. The following section provides an overview on school culture and
the six general categories used to assess it.

22
School Culture: An Overview
Individual definitions of culture are elusive, as it is unique to every group (Barth, 2002).
Shrouded in subjectivity, scholars contend that school culture has too much breadth to be
adequately defined (Geertz, 1973; Stolp & Smith, 1995). Despite the absence of one universally
accepted definition, characteristics of culture have been listed and defined. School culture can be
defined as the beliefs and values evident in the way a school operates. It encompasses the
expected behaviors, values and attitudes that impact a school’s operations (Fullan, 2007). A
school's culture is often complex and multifaceted, and it may be difficult to fully understand it
through a single method.
Culture is developed through social interactions (Roby, 2011). Every coworker within a
school setting is affected by the culture, whether positively or negatively (Adamy & Heinecke,
2005). Beyond coworkers, culture involves all stakeholders, including administrators, teachers,
staff, parents, students, and members of the community. Culture influences group discussions,
beliefs, and values taught in classrooms (Roby, 2011; Samuels, 2018). Culture has been studied
to drive school excellence and improve teacher satisfaction (Bryk et al., 1993). Additional
research shows strong support of cultures’ effect on cohesiveness, commitment, productivity,
personal investment, and performance (Duan et al., 2018; Maehr & Braskamp, 1986;
McLaughlin, 2001; Wijaya, 2020). A healthy and positive school culture is reflected by equitable
learning environments and opportunities that help students learn and grow.
Fullan and Hargreaves (1996) and Deal and Kennedy (1999) six general categories of
school culture:
1. Collaborative
2. Comfortable-Collaborative

23
3. Contrived-Collegiate
4. Balkanized
5. Fragmented
6. Toxic
As established, school culture is a complex entity that differs based on school site. These
categories are simplifications that help make meaning out of a complex topic. In a collaborative
culture, teachers share common values and are motivated to continue improving their work.
Common characteristics of a collaborative environment are professional development
opportunities and professional learning communities. Teachers in a school with this culture are
keen on learning best practices for teaching and learning.
A comfortable-collaborative culture is one where teachers learn to get along with each
other. While colleagues are aware of each other’s efforts, there is limited self-reflection which
often results in a fixed mindset (Cornell, 2023).
Teachers in a contrived-collegial culture are dictated by leadership. Administrators
support teacher growth in this environment but it can often feel superficial, leading to diminished
feelings of motivation and willingness to embrace change.
In a balkanized culture, collaboration only occurs amongst like-minded teachers. This
environment is characterized by cliques, with leaders looking to recruit new teachers to their
inner circles. There is minimal collaboration between cliques.
Fragmented cultures resemble isolation. In this school environment, teachers work on
their own and there is limited professional interaction among staff. Teachers operate
independently in this school culture and meetings lack involvement from the staff (Cornell,
2023).

24
Toxic cultures can be destructive to a school and its daily operations (Deal & Peterson,
2002). To fully understand the detrimental effects of a toxic culture, it is necessary to assess the
qualities of a positive environment. Among many others, Bolman and Deal (1999) highlighted
the following qualities of a positive school culture:
1. A mission focused on student and teacher learning
2. A sense of history and purpose
3. Core values of collegiality, performance, and improvement
4. Positive beliefs and assumptions about staff and students
5. A strong professional community
6. Rituals and ceremonies that reinforce cultural values
7. A widely shared sense of respect and caring for everyone
On the contrary, a toxic environment decreases enthusiasm, motivation, professionalism, and
effectiveness (Bolman & Deal, 1999; Deal & Peterson, 2002). They are characterized by a lack
of shared purpose, few positive traditions, a limited sense of purpose and community, and few
positive role models (Bolman & Deal, 1999; Deal & Peterson, 2002). While leaders are typically
tasked with developing the culture within a school, teachers share responsibility for the
promotion and maintenance of a positive school culture that embraces programs such as PBIS. A
collaborative school culture encourages learning for students and adults.
Organizations have clear identities that manifest in staffs’ views, beliefs, and perceptions.
Understanding the culture of an organization will give insight into how these views, beliefs, and
perceptions will affect self-efficacy, and in this study’s case, PBIS implementation (Deal &
Peterson, 2016). To better understand the culture of a school, one must look at the other systems
operating within its environment. The chronosystem addresses changes in the environment over

25
time. The macrosystem has a direct influence on the exosystem, which will be discussed in the
next section. The exosystem will analyze district influences, families, school policy, and
professional development opportunities. Each of these components will be analyzed to
understand their contributions to school culture and their consequential influence on a middle
school teachers’ PBIS implementation efficacy.
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory: An Overview
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory was used as the theoretical framework to
guide this study. This theory assisted in gaining in-depth insight into how school culture can
influence a teacher’s self-efficacy with a focus on PBIS implementation efforts. Urie
Bronfenbrenner’s approach to child development originated in 1979 as a response to earlier
studies analyzing children in unfamiliar and isolated settings (Ainsworth, 1970; Guy-Evans,
2020). Furthermore, he sought an approach that explored the bidirectional relationship between a
child and factors in his/her environment rather than the unidirectional studies being conducted at
the time (Guy-Evans, 2020). Through his research, Bronfenbrenner realized there are factors
within a child’s life that interact with and affect the child. His proposed model, Ecological
Systems Theory (EST), explains the dynamic relationships between environments and a
developing child. His model suggested that a child’s environment is situated within different
systems, the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystems, and chronosystem
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979). This model is often portrayed using a set of concentric circles, or as
Bronfenbrenner explained, as a set of Russian dolls.
This theory is originated out of interest in human development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979;
Härkönen, 2001). Bronfenbrenner (1979) defines human development as a process in which a
person develops an extended and nuanced understanding of his or her environment, allowing

26
them to become more motivated and able to engage in activities within their environment. He
characterized EST as an interconnected environmental system that influences an individual’s
development (Burns et al., 2015). Even though this theory was developed to understand child
development, it has been applied to several other fields including education. Some examples of
studies utilizing EST include research to identify factors that influence bullying (You et al.,
2015) and analysis on the implementation of effective school psychology services (Burns et al.,
2015).
Rather than children, this study explored different aspects of a middle school teacher’s
school environment and analyze how those aspects are influenced by the school’s culture. His
theory views the school environment as a, “set of nested structures” (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, pg.
3), which can otherwise be viewed as embedded systems. There are multiple layers if
interconnected systems within a school environment. Specifically, this theoretical model assisted
in the understanding of how different systems within a teacher’s environment can impact a his or
her self-efficacy regarding PBIS implementation. In addition, this theoretical framework guided
the researcher’s understanding on how a teacher can influence the school culture, and more
specifically, what support is needed in promoting a supportive school culture. The following
sections will probe four of the five proposed systems: the chronosystem, macrosystem,
exosystem, and microsystem. A specific group of stakeholders have been identified in
association with each system. Each system is described below, as well as how it relates to this
specific study.
Chronosystem
Macrosystem
Exosystem

27
Microsystem
The chronosystem will probe the evolution of mindsets and policies regarding school
discipline. The macrosystem will look at PBIS as a framework and its impact. The exosystem
refers to factors that indirectly impact a teacher’s self-efficacy. This research will analyze district
influences, including funding, on self-efficacy. Finally, the microsystem looks at a teacher’s
immediate environment and will consider professional learning communities, school mission,
and school leaderships’ impact on self-efficacy.
Chronosystem: Evolving Mindsets and Policies
According to Bronfenbrenner’s Theory, the chronosystem addresses changes within an
individual’s environment over time. This system assesses how changes in an environment may
affect a person’s developmental outcomes (Bronfenbrenner, 1986). For the purposes of this
study, the chronosystem will be framed as the educational policies that have shaped the way
society views school discipline.
Expectations, ideals, and beliefs surrounding school discipline have evolved in the past
four decades. Time periods of educational reform shaped the way society views the role of a
school and produced changes to the systems within (Slee, 2020; Warnick & Scribner, 2020).
These shifts are reflected in current disciplinary practices and policies. This section will analyze
key historical moments that have led to the PBIS movement. It is critical to understand the
repercussions of punitive based measures in schools in order to grasp the feeling of necessity for
a radical form of discipline. This understanding sets the context for which PBIS emerged, and
the challenges that educators, administrators, and students continue to face when dealing with its
implementation.

28
School disciplinary policies have been primarily characterized by zero tolerance
approaches since the 1980s, closely representing America’s criminal justice system (APA, 2008;
Teske, 2011; Stahl, 2016; Payne & Welch, 2015; Marsh, 2019). This trend mirrored the federal
drug policies set by the Nixon and Reagan administrations, leading to sharp increases in
incarceration rates between 1980 and 2008 (Gramlich, 2018). This policy expanded and was
firmly rooted in the educational system in 1994, when Congress passed the Gun-Free Schools
Act (Stern, 2016; Winter, 2016). This act mandated that states receiving federal education funds
under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) were required to expel students who
brought some form of a weapon on school grounds for at least one year (Irby & Coney, 2021). In
addition, these policies required that local law enforcement be notified of these instances,
creating the partnership between schools and police (Brady et al., 2007; Marsh, 2019; Irby &
Coney, 2021).
The early 2000s saw a sharp increase in the number of students suspended or expelled
(Teske, 2011; Shollenberger, 2015; Payne & Welch, 2015), as well as increases in surveillance
measures such as cameras, metal detectors, and police presence on school grounds (Skiba &
Peterson, 1999; Simon, 2007; Teske, 2011; Payne & Welch, 2015). More than two decades later,
scholars and policymakers alike see the disparate impact of zero-tolerance policies on students
from historically marginalized communities (Gregory et al., 2010; Payne & Welch, 2015;
Berwick, 2015; Scott et al., 2017; Camera, 2019; NCES, 2019; Bacher-Hicks et al., 2020). These
disparities became noticeable early on, as reports of exclusionary practices showed linkages to
lower graduation rates and increased absenteeism (Marsh, 2019). Furthermore, these practices
were found to affect students with disabilities, English Language Learners, and students of color

29
more than their white counterparts (Payne & Welch, 2015; Berwick, 2015; Camera, 2019;
NCES, 2019; Bacher-Hicks et al., 2020).
These findings sparked the need for immediate and drastic action. In 2011, the Education
Secretary and Attorney General launched a collaborative project called the Supportive School
Discipline Initiative. The focus of this initiative was to design and promote alternatives to
exclusionary discipline methods in an effort to curb inequitable and discriminating behavior
management strategies. Shortly after this release, President Obama announced his 2012 Race to
the Top plan, a program that is credited for transforming school reform efforts (McGuinn, 2012).
These initiatives led to the release of a guide by the Educational Department in 2014, outlining
principles for improving discipline practice. Policies and initiatives such as these brought
national attention to the inequitable methods being used by schools across the country and
provoked conversations for change.
Societies’ perceptions toward school discipline have changed over the last four decades,
shifting from a punitive, zero-tolerance mindset to one that is more nurturing and proactive
(Fronius et al., 2019). As these shifts have occurred, guidance for new behavioral methodologies
have been provided by policymakers, requiring administration, teachers, students, and families to
effectively implement these strategies in their schools. The next section will explore the
macrosystem and the factors that contribute to a school’s culture. Literature examining the
history of disciplinary action in American schools will set the context for which we analyze
school culture and the impact that the behavioral reform movement has had on American
schools. The following section provides an overview on PBIS and look at the ways this ideology
is being utilized in schools.

30
Macrosystem: PBIS
According to Bronfenbrenner’s theory, the macrosystem refers to the culture that frames
the structures within the system, or environment (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Newman & Newman,
2020). Härkönen (2001) refers to the macrosystem as the blueprint for a particular culture within
an organization, holding the cultural values, traditions, and laws. For the purposes of this study,
the macrosystem will be viewed as the PBIS framework that guides policies and Practices.
Policymakers have touted PBIS as a way to decrease the use of exclusionary practices,
dismantling approaches that disproportionately affect students according to gender, race, and
ability (Lewis et al., 2017; McIntosh et al., 2018). A growing number of schools have been
looking to these practices to respond to school-based conflict rather than zero-tolerance policies
that were reliant on exclusionary practices and increased security measures (Kodelja, 2019).
PBIS is far from a new concept, with its origins reaching back to the early 1980s. Initially
developed as a behavioral intervention program for students with behavior disorders, research
efforts indicated that a greater focus should be given to preventative, research-based practices
that impact school-wide systems (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). Consequently, the National
Technical Assistance Center on PBIS shifted its attention to school-wide behavior support for all
students, starting a movement to achieve academically and behaviorally significant outcomes for
all children (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). The Center on PBIS defines this approach as, “an
evidence-based, tiered framework for supporting students’ behavioral, academic, social,
emotional, and mental health” (2023). A growing number of schools have been looking to these
practices to respond to school-based conflict rather than zero-tolerance policies that were reliant
on exclusionary practices and increased security measures (Kodelja, 2019).

31
Copious amounts of research have been conducted on ways to mitigate the
disproportionate effects of exclusionary practices (Johnson et al., 2018; Kline, 2016; Yang et al.,
2018). PBIS increasingly being acknowledged as a means to improve the academic, behavioral,
and social outcome of students (Goodman-Scott et al., 2018; Horner & Sugai, 2015). With over
20 years of implementation in over 26,000 schools (TA Center on PBIS, 2018), ample research
exists on the definition, implementation, and evaluation of this framework.
Within school settings, PBIS encompasses several facets. Main tenets of PBIS include
problem-solving interventions, evidence-based practices, progress monitoring tools, and data-
driven decision making (Horner & Sugai, 2015). While these tents drive implementation
methods, schools have freedom to adjust the concept as they deem fit for their circumstances.
Based on preventative measures and behavior supports, there are many ways schools can prevent
behavior issues. Preventative methods are based on five inter-related elements including equity,
systems, data, practices, and outcomes (Center on PBIS, n.d). These five elements can be
adjusted depending on local context but work together to ensure implementation fidelity. The
following sections will analyze literature detailing experiences with implementing PBIS in
American schools, including the successes and challenges that accompany those experiences.
PBIS in American Schools: Practitioners’ Perspectives
Regardless of implementation method, two common themes define PBIS; a focus on the
whole school and the development of interventions tied to three levels of support (Horner &
Sugai, 2015). These three levels, or tiers provide guidance on the varying continuums of support
needed to math students’ needs. Tier one interventions are designed to provide preventative
support to everyone in the school setting. Established as a foundation for positive support, tier
one enables around 80% of a school population to succeed. In addition to tier one supports,

32
students requiring tier two supports receive additional services targeting their specific needs. Tier
two addresses 10%-15% of a school population. Tier three supports are utilized when an
intensive, individualized plan is needed for students not benefiting from tier two and three
supports (Center on PBIS, n.d). The ultimate goal of implementing this system is to improve
student outcomes.
Despite varying implementation methodologies, many schools utilizing PBIS practices
are reporting positive trends (Bradshaw et al., 2015; Cook et al., 2015; Freeman et al., 2016;
Kelm et al., 2014; Petrasek, 2022; Ross et al., 2012; Yeung et al., 2016) However, there is
increasing literature suggesting that practices are not being implemented with fidelity, resulting
in disgruntled employees, high attrition rates, and confusion across school personnel (Dicke et
al., 2014; Filter et al., 2016; Jarboe, 2020; McDaniel et al., 2017). The following two sections
will highlight research analyzing successes and challenges associated with PBIS implementation.
Successes with PBIS
PBIS is being used in schools to improve learning and social environments. In examining
PBIS and successful outcomes, studies reveal positive associations between PBIS and reductions
in problem behaviors. Over two decades of research reveal clear benefits to implementing PBIS,
including improved student academic outcomes and perceptions of school safety, improved staff
morale, and reductions in behavioral violations (Barret et al., 2008; Bradshaw et al., 2012;
Hunter et al., 2017; Mass-Galloway et al., 2008; McDaniel et al., 2015) Literature cogently
demonstrates that out-of-school suspension rates decrease in schools using PBIS (Barret et al.,
2008; Bradshaw et al., 2012; Mass-Galloway et al., 2008). Recent data also suggests that PBIS is
effective in reducing the number of suspensions among students of color and students with
disabilities (Gage et al., 2019).

33
Studies focusing on students’ well-being have found connections between PBIS
approaches and improved peer and teacher relationships (Bradshaw et all., 2015; McPhee, 2020).
These studies suggest that PBIS can facilitate positive relationships between students and
teachers through increased levels of respect and fewer teacher-issued referrals, leading to a
reduction in inequitable disciplinary treatment. Despite surmounting evidence that PBIS yields
positive results, outcomes addressed in studies varies, and some point to inconclusive or
sometimes negative results. The following section will document challenges that have been
addressed in recent literature.
Challenges with PBIS
While conclusive evidence demonstrates PBIS’ effectiveness in decreasing suspension
rates, studies are being published suggesting that PBIS has been hastily adopted in many schools,
resulting in issues with implementation fidelity (Bethune, 2017; Jarboe, 2020; Pinkelman, 2015;
Sanetti et al., 2018; Tyre & Feuerborn, 2021). Fidelity implementation has well- documented
connections to program effectiveness, including improvements to academics and behavior
(Flannery et al., 2014; Mercer et al., 2017; Tyre & Feuerborn, 2017; Tyre & Feuerborn, 2021). A
common theme amongst PBIS challenges was inconsistent implementation efforts, which may
stem from staff resistance or lack of buy-in to the program (Flannery et al., 2014; Tyre &
Feuerborn, 2017). Previous research suggests that staff buy-in or support is one of the most vital
components for full, successful implementation of PBIS (Flannery et al., 2014). A myriad of
factors has been associated with resistance, making the issue complex (Tyre & Feuerborn, 2021).
Some examples include insufficient resources, misguided staff perceptions, and disagreement on
how to execute the program (Kincaid et al., 2007; Lohrmann et al., 2008; Tyre & Feuerborn,
2017). These factors can lead to poor morale, lack of cohesion, and low rates of implementation

34
fidelity, all ultimately impacting student outcomes (Tyre & Feuerborn, 2021). One study
revealed a need for student buy-in for successful enactment (Acosta, 2019). This is a topic that
should be explored further when discussing what assistance teachers need in promoting a
supportive school culture. Overall, execution issues point to a greater need for teacher buy-in and
support of PBIS practices.
Several studies highlight the implementation process as a core facet of successful PBIS
programs (Baker & Ryan, 2014; Benner et al., 2010; Hall & Hord, 2011; Pinkelman et al., 2015;
Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). Before effectively implementing PBIS, school leaders must have a
clear understanding of the nature, scope, and source of the issues that the school is dealing with.
In addition, several studies noted that PBIS implementation is more effective when all
stakeholders, including students, teachers, staff, leadership, parents, and the community is
involved and has accepted its implementation (McDaniel et al., 2018; McIntosh & Goodman,
2016). Furthermore, proponents of PBIS warn that implementation of an effective PBIS requires
a paradigm shift that addresses discipline, the school culture, and the community (Bambara et al.,
2009). Despite this warning, limited studies exist showing the influence school culture has on
teachers’ PBIS implementation efficacy. While the benefits of PBIS are clear, successful
implementation depends on a school-wide effort. Teachers and staff must have adequate time,
resources, and support to ensure the implementation is completed with fidelity. Furthermore,
PBIS needs to be embedded in the school culture to be effective (Fronius et al., 2016; Gonzalez,
2012). Sustaining a model such as PBIS requires considerable planning, effort, and attention to
all systems within a school environment. Addressing the school culture requires a better
understanding of the elements within the exosystem and microsystem that contribute to the
overall environment, which will be discussed in the following sections.

35
Exosystem: District Influences
The exosystem consists of structures that indirectly influence a teacher. The teacher may
or may not have direct involvement in any of the following factors but will still experience the
effect of the decisions and actions of each group. The factors being reviewed that pertain to a
middle school teacher’s exosystem are district influences, including policies and funding.
District Funding
PBIS adoption, expansion, and sustainability efforts typically rely on a district action plan
and are based on the resources available (George & Martinez, 2007). Time and resources are
needed to build an effective PBIS program (Guckenburg et al., 2016). Administrators and
educators need access to the necessary resources required to successfully fund and implement
these programs including training and personnel. In California school districts, the Local Control
Funding Formula (LCFF) dictates that funding goes to school district rather than individual
schools, placing financial onus on the district office (eddata, 2018). District offices are required
to allocate funds to improve one of eight priority areas as stated by the Local Control and
Accountability Plan (LCAP). The eight priority areas include basic services, implementation of
state standards, parental involvement, pupil achievement, pupil engagement, school climate,
course access, and other pupil outcomes (eddata, 2018). Related to matters concerning school
climate are pupil suspension rates and expulsion rates.
It is necessary to discuss the LCFF and LCAP when discussing a district’s influence on
teachers’ PBIS implementation efficacy. School districts are positioned to ensure equity and
increase capacity but can only fund a limited number of projects every year, such as professional
development. Many studies have identified a lack of resources as the most deleterious barrier to
successful implementation (Flannery et al., 2014; Sanford DeRousie & Bierman, 2012; Tyre et

36
al., 2010). The level of funding dedicated to the training and resources needed for an effective
PBIS program will ultimately impact a teacher’s buy-in and support and therefore self-efficacy
during implementation efforts (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Fronius et al., 2016).
The next section will deconstruct a teacher’s microsystem into two distinct categories to
gain a better understanding of how school culture can impact a teacher’s implementation
abilities.
Microsystem: Middle School Teachers and Their Immediate Environment
In looking at school discipline policies and the actors responsible for implementation,
this study narrows the focus to teachers. A different study conducted by the RAND Education
and Labor sector found that among all school-related factors, teachers matter the most to student
achievement (Opper, 2019). While principals are typically charged with cultivating school
cultures (Levin et al., 2019), teachers have the unique ability to influence them, with or without
administrative support (Konen, 2018). This becomes significant when examining culture’s
impact on teacher efficacy. School culture is linked to stronger support and buy-in from teachers,
which is necessary when implementing new strategies (Levin et al., 2019).
This linkage becomes critical when looking at factors within a teacher’s immediate
environment that can impact PBIS implementation efforts. The immediate environment in
Bronfenbrenner’s’ model is known as the microsystem and includes components that have direct
influence. The microsystem is an individual’s closest environment and includes structures that
maintain direct contact (Berk, 2000). For the purpose of this study, examples of components in
this systems level include Professional Learning Communities, teacher leadership, school
mission, and principal leadership, four factors that are impacted by school culture and play a role
in a teacher’s self-efficacy.

37
Professional Learning Communities
Research on school culture has illustrated the importance of collaborative learning
environments. The benefits of positive and productive relationships with colleagues are two-fold.
First, positive relationships contribute to a positive school culture which in turn impact teacher
commitment, motivation, and satisfaction (Bayar & Karaduman, 2021; Deal & Peterson, 2016;
Gruenert & Whitaker, 2017; Shafer, 2018; Wagner; 2016). Second, collegial relationships based
on trust and support promote teacher growth (Hargreaves & Dawe, 1990; Ning et al., 2015). One
practice in promoting these collaborative conditions is the implementation of the professional
learning community (PLC) model.
A PLC model is defined as a collaborative process in which educators engage in
collective inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the students they serve
(DuFour, 2002). Specifically, PLCs are, “an environment that fosters mutual cooperation,
emotional support, and personal growth as they work together to achieve what they cannot
accomplish alone” (Dufour & Eaker, 1998). PLCs were formed out of the assumption that
improved learning for students will come as a result of continuous learning for educators (Dufour
& Reeves, 2016). This assumption is corroborated by John Hattie’s research on factors
influencing students’ achievement (2016). Collective self-efficacy, the belief that educators can
influence student outcomes (Donohoo, 2017), can be built through consistent and prioritized
teacher collaboration. A commitment to collaborative learning time has many perceived benefits,
including the creation and maintenance of a work environment that builds teacher commitment
(Brinson & Steiner, 2007). Above all, literature suggests that PLCs have a positive impact on
self-efficacy (Anderson & Oliver, 2022; Bruce et al., 2010; Cai et al., 2022; Dufour & Reeves,
2016).

38
Several conditions need to set for PLCs to be effective. First, time must be dedicated to
teacher learning throughout the day (Dufour & Reeves, 2016). This means arranging the
schedule in a way that prioritizes common planning time among teacher teams. Second, the PLC
agenda must be rooted to a common mission and centered on topics that align to a goal that will
result in enhanced opportunities for all students (Kramer, 2019; Dufour & Reeves, 2016). Staff
members’ capacities are expected to develop as they collaborate, share knowledge, and develop
new approaches, therefore improving the school’s functioning. (Antinluoma et al., 2021).
Ideologies related to PLCs such as shared responsibility, mission, and vision can have a positive
effect on organizational culture which consequently impacts school culture (Bush, 2015; Turner
et al., 2018).
Teacher Leaders
Most studies acknowledge the idea that there are different definitions and interpretations
of teacher leadership. Despite different interpretations, most authors support the notion that key
characteristics remain the same. A commonly agree upon working definition involves teacher
leadership influencing school-wide practices (Cansoy & Parlor, 2017; Ülger, 2015; Wenner &
Campbell, 2016). Teacher leadership is an important aspect of school culture because it reflects
the degree to which a school values collaboration, shared decision-making, and distributed
leadership (Baker-Doyle, 2017; Beachum & Dentith, 2004; Cansoy & Parlor, 2017; Harris et al.,
2017; Smith et al., 2017; Snoek et al., 2017). A collaborative and empowering school culture
encourages teachers to take on leadership roles and supports them through this endeavor.
Likewise, school environments that support teacher leadership places significance on practices
such as collaboration among colleagues and school administrators’ support (Cansoy & Parlor,
2017; Demir, 2014). When teacher leadership is embraced, it can also foster a sense of

39
ownership and commitment among teachers, as they feel more invested in the success of the
school and have a greater voice in shaping its direction. This can lead to a more positive and
engaged school culture, where teachers feel empowered to take risks.
School Mission
Artifacts are a vivid representation of a school’s core values and basic beliefs (Deal &
Peterson, 2016; Schein, 1990). Artifacts including a school’s mission, vision, and expectations
embody these values and beliefs and communicate them to stakeholders. Each school has a
unique mission to guide its operations, methodology, pedagogy, and programming. School
culture and school mission are intricately intertwined, as the culture sets the tone for how the
mission will be accomplished (Brown et al., 2004; Clark, 2019) and tells students and staff why
they are there (Gruenert & Whitaker, 2015). The school mission statement often reflects the
school culture because it is a statement that outlines the school's fundamental values, goals, and
priorities. In addition, the mission standardizes a set of beliefs and behaviors. Furthermore,
systems, or subunits, within the school’s culture can either help promote the school’s mission or
distract from it (Cansoy, 2017; Clark, 2019; Gruenert & Whitaker; 2015). The mission statement
communicates the school's overall purpose and direction, as well as its beliefs and values, to
students, parents, teachers, and other stakeholders. A clear and compelling mission statement can
help teachers understand the school's goals and priorities, and how their individual contributions
fit into the larger picture (Damanik & Aldridge, 2017). This can lead to a greater sense of
ownership and investment in the school's success, as well as a shared sense of purpose and
direction among the faculty.
Principals

40
Literature suggests that teachers value cultures in which there is a collective vision and
opportunities for collaboration (Brezicha et al., 2020; De Neve et al., 2015; Stearns et al., 2015).
Administrators play an integral role in the creation and maintenance of professional school
cultures that influence teacher commitment, motivation, and engagement (Rouse, 2021;
Sperandio & Kong, 2018, Stoll et al., 2006). Leaders have the potential to positively influence
teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs by promoting a culture of collaboration (Donohoo et al., 2018).
Moreover, leadership is often cited as having the most influence over the level of teacher buy-in
as well as determining how much funding, resources, and support will be directed to PBIS efforts
(Jarboe, 2020; Podolsky et al., 2016). The support, or lack of, from school administrators is a
well-documented barrier or facilitator of PBIS implementation. Schools with low levels of
administrative support report leadership as a barrier, while schools with high levels of support
report leadership as a facilitator (Bambara et al., 2009; Fackler and Malmberg, 2016; George et
al., 2018; Gkolia et al., 2018; Goodman-Scott et al., 2018; Jarboe, 2020; Lambersky, 2016; Liu
and Hallinger, 2018; Lohrmann et al., 2008; Tyre & Feuerborn, 2017; Xie et al., 2022).
It has been widely found that school leaders play a critical role in the successful
implementation of PBIS (Langley et al., 2010; Flannery et al., 2014; Pinkelman et al., 2015).
This belief remains consistent across findings as school administrators are instrumental in
maintaining support for PBIS practices (Flannery et al., 2014; Pinkelman et al., 2015). Schools
with supportive leaders create a culture of high expectations. Earlier studies suggest that positive
perceptions of administrative support enhance teachers’ self-efficacy (Lee et al., 1991). Current
research corroborates these findings, suggesting principals play a prominent role in developing a
teacher’s self-efficacy (Aldridge & Fraser, 2016; Duyar et al., 2013; Xie et al., 2022). In
addition, this type of leader creates shared normed and values that unite the staff and allows for

41
the development of high collective efficacy (Nichols et al., 2020), ultimately effecting self-
efficacy (Dimopoulou, 2014; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010), which will be explored in the next
section.
Teacher’s Self-Efficacy
The aforementioned systems levels and factors within will ultimately influence a
teacher’s self-efficacy and therefore their confidence when implementing PBIS. Self- efficacy is
defined as a belief or judgment in one’s capabilities to accomplish desired outcomes in student
learning, even among difficult or unmotivated students (Armor et al., 1976; Bandura, 1977).
Self-efficacy is aligned with investment in teaching, levels of aspiration, and goal setting
(Dockterman & Bondie, 2018; Rouse, 2021; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). Additionally,
research suggests that self-efficacy is positively correlated with increased levels of job
satisfaction, decreased levels of stress, and mitigated issues with student misbehaviors (Barni et
al., 2014; Klassen et al., 2009; Klassen & Tze, 2014). Moreover, high levels of self-efficacy
result in an increased willingness to implement new strategies for the benefit of their students
(Hattie; 2016; Protheroe, 2008). Understanding teacher self-efficacy and its facilitators may
improve school effectiveness.
Historically, the tenets of teacher self-efficacy derive from research on Locus of Control
(Rotter, 1996) and Bandura’s (1977) Social Cognitive Theory. Seminal research set the
groundwork for The Rand Corporation’s popular 1977 publication, Change Agent Study. This
report claimed that teacher efficacy was the most powerful variable in predicting program
implementation success (McLaughlin, 1977). This publication invited a slew of research to be
conducted on improving teacher efficacy.

42
School culture, and all its comprised systems levels, has a direct influence on a teacher’s
self-efficacy (Dockterman & Bondie, 2018; Rouse, 2021). Educators with strong self-efficacy
are more inclined to try new programs, methods, and initiatives set forth by the school, including
but not limited to new behavioral intervention strategies (Kaslak & Dağyar, 2020; Nichols et al.,
2020; Stein & Wang, 1988; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). It is necessary to explore the
connection between school culture and self-efficacy when exploring PBIS implementation
because self-efficacy is a characteristic that makes teachers more ready to adopt new
methodologies and techniques to deal with difficult situations (Mehmood, 2019; Nichols et al.,
2020). In addition, self-efficacy is a prominent construct in better understanding how a teacher
will work with at-risk students and implement evidence-based practices such as PBIS (Bandura,
1997; Heck, 2009; Nichols et al., 2020; Zee & Koomen, 2016).
A teacher’s self-efficacy is developed by four main influences, including mastery
experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and emotional states (Bandura, 1977).
Mastery experiences, or success in mastering a task or controlling an environment, are
considered the most powerful. The second source, vicarious experiences, come from our
observation of the people around us. Seeing similar people, especially role models, succeed
raises beliefs in one’s capabilities. Verbal persuasion from influential people cab bolster efforts
to succeed. Finally, the emotional state a teacher is in will influence judgement on their
capabilities. Positive emotions can boost confidence in skill level. Each of these influences can
be identified within a teacher’s environment at different systems levels and is impacted by the
school’s culture. Just as the school culture can affect a teachers’ self-efficacy, teachers can
impact the self-efficacy of those around them (Lopez-Garrido, 2020). Feedback, peer modeling,
mentorship, participation, and autonomy can all help build self-efficacy which in turn will

43
impact teachers’ PBIS implementation abilities. The next section will discuss additional supports
available to increase teacher promotion of supportive school cultures.
Supports at Different Systems Levels
According to Bronfenbrenner, human development and socialization are influenced by
the different systems within one’s environment when the person is an active participant, meaning
he/she exerts influence on their environment (Härkönen, 2001). Furthermore, the idea behind
systems within one’s environment have to do with the degree of participation in any system
(Härkönen, 2001). This realization makes teacher support all the more important. Teachers have
a unique ability to shape the culture of their workplace (Roby, 2011; Kunnari et al., 2018). Some
studies suggest that teachers need to be involved in promoting a cultural shift for it to be
sustainable (Langon-Fox & Tan, 1997; Leal Filho et al., 2018; Kunnari et al., 2018). Clear links
between teacher promotion and increased levels of buy-in create a demand to analyze teachers’
needs at different systems levels within their environment in promoting a supportive school
culture. Research highlights several strategies for integrating teachers into the school culture,
including mentorship, and professional development. Proper integration is the first step toward
promotion of school culture and must be properly executed before expecting teachers to
encourage support.
Mentorship
Mentorship is a common theme that emerges when researching teacher development
(Boreen et al., 2009; WestEd, 2013). Mentorship has been extensively studied as a tool for
introducing new teachers to a school’s culture (Boreen et al., 2009), but should also be regarded
as a tool for adjusting to new programs, initiatives, and policies. A myriad of research explores
the benefits of mentorship on schools, teachers, and staff (q12aZ). Specifically, research explores

44
the impact mentorship has on retention, consistency, collaboration, and leadership among school
staff (Bowman, 2014). Some experts propose that coaching dialogue between a mentor and a
novice teacher has the ability to affect the broader school culture by transforming the
conversations between experienced teachers and school leaders (WestEd, 2013). Moreover, there
are psychological benefits that include an enhanced sense of culture and loyalty toward the
school and increased levels of confidence (Cowin et al., 2016).
Based on the results from research on teacher well-being (Cherkowski & Walker, 2016;
Cherkowski, 2018), literature suggests that mentoring can be a purposeful tool for establishing a
growth mindset in which organizations observe and support what works well to generate similar
conditions (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 2017). This focus on the positive helps to stimulate a sense
of well-being which ultimately contributes to the school culture (Cherkowski & Walker; 2019).
A focus on teacher well-being means developing a mentorship model that starts with the notion
that teachers are competent professionals. One form of mentorship that focuses on teacher
flourishment is an appreciative, strength-based mentoring approach (Tschannen-Moran &
Tschannen-Moran, 2010). The benefits of this approach are two-fold. First, this model helps
teachers exceed standards by uncovering their strengths and talents and, second, it motivates and
empowers teachers to improve their own performance (Tschannen-Moran & Tschannen-Moran,
2010). Furthermore, this form of mentorship can create a sense of care and connection within a
school environment, increasing a teacher’s desire to contribute to the enhancement of the school
culture.
Isolation has long been developed as a leading cause for attrition among novice staff
(Lortie, 1975). Mentorship promotes collaboration which in turn fosters dialogue and discussion.

45
One form of collaboration is through the implementation of professional learning communities,
which be discussed in more detail next.
Professional Development
Professional development is a common theme that has emerged in several examinations
of effective implementation strategies (Leithwood et al., 2010) and has been a significant
component of educational reforms starting with No Child Left Behind in 2001. Teacher
professional development is essential to the successful outcomes of educational reform and is
often utilized when introducing new methodologies or strategies (Desimone 2009; Mayworm et
al., 2016). Research suggests that teachers have the most consequential influence on student
achievement (Archibald et al., 2011) making it essential to create purposeful professional
development programs. It is also widely accepted that professional development can promote
improvements in teaching (Kennedy, 2016). Successful PBIS programs have been linked to
meaningful professional development programs (Leithwood et al., 2010) and additional studies
highlight the positive effects of professional development on teacher learning (Desimone et al.,
2002).
While every member of a school system is requisite in its overall success, teachers play a
prominent role when it comes to student achievement (Archibald et al., 2011; Bayar, 2014;
Nichols et al., 2020). Furthermore, Guskey (1994) emphasizes this prominence by noting that
schools cannot be improved without improving the skills and abilities of their teachers. While
several studies distinguish a positive correlation, several more express concerns over
professional developments ineffectiveness in supporting changes in teachers’ practices (Darling-
Hammond et al., 2017).

46
Although many studies tout the positive effects of ongoing teacher development (Guskey,
1994; Kennedy, 2016; Leithwood et al., 2010; Wyatt & Ončevska Ager, 2017), there is a
documented gap between theory and application (Darling-Hammond & McLaughlin, 1995;
Wideen et al., 1998, Wyatt & Ončevska Ager, 2017). This gap has called to attention a stronger
emphasis on understanding how teachers learn. Traditional top-down approaches, including
courses and workshops, continue to be a common approach to professional development despite
studies suggesting they can result in demotivation (Wyatt & Ončevska Ager, 2017). Bottom-up
approaches that involve and engage teachers are more likely to motivate and result in change
(Wyatt & Ončevska Ager, 2017). Bottom-up approaches require a culture of critical enquiry that
provide opportunities for professional dialogue (Darling-Hammond & McLaughlin, 1995). A
school culture that encourages and supports inquiry will result in increased motivation and buy-
in from staff (Darling-Hammond & McLaughlin, 1995). Moreover, studies suggest that
professional development efforts have a positive effect on teacher self-efficacy (Tschannen-
Moran & McMaster, 2009; Yoo, 2016). Research supports a positive relationship between high-
quality professional development and teacher self-efficacy (Goddard et al., 2000; Garet et al.,
2001).
Supports such as mentorship and professional development must be embedded within
systems in a teacher’s environment to be effective. It is important to recognize and address the
bidirectional nature of this support; concepts like mentorship grow a teacher’s capacities while
motivating them to be supportive of their school. Intentional supports within a teacher’s
environment led to an enhanced sense of community, shared responsibility, care, and
collaboration. The following section visualizes a teacher’s environment and the different systems
that affect self-efficacy.

47
Conceptual Framework
The following conceptual framework presents the assumptions, beliefs, expectations, and
theories that guided the research process. To answer these research questions, “What are
teachers’ perceptions of school culture and the ways it influences PBIS implementation? What
are the teachers' needs at the different systems levels to promote a school culture that supports
PBIS?”, this study builds off research conducted by Urie Bronfenbrenner in his study on
ecological models in 1979. Bronfenbrenner’ Ecological Systems Theory was developed is a
psychological theory that explains human development and behavior in the context of a person's
environment. The theory suggests that there are five different levels of environments that can
influence a person's development and behavior. These levels include:
1. The chronosystem: This refers to the changes and transitions that occur, such as
societal changes, family structure changes, and personal life events. This study refers
to the chronosystem as changes in behavioral reform efforts and attitudes.
2. The macrosystem: This is the overarching cultural context in which a person lives,
including their beliefs, values, ideologies, customs, and laws. This study recognizes
the overarching PBIS framework and analyzes its impact on other systems within a
teachers’ environment.
3. The exosystem: This refers to the broader societal structures that indirectly affect a
person's development, such as policies and the community. This research looks at
district policies and funding’s impact on teacher efficacy.
4. The mesosystem: This is the connection between two or more microsystems, such as
the relationship between a child's school and their family.

48
5. The microsystem: This is the immediate environment in which a person lives, such as
their family, school, and peer group. This study focuses on elements such as the
principal, colleagues, and a school’s vision and mission.
While the mesosystem is not be specifically referred to throughout the study, the bidirectional
nature of Bronfenbrenner’s model contributes to the researcher’s understanding of how culture
also influences systems within the teacher’s environment. Bronfenbrenner posited that a person's
development is influenced by all of these environmental factors and that they interact with each
other in complex ways. These ideas are used to support the researcher’s understanding in how
systems impacted by a school’s culture can contribute to perceptions of self-efficacy. The
researcher included the following figure to represent the identified elements within a teachers’
environment that were explored for their relationship to school-culture. It outlines key concepts
and factors that were expected to affect teachers’ implementation efficacy and promotion of
supportive school cultures.

49
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

Summary
This chapter provided an overview of the literature related to school culture and its
comprised systems that may impact a teacher’s self-efficacy when implementing PBIS practices.
Using Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model, this literature review delineated systems levels
within a teachers’ environment and the factors within each level that may have an impact on their
perceived ability to execute PBIS practices. His theory suggests that there are five different
levels of environments that can influence a person's development and behavior. A teacher’s
environment is comprised of the chronosystem, macrosystem, exosystem, and the microsystem.
Key concepts and factors associated with each system were identified and described in chapter
two. Literature was analyzed to gain better understanding of which elements were best associated
with each system. For the purposes of this study, the chronosystem assessed the changes in

50
behavioral reform efforts and attitudes, the macrosystem was recognized as the overarching
PBIS framework and analyzes its impact on other systems within a teachers’ environment, the
exosystem looked at district policies and funding’s impact on teacher self-efficacy, and the
microsystem included a schools’ principal, colleagues, and vision and mission. The literature
further analyzed these five systems and their impact on teacher-self efficacy when implementing
PBIS practices. The bilateral nature of these systems levels necessitated a deeper investigation
into the influence a teacher has on school culture, and more specifically, a teacher’s needs in
promoting a school culture that supports PBIS. This review examined different methods of
support at different systems levels. Research highlighted several strategies for integrating
teachers into the school culture, including mentorship, and professional development.

51
Chapter Three: Methodology
Research on the effectiveness of PBIS has established a growing need to address
implementation efforts. This study addressed one component of implementation at the school
level by examining factors relating to school culture and how teachers perceive it as a tool to
encourage support and buy-in of this reform effort. The resources needed to promote a
supportive school culture and the impact it has on execution were be viewed through the lens of
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory. The results of this qualitative study contribute to
the understanding of how school culture affects teachers’ abilities to implement equitable
behavior management programs. It also provides insight into what assistance is needed by
teachers at different systems levels to promote school cultures that foster support of new policies.
This chapter outlines the specific questions addressed by this study, the research
methodology employed, and the research setting. Next will be a discussion of the researcher’s
positionality and data sources, including a description of the interviews, participants, and
instrumentation, as well as an overview of the data collection procedures. The chapter concludes
with a deliberation on the credibility and trustworthiness of this study, ethical considerations, and
the limitations and delimitations.
Research Questions
The research questions developed for this study are constructed to uncover the
relationship between school culture and effective implementation strategies to support PBIS
practices. In addition, this study aims to find what teachers need at different systems levels
within their environment to promote cultures where PBIS can be properly implemented. This
inquiry pursues the following research questions:

52
1. What are teachers’ perceptions of school culture and the ways it influences PBIS
implementation?
2. What are the teachers' needs at the different systems levels to promote a school culture
that supports PBIS?
Overview of Design
Qualitative methodologies were chosen for these research questions as they concern
teachers’ perceptions of their work environment (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). To fully
understand how teachers perceive their environment, or school culture, the researcher analyzed
the in-depth experience of the teacher and their role in promoting a supportive culture.
Qualitative research is most appropriate for these discoveries as it involves uncovering meaning
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Uncovering this meaning was best achieved through data collection
of multiple sources, including semi-structured interviews with ten middle school teachers and
document analysis involving public records.
A semi-structured interview format was chosen for its flexibility. Specifically, semi-
structured interviews operate under the assumption that participants define the world in unique
ways. They therefore take on a less-structured format, allowing the researcher to respond in the
moment (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This format enabled the researcher to gather explicit data
describing teachers’ perceptions and experiences (Patton, 2002). In addition, this study collected
documents for analysis. While documents did not yield information regarding teacher
perceptions, they were largely used to describe the context in which the case study was
occurring. Furthermore, document analysis helped corroborate findings from interviews and
reduce the impact of researcher bias (Bowen, 2009). Multiple methods of data collection enabled
the researcher to triangulate findings to increase credibility of the study (Merriam & Tisdell,

53
2016). Applied research methods were chosen with the purpose of improving the quality and
practice of PBIS implementation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Research has shown there are links
between school-controlled factors and suspension or expulsion levels, which in turn impact
graduation rates (Fabelo et al., 2011).
Table 1 details the research questions and the proper instrumentation used to collect data
in response.
Table 1
Research Questions as Instrumentation
Research Questions Interviews Document Analysis
1. What are teachers’
perceptions of school
culture and the ways it
influences PBIS
implementation?

x x
2. What are the teachers’
needs at the different
systems levels to
promote PBIS?
x x

Research Setting
This study was conducted across 3 middle schools within one Southern California school
district, Middleton School District, that exercises PBIS practices. PBIS is marketed as a tiered
framework and therefore does not have a set curriculum to adhere to (Center on PBIS, 2023).
Because of this, definitions and implementation strategies may differ. For the purposes of this
study, participants were provided with an introductory letter detailing this study’s definition of
PBIS to better inform them of the research questions and goal of the study (Appendix A).
Furthermore, middle school are defined as an intermediate school serving students in grades

54
sixth, seventh, and eighth. Ten middle school teachers who implement PBIS practices were
interviewed via Zoom.
Middleton School District is comprised of 17 elementary, 8 middle, 4 high schools, and 1
continuation and 1 alternative high school. The district is dedicated to ensuring every student is
educated and prepared to succeed in life. This school district was purposefully chosen due to
identification of PBIS practices that exist there. Participants were interviewed from 3 of the 8
middle schools, Alpha Middle School, Beta Middle School, and Epsilon Middle School.
Alpha Middle School is a public-school, serving students in grades six-eight located in
California. The school's mission is to provide a safe and supportive learning environment where
students can reach their full potential. Alpha Middle School had the lowest number of reported
suspensions during the 2016/2017 and 2018/2019 school years. Consequently, Alpha Middle
School was recognized as a as a California Distinguished School in 2019. This award is given by
the California Department of Education to schools that demonstrate excellence in academic
achievement and positive school culture. Alpha Middle School leaders credit PBIS for their
success. According to the 2020/2021 school accountability report card (SARC), 31.6% of
students are Asian, 3.9% are Black or African American, 39% are Hispanic or Latino, 5.5% are
Filipino, 1.8% are Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 9.1% are White, and 9.2% are two or
more races. 12.5% of students are identified as English Learners and 37.5% are
socioeconomically disadvantaged. Four participants, Minnie, Belcher, Kappa, and Mariana were
interviewed from this site.
Beta Middle School is the second middle school included in this study serving students in
grades six-eight. Beta Middle School is dedicated to achieving success for all students by
encouraging citizenship and civic virtue through diverse and challenging academic curriculum

55
and enrichment. While there is no mention of PBIS or its related activities on the school’s
website, the two participants, Cortland and Ruby, spoke extensively about their program. Beta
Middle School was recognized as a 2021 California Distinguished School. According to the
2020/2021 (SARC), 29.3% of students are Asian, 4.7% are Black or African American, 32.4%
are Hispanic or Latino, 8.4% are Filipino, 0.3% are Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 15.3%
are White, and 9.2% are two or more races. 10.2% of students are identified as English Learners
and 30.1% are socioeconomically disadvantaged.
Epsilon Middle School is the third middle school included in this study. 686 students
were enrolled in the 2020/2021 school year with approximately 16% qualifying for free/reduced
lunch. Epsilon Middle School is dedicated to inspiring critical thinkers who contribute to the
community as responsible and educated members of society. One way to support this mission is
through the utilization of PBIS which is implemented through the school’s positive behavior
matrix. This matric specifically details the expectations aligned to each core values. In addition,
Epsilon Middle School recently adopted restorative practice to supplement PBIS
implementation. As a result, Epsilon Middle School was also recognized as a 2021 California
Distinguished School. According to the 2020/2021 school accountability report card (SARC),
28.9% of students are Asian, 6% are Black or African American, 25.8% are Hispanic or Latino,
3.7% are Filipino, 0.1% are Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 22.8% are White, and 12.3%
are two or more races. 9.7% of students are identified as English Learners and 26.8% are
socioeconomically disadvantaged. Approximately 1% of students at Epsilon Middle School
experience homelessness. Four participants, Jefa, Winter, Jim, and Craig, were interviewed from
this site.

56
The Researcher
When conducting a qualitative study, researchers must fully engage in reflexibility
practices to ensure their own biases are accounted for. This process enables readers to evaluate
the objectivity of their research and gauge the credibility of data (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
Furthermore, this objectivity is necessary when making decisions about data collection, analysis,
and interpretation (Locke et. al, 2010).
As I observe Morgan’s Intersecting Axes of Privilege, Domination, and Oppression, I am
aware that the majority of my identities exist on the axes of privilege (1996). I am a fourth-grade
teacher working in a Southern California elementary school. As a teacher who began their career
through Teach for America, I am aware of the duality that existed within my identity and my
occupation as a privileged educator in a majority-minority setting. Previously attempting to
differentiate myself from other white, female teachers, I realized I am too intricately woven into
a life that has benefited from centuries of oppression to separate myself. I acknowledge that this
is a privilege I hold; the ability to hide or escape from one part of my identity to benefit a
different part of my lifestyle (Matias, 2013). I strive to be aware of how my racial identity and
schooling experience impact my craft and epistemology and learn how to accept my identity as
white and anti-racist (Utt and Tochluk, 2020).
My research question focuses on teachers and their perspective on different aspects of
school culture and PBIS. When interrogating my positionality, I can identify that I represent the
majority of elementary school teachers in America as a white woman. Moreover, my status as a
white woman influenced my encounters with school discipline. I have never personally dealt
with exclusionary practices as a student, and therefore must craft questions guided by knowledge
and research, rather than my own biases as a teacher. I have worked in school settings which

57
utilizes PBIS and must be cognizant of these experiences as I am analyzing data. This awareness
is also critical when designing my research methodology, as positionality can affect whose
voices were not heard and represented in the final report. I need to be aware that my positionality
as a white CIS gender woman may impact who I choose to interview, or which school I choose
to use as my focus. Strategies to combat personal biases and inequitable representation include
well-researched interview protocols and interview pilots to test the quality of questions (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). In addition, triangulation of data and member checking were employed to
ensure personal biases did not negatively impact findings.
Data Sources
This study examined the perceptions of teachers regarding school culture’s impact on
PBIS implementation efforts and the support needed at different systems levels to promote this
culture. Data sources for this qualitative study included semi-structured interviews and data
analysis of school records including the school mission, behavior policy, professional
development calendar, and Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP). 11 teachers were
interviewed using semi-structured protocols to obtain explicit information regarding their
perceptions and experiences. Simultaneous coding and triangulation assisted the research in
constructing categories during data analysis.
Interviews
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with middle school teachers who are
employing PBIS practices. A semi-structured format allowed for flexibility and exploration of
topics not included in the interview protocol. This flexibility was useful for this study since the
researcher only meet with each participant once. Semi-structured interviews provided time and
space for participants to freely express their views in their own terms (Cohen & Crabtree, 2006).

58
Questions in the interview protocol addressed the two research questions and were developed in
consultation with the literature review and Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Model. These interviews
served to provide data for the study.
Document Analysis
Document analysis is a systematic procedure for reviewing printed and electronic media
(Bowen, 2009). For this study, school documents including school expectations, the school’s
mission statement, the professional development calendar, the School Accountability Report
Card, and the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) were collected and reviewed.
Participants
A purposeful sampling process was utilized to select participants for this study. The unit
of analysis for this research was middle school teachers employing PBIS practices. Purposeful
sampling was be used to ensure the researcher can gain clear and meaningful data relevant to the
questions. This sampling was deemed most appropriate for this study since emphasis is on
understanding perspectives (Patton, 2015). In addition, this form of sampling is most suitable for
a qualitative study because the researcher is concerned with identifying individuals who offer
“descriptively valuable perspectives” (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017).
The first step to conducting a purposeful sampling is determining the criterion for
participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). 11 teachers were chosen based on their experience with
PBIS programs, meaning they must be employed in a school that explicitly follows this
methodology.
Instrumentation
Semi-structured, one on one interviews were conducted with each participant. During
each interview, participants were asked about their teaching experience, perspectives of school

59
culture and PBIS, and systems of support. These interviews were recorded with participants’
approval. Appendix B outlines the interview protocol created to accompany the interviews.
Using Patton’s (2007) guide on qualitative interviewing, a series of questions were developed to
elicit meaningful and rich data from the participants. Interview questions were cross-checked
with the research questions and conceptual framework to ensure alignment and written according
to Patton’s (2007) question types to guarantee variability. This interview protocol was piloted
with two researchers to verify clear, singular questions are being used throughout the protocol
(Patton, 2007). The semi-structured nature of the interview permitted probes for deeper
responses.
Additional measures were used to ensure triangulation of data sources. School policies
regarding disciplinary action, the school’s mission statement, the professional development
calendar, and the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) were collected and reviewed.
Documents detailing school discipline interventions and the mission statement provided
additional information aligning with research question one, as they provide more insight on the
school’s culture. The professional development calendar contributed to findings on the second
research question, allowing the researcher to cross-check findings referring to teacher support.
LCAP documents addressed both research questions, yielding information about school culture
and teacher support at different systems levels.
Data Collection Procedures
Data was collected through in-person, semi-structured interviews with eleven middle
school teachers. These interviews allowed the researcher to engage in conversations focused on
questions related to the study (deMarrais, 2004). All participants were sent an introductory letter

60
detailing the purpose of the study and their role (Appendix A). This study’s focus was on
teachers employed in middle schools that utilize PBIS.
Semi-structured interviews followed the interview protocol outlined in appendix B. A
semi-structured approach allows for fluidity between prepared questions and probes for richer
conversation. Each interview was conducted within a 45-minute timeframe and took place on the
Zoom platform. The researcher obtained verbal permission to record the interviews using
rev.com and notes throughout.
Data Analysis
Organized, simultaneous, and continuous analysis of data is necessary to fully answer the
research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To accurately answer the research questions, a
series of steps were conducted after all data was collected. First, collected data was organized
and prepared through a transcription service called rev.com. Rev.com provides speech to text
services, ensuring interviews are documented verbatim. After this initial step is complete, the
researcher examined the data, including transcribed interviews, notes, and school documents. A
formal and comprehensive data analysis transpired after all interviews were complete. Data
analysis also occurred simultaneously, with transcriptions being reviewed after each interview
and initial thoughts, insights, and interpretations noted. This process is also known as coding.
Qualitative data were analyzed using a six-step thematic analysis. The six steps include
familiarization, coding, generating themes, reviewing themes, defining, and naming themes, and
writing up results (Braun & Clark, 2008). After transcribing each audio recording and reading
through the transcripts, careful observations were made about repeating words and phrases.
Word-based techniques were primarily used during the coding process to identify word
repetitions. Word repetitions and synonymous words or phrases were then documented and

61
analyzed. Words and phrases that appeared more than three times in an interview were marked as
high frequency. Next, the researcher began to identify parts of the data that respond to the
research questions and started to form them into meaningful categories (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Bronfenbrenner’s framework was utilized during this step to ensure categories aligned
with the purpose of the study. Using the theoretical framework, literature review, and data
collected from interviews and school documents, categories were named, and relationships were
formed. Forming relationships and theorizing the data is where explicit steps need to be taken to
establish credibility and trustworthiness in the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Credibility and Trustworthiness
It is critical to remember that qualitative research studies participants’ constructs of
reality, with the researcher as the main instrument (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In turn, qualitative
research will not produce one objective truth, but steps can be taken to ensure credibility of the
research. The first step to establishing credibility is through sound questions (Creswell & Poth,
2016). Effective qualitative interview questions are clear, concise, and open-ended. Questions
need to yield descriptive data and make room for further probes, so the researcher isn’t forced to
make assumptions or discard the data. Careful consideration was made when creating the
interview questionnaire for this study. After consulting the literature review and
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model, an interview protocol was developed and tested on two
people outside of the sample selection.
Additional measures to establish credibility include triangulation through multiple data
sources (Denzin, 1978). Two methods of data collection, online interviews and documents, were
employed. This strategy enabled the researcher to cross-check interview responses against school

62
documents (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Variation of data sources provided additional insights
into the research questions, establishing credibility by looking at the issue through different lens.
To ensure trustworthiness, the researcher verified online recording capabilities prior to
interviewing participants. All interviews were recorded using the researcher’s Zoom recording
functionalities and uploaded locally to a personal device. Verbatim recordings add to the audit
trail, which detail the methods and procedures used to gain and analyze data (Merriam & Tisdell
2016). Furthermore, this data was member checked by participants to confirm that findings are
valid and plausible. Triangulation of data also strengthened the trustworthiness of the study by
corroborating the findings against other sources.
Ethics
Protection of the participants was ensured throughout the study through a series of ethical
considerations. First, the Institutional Review Board examined the research proposal and
approved the study, confirming preliminary steps were taken to guarantee the well-being of
participants. An explicit explanation of the interview procedure, questions, and intended
outcomes were provided to all participants to gain informed consent (Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
Confidentiality was protected and maintained using pseudonyms for people, places, and
locations (Glesne, 2011). In addition, permission was obtained prior to the recording of any data
and all records were discarded appropriately after the study was completed.
Additional ethical considerations need to be considered before and after the interview
process. Opportunities for misunderstandings are magnified during qualitative research, and
researchers may resort to analyzing data through the lens of their positionality (Patton, 2002). It
is necessary to complete background research when engaging in cross-cultural interviews to
reduce the likelihood of misunderstandings and therefore colonization of research participants.

63
Ethical interview practices for this study include forming knowledge through research, building
rapport, remaining neutral, being conscious about the wording of questions, and informing
participants of their purpose and role in the study (Rubin & Rubin, 2012).

64
Chapter Four: Findings
This qualitative study aimed to explore the perceived impact of school culture on PBIS
implementation. Furthermore, this study probed the needs of middle school teachers in
promoting a school culture that supports PBIS. Multiple sources of qualitative data were
collected to assess this problem of practice. Specifically, interviews and artifact data were
collected to understand perceptions of school culture and its influence on PBIS implementation.
Interviews were conducted first, followed by document analysis to corroborate data. The findings
of this study aim to provide insight for teachers and administrators who are wishing to improve
the effectiveness of PBIS programs in their schools. Schools that desire to create intentional
PBIS implementation plans may also use these findings when developing their programs.
This chapter describes the participants of the qualitative study and reports on the findings,
which are guided by the following research questions:
1. What are teachers’ perceptions of school culture and the ways it influences PBIS
implementation?
2. What are the teachers' needs at the different systems levels to promote a school culture
that supports PBIS?
The following sections of this chapter present the findings of the research questions. Results are
organized according to themes that emerged during data analysis and are categorized by research
question. Each theme is discussed in a separate sub-section. Three themes resulted in subsequent
sub-themes. Direct quotations are included as a form of evidence to assure credibility.
Participants
The unit of analysis for this research was middle school teachers, grades six through
eight, in Middleton School District. All ten participants in this purposeful sample were teachers

65
at one of the three study schools within the Middleton School District. The three middle schools
were Alpha Middle School, Beta Middle School, and Epsilon Middle School. As discussed in
Chapter Three, all interviews were conducted via Zoom video conference as requested by the
participants. Table 2 indicates the relevant demographic characteristics of the study participants.
Pseudonyms have been assigned to each participant as indicated in the table and are be used in
discussions throughout the chapter. Additionally, pseudonyms have been assigned to the school
district and school sites.
Table 2
Participant Demographics
Participant Gender Middle School Years at Study
School
PBIS Experience
Minnie Female Alpha Middle
School
4 Current coordinator
Belcher Female Alpha Middle
School
20 Former PBIS
coordinator
Kappa Female Alpha Middle
School
1 PBIS team member
Mariana Female Alpha Middle
School
20 PBIS team member
Ruby Female Beta Middle School 23 PBIS team member
Cortland Female Beta Middle School 25 PBIS team member
Craig Male Epsilon Middle
School
9 Former PBIS
coordinator
Jim Male Epsilon Middle
School
21 Former PBIS team
member
Jefa Female Epsilon Middle
School
10 Current PBIS
coordinator
Winter Female Epsilon Middle
School
2 PBIS team member

Eight participants are female and two are male. Four teachers work at Alpha Middle
School, two work at Beta Middle School, and four work at Epsilon Middle School. Participants’

66
years at the study school range from 1 to 25 years with an average of 13.5 years of employment
at a study school. These ten teachers were purposively selected for their participation in a PBIS
program at their school. Two participants are current PBIS coordinators at their school site, three
were former coordinators and now serve as members, and five serve as current members on their
site’s team.
Findings for Research Question 1: What are teachers’ perceptions of school culture
and the ways it influences PBIS implementation?
The first research question focuses on teachers’ perceptions of school culture and its
influence on implementation efforts. As data were collected in this study, three themes emerged
addressing the first research question. First, participants agreed that collaboration strengthens
their understanding. Furthermore, they referred to collegial support as a means of encouragement
when trying new strategies. These support systems also influenced teachers to seek help when
needed. Second, ten out of ten participants highlighted retention as having an impact on self-
efficacy. Teachers found value in working with people with extensive experience in one school.
Conversely, teachers were challenged by principal attrition. Third, common language,
expectations, and values establish cohesion and understanding which in turn support
implementation. These three themes are developed, with evidence, in the following sections.
Theme 1. Collaboration Strengthens Understanding
Interview analysis determined that collaboration was the highest frequency word used in
all ten interviews. In addition, data suggest that time spent in Professional Learning
Communities (PLCs) helped deepen teacher understanding. Interview and document findings
were employed to inform this theme. School calendars were analyzed to assess how much time

67
was allotted for PLCs. School Accountability Report Cards were also collected to check for
reference to PLCs as a means for teacher development.
Interview Findings
When discussing positive characteristics of their school culture, all ten participants
mentioned collaboration. Moreover, when asked how collaboration with colleagues supports or
hinders their confidence when implementing PBIS, six out of ten discussed the importance of
their PLC time. Interview findings are depicted in table two below.
Table 3
Interview Analysis Categorization in Theme 1
Participants Collaboration strengthens
understanding
PLCs strengthen
understanding
Minnie x
Belcher x x
Kappa x
Mariana x x
Ruby x x
Cortland x x
Craig x
Jim x x
Jefa x
Winter x x

When asked about PLC time, Mariana said, “We have PLC time and we break up by our
department levels.” She shared details of what happens during PLC time and the team’s focus.
Their focus is cross-grade level, meaning they are collaborating with sixth, seventh, and eighth
grade teachers. When probed for more details about this time, Mariana stated: “It is very
collaborative. We sit there and talk about what we want them to know. What is the point of this,
what’s most important?” Moreover, Mariana explains that if the school did not provide them
with PLC time, “we would have to meet on a conference period, or at lunch or passing in the

68
hall. It wouldn’t be as good of a conversation because it wouldn’t be as focused.” Belcher
expressed similar sentiments when discussing PLC time with an emphasis on new teacher
support. When specifically asked what supports are in place to assist new teachers with PBIS,
Belcher highlighted Alpha’s weekly PLC meeting time as a time to problem-solve academic and
behavior concerns with colleagues. Despite being at a different school site, Ruby referenced their
weekly PLC time as her opportunity to collaborate with her colleagues about PBIS-related
topics. She relates:
We have weekly PLCs that we have an agenda to do in an hour, once a week. Everything
from talking about student discipline to planning curriculum and talking about data. I
think the PLCs have developed this camaraderie, there is ease to sharing about their
students and what’s going on, and what steps were done.
Ruby emphasized the importance of this weekly meeting for her overall understanding. PLC
meetings provided a consistent period to hear testimonies from other teachers and utilize data to
pinpoint specific needs. Collaboration amongst teams allows teachers to identify systemic issues
and provide data-driven solutions, all within a matter of an hour. Ruby elaborates:
It’s good to know that teachers are adhering to our discipline matrix, adhering to
following up, and knowing that one student is perhaps behaving in a certain way in one
class and another class there’s no problem, it’s good to see what’s the problem. Is the
problem the teacher? The environment? The peers?
The eight other participants shared Ruby and Mariana’s sentiments on the importance of
collaboration. While some participants focused on their department or grade-specific
collaboration, others highlighted collaboration and support amongst all colleagues. Kappa, a
third-year teacher, shared her experience as a first-year teacher in Middleton School District.

69
When asked about the school culture at Alpha Middle School, she shared, “I love it here. The
school culture is much better. Out of all the sites I’ve been in, the staff here is very helpful.”
Kappa said that she immediately felt supported and welcomed by her colleagues, which led her
to volunteer to be on the PBIS team. Similarly to Kappa, Belcher expressed whole school
collaboration efforts to address behavior issues. When talking about monthly school meetings,
Belcher shared that when she was PBIS coordinator, she was responsible for reporting behavior
data to the entire staff. According to Belcher:
At monthly staff meetings, I would give a report out and then talk to them and tell them
what the data said, and then tell them what the [PBIS] team decided to do to try to
address it if it was a discipline issue. And then the whole staff would give it a shot and
see if it worked.
Belcher describes a whole-school, solution-oriented meeting where data is presented and
strategies are offered to resolve disciplinary issues. Additionally, Belcher shared that the process
has changed since she moved school sites. When asked what monthly PBIS meetings look like
now, she disclosed that a newer teacher is running the program. In addition to new teachers, the
school has also had new administration join the team, creating changes in the way data are
collected and dispersed. She shared, “We don’t meet as a staff. We don’t have a PBIS team
yet…We talk about issues, but it isn’t a formal step-by-step that I used to do.” Staff changes are
formally discussed in theme two.
Kappa and Mariana’s attitudes toward whole-school collaboration were reinforced by
many other participants. Minnie, who was recently promoted to PBIS coordinator, credits
collaboration for having a strong impact on her efficacy levels. She explains, “Yeah, I feel like
this year, collaboration with peers has been really helpful. It has been really helpful to have

70
somebody that has been in my position for longer than I have been to bounce ideas off of.” This
idea of collaboration with veteran teachers is developed in theme two.
Several participants expressed their desire to interact with teachers outside of their
departments. Craig shared that having the support of other teachers has been really meaningful to
him. Specifically, “The teachers here have been really supportive of us…They get what we’re
trying to do with our program.” The support and positive feedback encourage Craig and his team
to invite staff members to special performances, further contributing to a culture of care, support,
and understanding. Jim also expressed a desire to meet as a whole staff more frequently. He
alluded to the idea of departments becoming “islands”. While he enjoys his department and feels
a great level of comfort with them, he recommends meeting as a whole staff to collaborate,
problem-solve, and work with teachers that may not share the same mindset. A holistic sense of
community promotes true collaboration and invites participation from all stakeholders.
Document Analysis Findings
School calendars were referenced to analyze how much time is dedicated to
collaboration, specifically PLCs. Additionally, School Accountability Report Cards (SARC)
were cross referenced to see if PLCs were discussed as a method for teacher development. The
SARC report allows the public to compare schools for student achievement, environment,
resources, and demographics. Middleton School District consistently schedules PLC time every
Tuesday morning from 8:35 a.m. to 9:20 a.m. This late start applies to all three participating
middle schools. Students have a late start on Tuesdays with class usually beginning at 8:35 a.m.
Teachers are given this time, every week, to discuss matter of importance with their team. These
teams may meet according to the subject they teach or by grade level.

71
In addition, each SARC mentions PLC time as a way to further staff development. The
SARC references weekly PLC time as a way to encourage ongoing professional growth and site
leadership.
Summary
Theme one reveals strong support for collaboration amongst all three school sites.
Middleton School District prioritizes professional growth by allotting time every week to PLCs.
Participants discussed collaboration’s impact on their self-efficacy, stating that time spent with
peers deepened their understanding and developed collegiality, establishing a sense of trust and
understanding. Trust and understanding are critical components of a positive school culture,
allowing teachers to work on a more personal and vulnerable level. Detailed quotes and
examples from different participants showcase their unique experiences and perspectives on the
importance of collaboration in PBIS implementation.
Theme 2. Retention Affects Implementation
Reportings suggest that staff retention can have an impact on implementation efforts. All
ten teachers mentioned retention impacting their perceived effectiveness in some capacity.
Recorded data highlighted the benefits of teacher retention and the barriers associated with
administrative attrition. Interviews suggest that when staff members are retained for longer
periods of time, they tend to develop stronger relationships with their colleagues and become
more familiar with the organization's culture and practices. Conversely, when staff members, in
this case principals, are constantly leaving, those who remain feel uncertain and anxious about
the future of the organization. This uncertainty can lead to decreased confidence in their ability
to perform their job duties effectively and can even lead to burnout and job dissatisfaction.

72
Ten out of ten teachers discussed the benefits of working on an established team. Others
analyzed the effect that administrative turnover had on the state of their PBIS team. Interview
analysis determined that established, long-lasting partnerships developed trust, confidence, and
efficiency. Turnovers resulted in confusion and frustration as a result of new strategies being
implemented or committees being dissolved. Two sub-themes regarding retention emerged
during data analysis. First, working with an established team impacts PBIS implementation.
Second, administrative tenure impacts PBIS implementation. Document analysis involving the
Local Control and Accountability Plan was employed but yielded no information.
Interview Findings
Six out of the ten participants had more than 10 years of experience at their school site.
When discussing self-efficacy and practices that impact it, retention was mentioned regarding
teachers and administrators. Veteran teachers highlighted working with newer teachers to
problem-solve PBIS issues while younger teachers discussed the importance of having a veteran
teacher to check in with. Six out of ten participants distinctively mentioned administrative tenure
when discussing ability, understanding, and overall efficacy regarding PBIS implementation. All
three schools were represented in this finding, with two participants from Alpha Middle School,
one from Beta Middle School, and three participants from Epsilon Middle School. Interview
findings are depicted in table three below.
Table 4
Findings of Sub-Themes in Theme 2
Participants Established teams impact
implementation
Administrative tenure
impacts implementation
Minnie x x
Belcher x x
Kappa x

73
Mariana x
Ruby x
Cortland x x
Craig x x
Jim x
Jefa x x
Winter x x
Established Teams Impact PBIS Implementation Participants emphasized the positive
effects of working with a team for a long period of time or joining a settled team. When
discussing PLC time, Mariana shared the importance of feedback. She explained that
collaboration depends on trust and open communication, tenets that need to be developed for
effective collaboration to take place. According to Mariana:
The three of us have worked together for a little while. So that helps us feel comfortable
with each other and we can say, “oh, ten of my kids got a zero, 17 of them got a one,” it
doesn’t feel like we’re being judged. It’s not like that.
Similarly to Mariana, Craig mentioned the value of working with a long-withstanding team. His
team has been together for nine years, with one team member having 20 years of experience at
their school site. He credits this as one of the many reasons he feels his team is successful and
mentioned that other teachers and schools complement the progress his department has made.
Teachers new to Middleton were also able to comment on the long-lasting tenure of many
teachers. Kappa, a first-year teacher at Alpha Middle School, credits the positive school culture
to its veteran teachers. When asked why teachers are so willing to help at Alpha, she shared:
I think a lot of these teachers have been at Alpha so long and they share the appreciation
that Alpha is a great school to work at. It helps foster an environment where we’re all
being very supportive of each other and we want what’s best for the school because we
all care about it so much.

74
Minnie fondly reminisced on her time as a substitute teacher in the district. She shared, “That
was something that was really nice when I was subbing here at the beginning. It didn’t matter
that I was a sub. They were just really open and nice.” When asked what she thought drove this
friendliness she responded, “At this school, there is a core group of teachers that have been here
for a long time and they’re open to taking people in.” This sense of support and inclusivity from
veteran teachers was what eventually helped Minnie settle in as a full-time teacher.
Administrative Tenure Impacts PBIS Implementation Participants also shared the
challenges they faced when working through periods of turnover. Winter shared the following:
It’s a little different this year compared to last year because half our team is new now. So,
yeah, we’ve had a lot of changes and so we actually don’t really have a department head
right now. So, I feel like it’s been less collaborative than last year, but I feel like it’s
because no one is really leading the collaboration.
These sentiments were shared when expressing challenges with administration turnover.
Six out of ten participants discussed problems with PBIS implementation due to the new
administration. Changes in leadership can present new ideologies regarding PBIS
implementation, causing delays and setbacks to previous progress. This also creates a state of
disorientation as staff members are working to understand the new process. Many participants
discussed successful programs being paused due to changes in leadership. For example, Belcher
disclosed that a successful PBIS program was halted due to changes in leadership. This was a
case where the program was discontinued rather than altered, having a negative effect on
communication and understanding regarding school-wide behavior issues. Similar challenges
were shared by teachers at different study schools. While talking to Craig, he shared that Epsilon
Middle School experiences high volumes of administrative turnover. When asked what happens

75
during those transitional periods, he explained that some teachers try to take charge but
experience difficulty because administrators will “try to implement their new things.” Rather
than allow teachers to lead established programs, many principles want to try something
different. Winter added that it was difficult to describe the school culture at her site because the
administrators are all fairly new. There are “discrepancies” in what should be teacher-led versus
administrator-led, causing programs to be delayed or suspended while leadership “sets things
up”. Jefa elaborated on these delays. She added:
We’ve had a lot of admin turnover, so I think that’s our biggest flaw here. We have a lot
of great teachers and they care about the kids, but when we have admin turnover, then we
hear different things or nothing gets finished.
Despite the hardships that come with periods of transition, several teachers noted
increased levels of unity during these times. Minnie adds:
I think the teachers want to support each other even if things are hard and not the way
they have been in the past, which we see a lot of right now. We have new admin this
year. Things aren’t like they used to be, but we want to make it good for each other and
we want to support students; we know if we support each other then we can try to do the
best we can.
A sense of unity is an important aspect of a positive school culture. A supportive and nurturing
environment has clearly been established, allowing teachers to feel connected and engaged
during a time of uncertainty.
Summary
This section reported findings on the impact of established teams and administrative
tenure on self-efficacy in the context of PBIS implementation. Retention was perceived as both a

76
barrier to and a facilitator of perceptions of self-efficacy. Participants across all three school sites
shared how working with an established team can increase self-efficacy regarding PBIS while
principal attrition can reduce it.
Theme 3. Common Language, Expectations, and Values Establish Understanding and
Cohesion
A powerful cultural component that enhances teachers’ ability to efficaciously implement
PBIS is the establishment of clear expectations and values for all students and staff. These clear
expectations and values are communicated through an intentional common language that builds
efficacy through shared understanding. Moreover, shared language, expectations, and values
support all stakeholders in sustaining a positive school culture (Shafer, 2018). Literature suggests
that organizations with common values and beliefs regarding how good schools operate will
perform at higher levels of productivity (Gaziel, 1997). This theme analyzes the impact that a
school’s expectations, values, and/or mission have on a teacher’s self-efficacy when
implementing PBIS. Interview and document findings were employed to inform this theme.
Documents used for this theme include the district website and school code of conduct.
Document analysis is organized by school site.
Interview Findings
Nine out of ten participants shared ideas of school expectations, school values, and
school mission when discussing self-efficacy. Participants used different terms depending on
their background and school site, but all three words refer to a common set of guidelines for how
a student should behave in school. Participants referencing their school’s expectations, values, or
mission as having an impact on their self-efficacy are identified below. Kappa, the one
participant who is not identified, did not share any dissenting opinions. Rather, she did not

77
highlight common language, expectations, and values as having an impact on her self-efficacy
when implementing PBIS. Results are shown in table 5 below.
Table 5
High-Frequency Word Analysis in Theme 3
Participants School expectations/ values/ mission impact
implementation
Minnie x
Belcher x
Kappa
Mariana x
Ruby x
Cortland x
Craig x
Jim x
Jefa x
Winter x
School Expectations/ Values/ Mission Impact PBIS Implementation When asked
about PBIS successes at their school site, several participants started on their school’s
expectations and aligned rewards program. “Positive” was a high-frequency word used in
association with school-wide expectations and rewards systems. Jim shared:
I just keep it really positive. We do a lot of [school mascot] rewards. If a student does
something you appreciate you give them a [school mascot] reward, and that goes into a
drawing. So, you always try to catch them doing something good.
This idea of seeking the best in students was communicated by many participants. Winter
explains that their behavior expectations are tied to their mascot. Similarly to Jim, tickets are
passed out to students who are observed displaying one of the expectations. Cortland adds:
Our mission is to be responsible and respectful. Anybody at the school can pass those
out. Anybody, including security guards, whatever. So, these can be used in a bunch of

78
different ways. On Thursdays, I’m involved in what we call the trading post. There are a
bunch of different prizes from $1 to $50.
Despite being at a different school than Jim and Cortland, Minnie also commented on her
school’s expectations. She had expectations hanging on the wall behind her. When probed, she
shared, “Our [school mascot] code, it’s our school rules. This is what we want all the kids to live
up to. Then we have a big mural. It’s something we refer back to throughout the year.” Minnie
went on to explain that rewards are given to students who are seen following the rules. She
described it as an overall positive experience and something that unifies the school. Belcher had
additional thoughts on her school’s expectations. She added that her school has been intentional
about working the four values into their school culture. Belcher explains, “We want the kids to
be respectful, responsible, safe, and successful. Those are the core four. We did a lot to build that
into our culture, teaching that in our behaviors. We have posters all over campus.” Jefa also
shared examples of her school site promoting school-wide expectations. She realizes that
expectations should be continuously taught and reinforced throughout the year and suggests that
teachers should review with their class every quarter.
A reward system tied to school-wide expectations provides a guide for all staff members
to adhere to when seeking positive behaviors. Most participants considered their reward systems
and as a positive aspect of their PBIS program. Likewise, the assemblies where rewards are
publicly announced were acknowledged. If a school site did not have regular assemblies,
participants acknowledged programs such as daily announcements, weekly newsletters, and
weekly raffle drawings. Minnie conveyed a sense of community when describing her school’s
programs. Weekly newsletters and school-wide daily announcements improve communication
between teachers, students, and parents. In addition, they help create a more supportive and

79
informed learning environment, therefore impacting self-efficacy. Jefa communicated a similar
program at her school site. In addition to informing and motivating teachers, she mentioned that
school-wide reward programs also motivate families. She shared:
I know parents love it when their student gets recognized for different things. We started
an Instagram page. So, when we do our assemblies now, we put all the names on the
Instagram page, just recognizing the students.
Jefa continued on to talk about the effect of these assemblies and recognition on the students.
She shared that all of the programs her school is implementing are “motivating” students.
Hearing other students’ names drives them to do better.
What makes these school-wide programs so successful is that they are clearly
communicated to the staff. There is no guesswork involved. Cortland explained that the PBIS
team creates a list of suggestions for teachers to use as rewards for displaying one of the school’s
behavior expectations. She shared, “We give suggestions to teachers in the classroom. We give
them a handout.” Initiatives such as this create consistency throughout the school. There is the
understanding that students are being recognized for positive behavior no matter what room they
are in.
Despite having so many successful programs at Epsilon Middle school, Craig divulged
his desire to have the programs be more values oriented. He explained:
I was going to suggest to my principal, the school that I student taught at had the behavior
expectations on the daily bulletin that they read daily. At the end, they would repeat the
acronym and the behavior expectation. So, it’s a reminder for the students. I was going to
tell her that she should do that when she’s signing off, just as a reminder so that it could
be more ingrained in the kids and teachers.

80
Participants’ responses suggest that reward system tied to common expectations is an effective
way to build teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy while building buy-in from students and
families. There is a shared understanding of which positive behaviors to acknowledge and how
to appropriately do so.
Document Analysis
School websites and SARC reports were analyzed for presence of school expectation,
mission, and values. The follow section is organized by school site.
Alpha Middle School
Alpha’s school website does not clearly state the expectations, mission, values. It requires
opening the school handbook to find any mention. However, the school handbook details the
mission and the school expectations, which are aligned to participants’ interview responses. The
mission is not listed on the SARC report. Instead, they have their school’s vision, which shares a
different message. Despite these differences, three out of four participants referred to the
importance of common language. The one teacher who did not, Kappa, is new to the school.
Beta Middle School
Beta’s website lists the school’s expectations at the top with a link to a more detailed
presentation. This presentation includes pictures depicting the expectations in action along with
examples of how to model these expectations. These examples establish clear understanding of
what is expected from students, as well as positive behaviors staff should be looking for. This
helps authenticate the consistency Ruby expresses when discussing expectations and the school’s
discipline matrix. In addition to expectations, the same mission statement is listed on both the
school’s website and the SARC report.
Epsilon Middle School

81
Similarly to Alpha’s website, Epsilon’s school website requires some searching to find
any mention of expectations. Under the student section, there is a detailed list that outlines their
positive behavior matrix. This list includes examples of what the expectations should and should
not look like, as well as possible rewards for positive behavior. These expectations are aligned
with their mascot, which confirms participants’ responses regarding mascot themes rewards. The
mission and vision are not clearly stated on the website and requires reading the SARC report.
Summary
Theme three highlights responses demonstrating the impact of common language on
teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy. Common language, either through the use of school
expectations, mission, or values, were influential in nine out of ten participants’ experiences.
Several participants discussed their PBIS reward program being linked to their school’s
expectations. This link made it easier for teachers to identify positive behavior and discuss
school wide expectations with their students. Interview responses were corroborated by the
schools’ websites which listed the expectations and the reward systems examined by nine out of
the ten participants. Common language, expectations, and values are a tenet of positive school
cultures because they establish a shared understanding of what is expected from students and
staff members. Furthermore, they create a sense of predictability, consistency, and community as
everyone is working toward the same goal.
Summary
The three emergent themes from research question one shed light on the perceived impact
school culture has on teacher self-efficacy when implementing PBIS. Results of this study align
with Bronfenbrenner’s theory regarding the impact of social environment on human
development. The three themes discussed, collaboration, retention, and common language are all

82
strong tenets of a positive school culture. Teachers are able to establish a stronger sense of self-
efficacy when these three systems are established and consistent. Two of the themes,
collaboration, and common language, were discussed as a facilitator of self-efficacy while
principal retention was viewed as a barrier. Despite periods of great administrative attrition,
collaboration and common language were sustained, suggesting a strong community amongst
teachers and staff. This idea is explored in the next section, as the second research question has
to do with teachers’ needs in promoting a school culture that supports PBIS.
Findings for Research Question 2: What are the teachers' needs at the different systems
levels to promote a school culture that supports PBIS?
While the first research question focused on perceptions of school culture on self-
efficacy, the second analyzes teachers’ needs when promoting a supportive school culture.
Research suggests that the greatest barrier to implementing PBIS is teacher and staff buy-in
(Kincaid et al., 2007). Exploring teachers’ needs in promoting a supportive culture contributes to
a greater understanding of the common implementation barriers schools face with PBIS. Two
themes emerged during data analysis for the second research question. First, leadership efforts
from principals and teachers promote a supportive school culture. Second, resources, including
funding and professional development, increase buy-in. Both themes were informed through
interview analysis with the second theme also including document analysis.
Theme 1: Supportive Cultures Include Leadership by Both Administrators and Teachers
While this research question is teacher-focused, many decisions ultimately rely on
administrative backing. By listening and implementing teacher feedback, administrators can
contribute to a culture where teachers feel valued. School administrators hold a myriad of
responsibilities, including the maintenance of school-wide programs and systems that ensure

83
student safety and success. Through open communication with stakeholders, leadership can build
capacity amongst their staff to sustain school-wide programs such as PBIS beyond their tenure.
Moreover, interview analysis suggests that teacher leadership can be influential in promoting
buy-in of new programs such as PBIS. Two sub themes emerged when analyzing teacher and
principal leadership. First, supportive administrative leadership encourages teacher support. It is
important to reference all administration rather than the principal because several teachers
mentioned the support of their vice principal. Second, teacher-led PBIS teams strengthen buy-in
and support. Administrative, principal support, and teacher-led were high-frequency words used
in naming this theme.
Interview Findings
Table 6
Findings of Sub-Themes in Theme 1
Participants Supportive Administrative
Leadership Encourages Teacher
Support
Teacher Leadership
Strengthen Buy-In and
Support
Minnie x x
Belcher x x
Kappa x
Mariana x x
Ruby x x
Cortland x
Craig x x
Jim x x
Jefa x x

84
Winter x x

Supportive Administrative Leadership Encourages Teacher Buy-In Whether seen as
a facilitator or a barrier, administrative support appeared in nine out of ten participants’
interviews. Kappa, the one teacher who did not comment on administration, is a first year at
Alpha Middle School and expressed overall appreciation for the school-wide support she was
receiving. Craig’s statement sums up participants’ feelings towards leadership’s impact: “I would
say the administrators have a huge influence. It could be positive; it could be negative. We get
new administrators every few years, so they cycle in and out. And whether they fully support us
makes a big impact.” This support was expressed in different ways. Some participants defined
support as a committee that the principal attended. Cortland described a committee where
teachers could express any frustrations or concerns. The meeting would be publicized and the
principal would answer any submitted questions. Cortland lamented its existence as it had since
been dissolved. She felt more informed and supportive of PBIS because of the transparency
created by this committee. Additionally, issues within the PBIS program were quickly dealt with
since it was discussed in such a public format. Moreover, the format of this committee provided
a space for teacher-led discussions.
Sentiments about PBIS being teacher-led were shared by several participants. When
asked what advice Mariana would give to a principal starting PBIS, she said, “I would tell the
principal, you don’t have to make all the rules. Ask your teachers, especially if it’s a new
principal coming into the school and you have established teachers there.” She added that
decisions should not be top-down because teachers will “rebel”. Winter agreed with this advice:

85
That should be teacher-driven, teacher-led. We're the ones with the kids spending all day
with them and we know what they need. I would need a leader who can communicate
between the teachers and Admin in an effective way. But of course, we would also need,
for it [PBIS] to be effective, we also need a bit of admin guidance.
Minnie and Jefa, both PBIS coordinators at their respective school site, shared an ideal
version of a PBIS team where the administration and teachers work collaboratively. Minnie
explained that she is provided two opportunities to meet with the vice principal. The first is
during what they call guiding coalition which is a monthly small leadership group. This group
consists of the Response to Intervention lead, the PBIS lead, the English Language Development
coordinator, the principal, and the vice principal. The second meeting is the weekly PBIS
meeting which the vice principal also attends. Here, Minnie is able to “give updates” and discuss
what is needed for an effective PBIS program. Similarly, Jefa disclosed details of a recent
meeting with her principal regarding teacher reported PBIS concerns. Jefa took this teacher
feedback to the PBIS committee, proposed a solution, and presented it at their staff meeting. She
explained, “We have not implemented it yet. We just had our staff meeting today and went over
the whole thing, so it’s going to be happening next week or so.” This is an example of a teacher
leader presenting an issue to administration, collaborating on a solution, and implementing it the
next week. Staff were excited by this quick turn around and appreciative to have their voices
heard.
Teacher Leadership Strengthens Buy-In and Support Ten out of ten participants were
either PBIS coordinators, former coordinators, or members of their PBIS team. Three
participants in particular, Craig, Minnie, and Jefa, shared that they were tapped by administrators
to be the new coordinator for their “positivity”. When asked how these three participants were

86
able to influence their school culture and promote support for the program, all three shared that
they are a positive presence on campus and generally well-liked. Minnie explained, “People see
me as a really positive person. I was kind of picked for this because I’m very positive. I think
starting off there, knowing that I’m not out to get people or anything [helps me influence the
school culture].” Positive teachers help model desirable behaviors that consequently spread
around the school. Administrators at Alpha and Epsilon Middle School had great foresight to tap
a teacher that would lead by example.
Craig shared similar foresight when he was the PBIS coordinator. As a newer teacher, he
was aware that teaching veteran teachers new behavior-related strategies could backfire. As the
only staff member sent to professional development, he was responsible for reporting back to the
school. He shared that to ensure staff support, he would establish a relationship with different
“branches” of teachers. He did not want to use the word “clique” but alluded to the sense of like-
minded teachers working together. He explained, “If I have buy-in from one of the many they
can send a message out to the rest.” His main target was someone well-loved by the entire staff
who helped him build relationships with the rest of the school. Through these relationships, he
was able to gather support and buy-in for the PBIS strategies he was suggesting. He shared that
he was even able to form close connections with historically disagreeable teachers through this
method. His original “target” has since taken over the role of PBIS coordinator and continues to
promote a culture of support through these methods. Craig also shared some burdens he carried
while being the coordinator. In addition to his regular teaching responsibilities, he felt committed
to spend any free period on PBIS matters. He even shared that he felt “guilty” if he wasn’t
working on something PBIS-related.
Jefa, a current PBIS coordinator, shares similar concerns about the additional

87
responsibilities you accept as the coordinator. Jefa was hesitant to accept the role at first but
quickly realized that she is already implementing the core tenets of PBIS in her classroom. Once
she made that connection, it became clear that she needed to make that connection for her
colleagues as well. The one drawback she sees is the increased workload.
Another form of teacher leadership that emerged was mentorship. The impacts of
mentorship are twofold. Serving as a mentor teacher provides experienced teachers with an
opportunity to take on new challenges and responsibilities, which can help keep them engaged
and motivated in their work. Additionally, mentorship programs provide teachers with guidance
and support from experienced teachers who can help them navigate the challenges of their new
roles. These supports can improve job satisfaction and in turn, increase the likelihood that
teachers will remain in their positions for longer periods of time.
While mentoring is a longstanding approach to new teacher orientation, the focus has
often been on curriculum and academic achievement. The focus of mentorship in this sub-theme
is the identification of a positive colleague that will assist in the understanding and
implementation of PBIS. Belcher reminisced about a successful mentorship program her school
had employed. She stated, “I think it is important for new teachers to PBIS to have opportunities
to ask questions because things are going to come up. They need to have those outlets to get the
help and the support that they need.” Belcher continued on to explain that because there is a
culture of care, new teachers feel comfortable reaching out for help. As a veteran teacher, she is
constantly sending emails, stopping by classrooms, and checking in on new teachers to show
support. She added that as a veteran teacher, she knows the systems and has the confidence to
share her knowledge with novice staff. She made sure to express that collaboration goes both
ways and she appreciates the new ideas she garners from her conversations with new staff.

88
Another veteran teacher, Ruby, expressed the positive impact her mentor teacher had on
her. Consequently, she developed a passion in supporting new teachers and creating that same
experience for a novice teacher. She shared:
And for a new teacher, definitely ask those questions. Don't be afraid to ask questions
because we all learn, things change every day. New situations arise every day. It's good
to be in a school community where we feel safe enough to ask those questions. And I
think for a new teacher, they need to first be able to establish that safety net, that it's okay
to ask questions.
This sense of safety and community continued to come up in conversations when discussing
collaboration around PBIS topics. Kappa explained the PBIS lead at her school has a vision for
her future on the team. She wants Kappa to take on more responsibilities, including becoming a
sponsor for a student outside of the classroom. Discussions such as these encourage Kappa and
reaffirm contributions. Mentors such as Kappa’s help promote and sustain a supportive school
culture by instilling core values into new staff.
Summary
This theme addresses how supportive leadership from both administration and teacher leaders
can encourage teachers to promote a school culture that encourages PBIS. Many participants
emphasized the significance of administrative support for PBIS implementation. Participants
suggested that decisions should be teacher-led, but administration should provide guidance and
collaborate with teachers to address concerns and implement solutions quickly. School morale
and support for PBIS were magnified when teacher feedback was accepted and implemented in a
timely manner. Teacher leadership was found to strengthen buy-in and support for PBIS. Craig,
Minnie, and Jefa were examples of positive teacher leaders who influenced their school culture

89
and promoted support for the program while others demonstrated the successes of teacher
mentorship. Furthermore, teacher leaders had an easier time gathering support for PBIS when
decisions were well communicated, transparent, and a team effort.
Theme 2: Resources Enhance Teacher Support and Buy-In
Barriers to staff buy-in appeared during data analysis. Two different sub-themes
emerged when discussing strategies for teachers to combat such issues, both stemming from
district-led efforts. The first sub-theme discusses the need for a district-issued budget to cover
PBIS costs. The second sub-theme deals with continuous PBIS specific professional
development opportunities. These two sub-themes are discussed in detail below. Document
analysis was employed to yield findings associated with the first sub-theme. The LCAP was used
to analyze PBIS budgets and is discussed in detail below.
Interview Findings
Table 7
Findings of Sub-Themes in Theme 2
Participants PBIS Funding Increases
Teacher Support and
Buy-In
Continuous PBIS Professional
Development Opportunities
Increases Support and Buy-In
Minnie x x
Belcher x x
Kappa x
Mariana x x
Ruby x
Cortland x
Craig x

90
Jim x
Jefa x x
Winter x

PBIS Funding Increases Teacher Support and Buy-In Six out of ten participants discussed
funding as a significant enabler or inhibitor to successful PBIS implementation. Interviewees
explained that their schools use tangible incentives to motivate students. These incentives can
range from free items, such as preferential seating during an assembly, to more expensive items,
like a new pair of shoes. Furthermore, several participants explained that money is needed for
items to boost teacher buy-in, such as t-shirts or lanyards. These items also help build awareness
around campus. As a former PBIS coordinator, Belcher shared how additional funding impacted
her ability to promote PBIS. She explained:
I would say that the support was there, that whenever I had questions or I needed help or
funding, that was the big one, that the school always came up with a way to make it
happen. For example, we bought yearly t-shirts for the staff to wear. We all wore it on a
certain day.
In addition to staff buy-in, the funding helped recruit student support as well. Belcher added that
PBIS funding went toward purchasing student prizes. The better the prizes were, the more
motivated students were to receive positive behavior reward tickets. Specifically:
The prizes are pretty cool things that kids can win. Just recently one kid earned a free pair
of tennis shoes. Like, $100 pairs of shoes that the kid got to choose from. They're pretty
generous with the budget. I've never heard that we couldn't do something. We always
were able to find a way.

91
Mariana, a teacher at the same school as Belcher, shared similar examples of the prizes offered
as part of their incentives program. She added, “The one that is popular this year that our PBIS
coordinator figured out is they get a large pizza from Costco and they can share it with their
friends.” Common sentiments were expressed that the more desirable the prize is, the more
students are motivated. Mariana wanted to be clear that there is also an innate sense to do well
among students, especially as they get older. She notices that as the students get older, their
motivation to adhere to the school rules becomes less tangible. She explains, “It's difficult to
entice them [seventh and eighth graders] with that kind of stuff. But on the other hand, they want
their school to be nice and they want it to be a caring community.” Winter shared this sentiment,
saying that the awards aren’t as meaningful to the seventh and eighth graders as they are to the
sixth graders.
Cortland, a teacher at Beta Middle School, shared issues the PBIS team has due to lack of
funding. She disclosed, “This is one thing that is a problem with PBIS, is the funding. It's really
hard to do it when you have no money.” Cortland went on to explain that it’s difficult to garner
teacher support when they are responsible for seeking donations from local vendors or donating
items from their own personal budget. Despite these setbacks, the PBIS team is creative with
their reward systems, presenting incentives such as specialized seating during assemblies and
athletic matches against the teachers. Cortland said that they, unfortunately, receive feedback
that the students are not motivated by these prizes and therefore don’t care about the ticket
system. These funding-centric issues make it difficult to develop school-wide support. Similarly,
Winter, a teacher at Epsilon Middle School, said they had a meeting at the beginning of the year
to discuss improvements to the awards. Rather than rewarding students with a pencil and sticker,
Winter’s school now gives out “sling bags” with the school’s logo on it. Even with this

92
improvement, she worries the rewards do not properly motivate the seventh and eighth graders.
This contrasts Mariana and Belcher’s sentiments towards Alpha Middle School’s rewards, which
brings up issues regarding PBIS funding allocation. Another issue involving communication
appeared during Craig’s interview. Craig, a teacher at the same school as Winter, shared that he
was not aware of the PBIS budget during his first year as coordinator. He revealed that his
principal had used PBIS funds on staff gifts. Craig shared how meaningful this money could
have been to the program his first year in charge.
Continuous PBIS Professional Development Opportunities Increases Support and Buy-In
Eight out of ten participants discussed professional development (PD) as a means of promoting a
supportive culture through deeper understanding. Many participants disclosed that their school
sites do not provide PBIS focused PD opportunities as often as they would like. When asked
about different PD opportunities at her school site, Ruby shared that PD opportunities were
available when the school first adopted PBIS but they have since fallen off. A follow-up question
probed whether she thought more PDs would have an impact on the overall mindset regarding
PBIS. The terms “professional development” and “training” are used interchangeably in the
following section. She shared:
Definitely. PBIS is not a one-time event, it's something that's ongoing, it's every single
day and new ideas come out every year. So, it would be good to be exposed to those ideas
that are maybe occurring at another school that we don't know about. I think we should
have PBIS training at least once a year.
Ruby’s answer exposes a passion for continuous learning which was shared by many teachers in
Middleton School District. She acknowledged that PBIS PD had only happened the first year the
school adopted the framework. She expressed a desire to have a professional company come and

93
discuss proper implementation methods and provide feedback on how to make their program
more successful. Jefa also expressed a desire for more professional development programs. She
explained that the district used to have many PBIS-related PD opportunities, sometimes as often
as four times a year. Jefa and the assistant principal would attend these meetings together,
strengthening their collaborative efforts and helping create a core PBIS team at the school. Jefa
said that these trainings have stopped since returning from online learning due to COVID.
A common development amongst many participants was that professional development
opportunities were only offered to the PBIS coordinator or the PBIS team. While Belcher shared
positive comments on her PBIS team PD meetings, many interviewees shared concerns. Seven
out of ten participants stated that only teachers affiliated with the PBIS team attended
professional development. This is problematic as many participants shared how vital it was for
the whole school to be involved in PBIS efforts. Mariana explains:
The whole school has to do it. So, all the adults on campus, not just teachers,
administration, cafeteria, office staff, janitors, the whole school has to show the kids we
care about you. It’s about noticing all the kids even if you don’t have them.
Only offering professional development to certain staff members creates an organization that is
dependent on teacher leadership and clear communication. While this is successful in many
schools, participants shared a desire for more access to professional development opportunities
for all teachers. Craig disclosed that it was sometimes difficult to communicate what he learned
at training with his staff. He often returned from professional development opportunities
thinking, “How do I convince teachers to implement this program?” Participants were clear that
PBIS teams did not create an exclusive culture. Rather, the PBIS team would prefer for the
whole school to hear the information from the original source.

94
While eight out of ten participants viewed PD as a facilitator of a supportive school
culture, Craig and Cortland disclosed that they did not find the PD opportunities they had to be
meaningful. Craig shared that there could be “more beneficial trainings” rather than the ones
offered only to the PBIS team. He would rather spend his time collaborating with other teachers
and gaining their support. Cortland shared concerns about scheduling, communication, and PD
content. She explained that PDs were often surface level. For example, the focus would be on
using data but not in a way that would impact student behavior or teacher motivation. In
addition, they would be communicated the day of, which made it difficult for her to attend.
Cortland shared that many of these PDs were optional which encouraged many teachers not to
attend.
Document Analysis
Middleton School District’s LCAP was utilized to provide more information on PBIS
funding. When searching “PBIS” on the LCAP document, three relevant categories appeared.
The 2022/2023 LCAP reveals that 20,000 dollars of state funds from the Local Control Funding
Formula (LCFF) were allocated across all schools and intended to be used for school wide PBIS
measures. These measures include continued trainings, targeted assistance, and SWIS licensing.
SWIS is an online platform used to collect referral data. This information is intended to help
schools make data-driven decisions. The LCAP does not specify how much money each school
received. 0 dollars were allocated toward the establishment of a positive school culture. This
designation includes utilizing results of student surveys and site data, and providing on-going
PD. Finally, 2,500 dollars were allocated toward trainings on discipline, attendance, and student
support. While it does not relate to the tangible incentives discussed in the funding section, it is
important to note that Middleton also allocated 600,000 dollars of supplemental funding to

95
support PBIS, Response to Intervention, and English Learner interventions at each of the eight
middle schools and one continuation school.
Summary
Theme two addresses resources as a critical component of promoting a supportive school
culture. Two sub-themes emerged from interview analysis. The first suggests that PBIS funding
increases teacher support and buy-in. Seven out of ten participants discussed funding as either
impeding or advancing staff support. Participants from Alpha Middle School noted spoke
positively about funding allocation while participants from Beta and Epsilon Middle School
discussed challenges. Document analysis of the LCAP revealed targeted funding for PBIS. The
LCAP did not specify how much money each school site was allotted, making the data less
compelling. Still, document analysis proves that PBIS funding is discussed during financial
meetings and planning sessions. The second sub-theme reveals that eight out of ten participants
want more PBIS targeted professional development opportunities. Two interviewees shared that
their PD experiences were not impactful, pointing out a need for a deep dive into the professional
development opportunities at Beta and Epsilon Middle School.
Summary of Results and Findings
This chapter explored the study’s finding by research question. Five themes, three in
connection to research question one and two in connection to research question two, emerged
during interview and document analysis. Findings from research question one reveal that
teachers’ perceptions of a school’s culture, including components such as collaboration,
retention, and common language, have an impact on PBIS implementation. .Perceptions of self-
efficacy were positively affected when working in collaborative school cultures, where teachers
work together effectively and are guided by common goal. Findings indicate that they are also

96
factors associated with school culture that can abate perceptions of implementation abilities.
Attrition, particularly principal attrition, was commonly referenced as a barrier to PBIS
implementation. Findings from research question two reveal that supportive leadership, from
both administration and teachers, and resources can increase staff buy-in and therefore
promotion of a supportive school culture. When teachers feel invested, they are more likely to
engage in behaviors that promote positive interactions and reinforce the school's values. Chapter
Five presents a detailed discussion on these findings and their alignment to the literature review.
Recommendations for practice based on these findings follow.

97
Chapter Five: Discussions and Recommendations
The previous chapter delineated the study’s findings and detailed the supports, successes,
and challenges experienced by ten middle school teachers in Middleton School District with
PBIS implementation. This chapter is organized into five sections. The first section analyzes the
findings and their alignment with the literature discussed in chapter two. Next, the researcher
presents three recommendations for practice. These recommendations have implications for
teachers, school leaders, and districts wanting to build a secure PBIS program or ameliorate a
current program. Following this section, are the limitations and delimitations experienced during
this study. Finally, recommendations for future practice are identified, followed by the
conclusion.
Discussion of Findings
The findings from this study suggest that several components of a strong school culture
contribute to higher levels of PBIS implementation. Teacher leadership and collaboration serve
as facilitators while principal attrition serves as a barrier. Furthermore, supportive school cultures
include leadership from both administration and teachers. This section will present a discussion
of the study’s findings related to teacher leadership, collaboration, and principal attrition, and its
relationship to current research.
Findings disclosed that school leaders should prioritize systematically building leadership
capacity in teachers with the intent of promoting and furthering the school’s PBIS efforts. While
leaders are typically charged with building school culture (Donohoo et al., 2018; Levin et al.,
2019), teachers have the unique ability to influence them beyond the support of the
administration (Beachum & Dentith, 2004; Opper, 2019). With demands on school leaders and
teacher attrition both on the rise, a focus on teacher leadership is more critical than ever. Teacher

98
buy-in is the main driver of successful implementation efforts (Grebing et al., 2023; Kramer et
al., 2015; Lee & Min, 2017; Zimmerman, 2006; Yoon 2016), meaning attention should be
focused on developing supportive systems within a teacher’s environment. Current literature
reviews propose that self-efficacy is one of four primary tenets supporting teacher buy-in
(Grebing et al., 2023), making a connection between self-efficacy and implementation success.
Furthermore, teachers with higher self-efficacy are more likely to exhibit increased effort and
persistence (Gondo et al., 2013). When analyzing teachers’ needs at different systems levels,
many participants acknowledged teacher leaders as a means for promoting a supportive school
culture. Interviewees’ perspectives, current literature, and Bronfenbrenner’s Theory work
analogously to support this finding. While administrator perspectives were not taken into
consideration during this study, many participants shared their experiences with being tapped
into leadership. Knowing that PBIS can be a difficult method to sell to teachers, participants
shared they were chosen to lead the PBIS team for their general likability and supportive attitude.
Despite having no official background in PBIS, these teachers were chosen to drive support and
increase motivation amongst the school staff. Literature commonly references teacher leadership
as an influence rather than a role of formal authority (Anderson, 2004; Smith et al., 2017; Snoek
et al., 2017). Principals systematically chose teachers with positive mindsets over experience.
Research calls attention to the positive aspects of teacher leadership (Baker-Doyle, 2017;
Beachum & Dentith, 2004; Harris et al., 2017; Smith et al., 2017; Snoek et al., 2017). In
accordance with Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory, the relationship between teacher
leaders and school culture is bi-directional. Teacher leadership contributes to an environment of
continuous learning and congeniality while collaborative school cultures encourage personal
growth (Fullan & Hargreaves, 1996; Deal & Kennedy, 1999). Furthermore, teacher leaders can

99
promote professional development, foster innovation, build a stronger school community, and
lead by example.
Similarly, teacher mentorship, which involves an experienced teacher providing guidance
and support, can have several benefits. These benefits include improved teaching practices,
increased self-efficacy, professional growth, reduced stress, and improved retention (Bowman,
2014; Cherkowski & Walker, 2019; Dawson, 2014; Stanulis & Floden, 2009; Tonna, 2019;
WestEd, 2013). Additionally, a mentoring program offers exemplary teachers an opportunity to
expand their role and influence. Mentor teachers have the opportunity to promote, expand, and
sustain a school culture that they believe in. Participants shared positive experiences with
mentorship, both as a mentor and as a mentee. Specifically, interviewees communicated the
sense of safety and community that was established through mentoring.
Discussions on teacher leadership and mentorship, both tenets of a collaborative school
culture, serve as a reminder for administrators to better value the contributions of teachers in the
daily operation of schools. When teachers are encouraged and supported to take on leadership
roles and mentorship responsibilities, they are more invested in the success of the school and feel
empowered to make meaningful contributions. This, in turn, can lead to the promotion of a
school culture that supports PBIS, ultimately impacting student outcomes (Peter et al., 2020;
Shen et al., 2020; Sugg, 2013) and higher teacher retention rates (Kuhn, 2018; U.S Department
of Education, 2021).
For this to happen, administrators need to recognize and value the contributions of
teachers. This means creating a culture where teacher input is actively sought in decision-making
processes, and where teachers are given the necessary resources and support to carry out their

100
leadership roles effectively. The promotion and sustainability of a supportive school culture
depend on the recognition and development of teacher leaders.
This study found that the culture at Middleton School District, which values personal
growth, facilitates a collaborative environment that encourages inquiry. The schools’
commitment to scheduling consistent professional learning communities (PLCs) demonstrates
their dedication to teacher-led collaboration. Middleton School District utilizes a late start system
every Tuesday to provide time for on-site PLCs. All ten participants mentioned collaboration as
a means for increasing understanding and self-efficacy regarding PBIS implementation. They
also referenced collaboration when discussing positive elements of their school culture.
Interviewees discussed their PLC time as meaningful to their PBIS understanding. Moreover,
participants disclosed the importance of having a scheduled time to meet with their teams.
Teachers explained that the discussions would not be as productive if done inconsistently in an
unsecured location. However, several participants expressed that although PBIS specific
collaboration is beneficial, it is infrequent. Many shared a desire for more PBIS specific
discussions during PLC time. Conversations tended to focus on testing data rather than behavior
data. Including time for PBIS focused collaboration is discussed in recommendation three.
This finding is consistent with literature on the effects of PLCs Strong school cultures
foster collegiality and collaboration (Glossary of Education Reform, 2013). Sustainable
educational development depends on the continuous engagement of teachers and research
suggests that PLCs are one form of effective engagement (Cai et al., 2022). PLCs provide
organizational and social resources that can positively impact a teacher’s self-efficacy (Anderson
& Oliver, 2022; Bruce et al., 2010; Cai et al., 2022; Dufour & Reeves, 2016). PLCs are closely
related to school culture, as they are a way of creating a collaborative and supportive learning

101
environment for both teachers and students (Jones et al., 2013; McLaughlin & Talbert, 2010;
Voelkel & Chrispeels, 2017; Watson, 2014). PLCs have long been viewed as a key element of
school culture that contributes to sustainable school improvements (Jones et al., 2013). Effective
PLCs depend on a common vision and goals, collaborative inquiry, regular assessment of student
data, consistency, and data-driven solutions to inform decisions (Schmoker, 2011). Moreover, a
positive school culture encourages collaboration, fosters a growth mindset, supports inquiry, and
enhances teacher morale, all of which impact the success of a PLC.
While many positive elements of school culture were discussed, a common challenge was
principal turnover. A new study from Rand Corporation found that sixteen percent of public-
school principals retired or quit in the 2020-2021 school year, more than double the rate from the
2019-2020 school year (Diliberti & Schwartz, 2023). Greater demands for teacher leadership
comes with a needed focus on the impact that turnover has on school culture and implementation
efforts. The majority of interviewees discussed administrative turnover as a barrier to successful
implementation efforts. Participants shared that new leadership often meant new ideologies and
changes in practices, resulting in setbacks and confusion. Teachers agreed that it was difficult for
teacher leaders to assume control of PBIS implementation because new principals wanted to
adopt their own methodologies. Knowledgeable teachers found their self-efficacy weakened as
their understanding had to shift. New methodologies often meant discontinued programs and
greater uncertainty with PBIS protocol.
The effects of principal turnover are twofold. First, literature suggests that principal
turnover can have a significant impact on implementation efforts in schools (Bartanen et al.,
2019; Fullan, 2001; Holme & Rangel, 2012; Langley et al., 2010; Levin & Bradley, 2019;
Miller, 2013; Pinkelman et al., 2015; Wallace, 2019). Implementation efforts may stall or even

102
come to a halt when a principal leaves their position. Principals are expected to play a pivotal
role in leading school improvement, such as PBIS implementation. Research indicates that
practical improvements can take five to seven years (Fullan, 2001). A constant change in
leadership can make it difficult for schools to effectively implement new programs (Holme &
Rangel, 2012; Miller, 2013). Additional effects may include loss of institutional knowledge,
changes in priorities, disruption to relationships, and loss of morale. Changes in priorities were
frequently cited during interviews. A new principal may have a different set of priorities than
their predecessor, resulting in new initiatives or demoting the prioritization of an existing
implementation effort. These changes can result in a loss of focus and resources for the existing
implementation effort. Leadership instability can consequently have devastating effects on
improvement efforts (Hargreaves, 2009; Leithwood et al., 2010). Participants also shared
experiences with loss of morale during periods of transition. If teachers and staff have invested
time and energy into an implementation effort that is disrupted by principal turnover, they may
become demoralized and disengaged (Bradshaw et al., 2009). This can lead to a loss of
momentum and a decline in self-efficacy. A continuous push to improve educational practices
through the adoption of current trends encourages new leadership to neglect existing practices
and institute new practices (Clayton & Johnson, 2011).
Consequently, principal turnover impacts teacher self-efficacy. A body of research exists
indicating that principal leadership has a prominent impact on teacher self-efficacy (Aldridge &
Fraser, 2016; Duyar et al., 2013; Xie et al., 2022). Specifically, principals promote positive self-
efficacy through personal development opportunities such as continuous professional
development (Xie et al., 2022). In addition, teachers with higher perceptions of principal
leadership are more supportive of their school’s vision and are more likely to have an enhanced

103
sense of self-efficacy (Fackler and Malmberg, 2016; Lambersky, 2016; Gkolia et al., 2018; Liu
and Hallinger, 2018; Xie et al., 2022). Principal turnover can have a negative impact on teachers'
self-efficacy as it creates instability, uncertainty, and confusion in the school environment.
Findings from this study encouraged three recommendations for practice that are discussed in the
next section.
Recommendations For Practice
The findings from this study have implications for school leaders and teachers wanting to
build an effective and sustaining PBIS program. In addition, findings contribute to the growing
literature on best practices to enhance teacher self-efficacy. Recommendations for practice are
targeted toward teachers, school principals, and districts. These three groups can utilize the
findings from this study to better cultivate a school culture that supports PBIS implementation.
Three recommendations are identified below to address key findings from this research.
Recommendation 1: Identify, Recruit, and Develop Teacher Leaders
Participants contributed high levels of self-efficacy and understanding to their work with
more tenured colleagues. In addition, many interviewees highlighted mentorship as a stimulant
of greater self-efficacy and as a means for promoting a supportive school culture. Teachers
identified their role on the PBIS leadership team as an impetus for teacher buy-in and an
incentive for promoting a culture that supports PBIS. A focus on developing teacher leaders will
result in the promotion of a collaborative culture, enhanced instructional quality, and empowered
teachers (U.S. Department of Education, 2021).
Ideologies and practices aligning with linear management and control are outdated and
ineffective. They fail to reflect the complexity and unpredictability of organizations, human
behavior, and the world at large. Rather than funnel all resources into rigid and inflexible top-

104
down approaches, districts and school leadership preparedness programs need to prepare and
train principals to identify, recruit, and develop teacher leaders. Specifically, districts should
prepare principles to seek out mentalities that will be conducive to promoting PBIS-related
methodologies. Rather than focus on skills, school leaders need to be trained to recognize
behavioral competencies (Ryan & Tippins, 2004). Behavioral competencies are the behaviors,
attitudes, and personality traits that predict how successful a job candidate will be (Spencer &
Spencer, 2008). By using these behavioral competencies to identify teacher leaders, schools and
districts can identify individuals who possess the skills and behaviors necessary to lead and
influence others. These teacher leaders can then be provided with opportunities to develop their
leadership skills further and support the growth and development of their colleagues. While not a
new concept, training principals to specify key behavioral competencies and identify them in
teachers can be transformational. Prior to training principals, districts need to research and select
behavioral competencies that they value in their leaders, such as communication skills,
collaboration and teamwork, problem-solving, and coaching/mentoring. Consistent observations,
check-ins, and professional development opportunities must occur to successfully identify
capable teachers. Established behavioral competencies provide a clear framework for evaluating
performances. While it will take a more concerted effort by the principal, it will be beneficial in
the long run.
Teachers who take leadership roles in their schools are successful conduits in promoting
supportive cultures (Beachum & Detith, 2004; Dinsdale, 2017). Moreover, principal attrition
rates are surpassing teacher attrition (Goldring & Taie, 2018). A focus on developing teacher
leaders will ensure sustainability with implementation efforts. With increased levels of principal
attrition, structures need to be established at the district level to institutionalize teacher

105
leadership. In addition to attrition rates, teachers are a primary implementor of PBIS, meaning
teachers should be leading the conversation regarding successful implementation efforts. A
formal, institutionalized system at the district level is needed to amplify teacher voices and
empower teacher leaders. Creating these structures at the district level ensures cohesive and
consistent implementation across all schools. Several steps must be taken to develop these
systems. First, districts must clearly define teacher leadership roles and their associated
responsibilities. Once the roles have been defined, districts should identify teachers who
demonstrate strong leadership skills and a passion for school improvement. Behavioral
competencies can assist districts in this process. Districts must provide additional professional
development opportunities to ensure effectiveness. These opportunities should include trainings
that help teachers develop skills such as facilitation, data analysis, and instructional coaching.
Teacher leadership roles may require additional time and effort beyond regular classroom
teaching responsibilities. A compensation model should be created that recognizes and rewards
teacher leaders for their contributions. Finally, it is imperative to monitor and evaluate the impact
of teacher leadership initiatives on student outcomes. The district can use data to identify areas
for improvement and adjust as needed.
Recommendation 2: Develop Policies to Assist Principals in Building Capacity
While research questions were created to target teachers’ needs and perceptions of self-
efficacy, most participants raised concerns about frequent administrative attrition. High periods
of principal turnover resulted in chronic and accelerated changes. Changing ideologies and new
methods contributed to decreased morale, lower self-efficacy, and less motivation to support new
practices. Research findings indicate that perceptions of self-efficacy related to PBIS are much
higher with consistent leadership. These findings are consistent with the literature on a

106
principal’s role in developing teacher self-efficacy (Aldridge & Fraser, 2016; Duyar et al., 2013;
Lee et al., 1991; Xie et al., 2022) and in the overall implementation of PBIS (Langley et al.,
2010; Flannery et al., 2014; Pinkelman et al., 2015). Overall, research findings from this study
substantiate the need for consistency. Rather than focus on principal retention, this research
recommends establishing structures that support capacity building to ensure turnover does not
derail implementation efforts. Principal attrition is inevitable. As such, principals must be
supported in their pursuit to build capacity in their staff to withstand changes in leadership.
This recommendation calls upon districts and policymakers to prioritize principal
development efforts over principal retention efforts. Research conducted by the National
Association of Secondary School Principals (2020), The Learning Policy Institute (2020), The
Rand Corporation (2023), and The Wallace Foundation (2010) support recommendations for
improving principal development. Recommendations include creating systems for feedback and
mentoring beyond the first two years and engaging principals in peer networking systems.
Developing policies to help principals build capacity among staff requires careful
consideration of the goals and objectives of the district, as well as the needs of individual schools
and teachers. First, districts should set clear goals for capacity-building policies. These goals
should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time bound. Once these goals have
been established, districts should work with principals to ensure proper support is given. Districts
and policymakers should invest in mentoring and coaching for all principals. Priority should be
given to the following to ensure effective systems are implemented: (1) a meaningful match must
be made between the leadership style, expertise, and needs of the mentor and the principal, (b)
sufficient training and resources must be provided to the mentor, (c) the specific needs of the
principal are supported, and (d) there is a focus on improving instructional leadership. Similarly,

107
districts need to invest in meaningful networking opportunities for principals. Rather than rely on
traditional lecture-based professional development, district leaders should require principals to
engage in peer networking opportunities. Initiatives like the School Leadership Network provide
a forum for administrators to collaborate, reflect, and problem-solve. Districts can propose
something global, like the School Leadership Network, or keep it local by creating a network
with principals from surrounding districts. In all, principals need to build cultures that can
withstand change. Efforts need to be made at the district level to ensure high quality principal
development and support is a priority. Districts can develop policies that help principals build
capacity among staff, improve teaching and learning outcomes, and support the sustainability of
overall goals and objectives of the district.
Recommendation 3: Create District Structures and Supports to Ensure Consistent Practice
of PBIS
Interviewees discussed the benefits of several district-wide structures including
professional development and collaboration. Participants specifically mentioned programs such
as PLCs as a method for strengthening understanding and self-efficacy. Respondents identified
several benefits to PLCs, including (a) the promotion of collaboration and teamwork, (b)
encouragement of continuous learning, (c) support for the development of a shared vision and
goal, and (d) space and time to discuss innovative teaching strategies. Many elaborated on the
benefits of PBIS specific collaboration during PLC time but expressed that it is not a consistent
priority. Given the impacts of consistency and collaboration on self-efficacy and teacher buy-in,
it is imperative for districts to establish certain structures and supports to ensure consistent
practice of PBIS.

108
The following outlines structures that can be established to support consistent PBIS
practice across the district. First, districts need to create a district-level PBIS team to oversee and
coordinate PBIS efforts across all schools. This group should include representatives from each
school site’s PBIS team, district leaders, and PBIS coaches. Second, the district should provide
ongoing training and professional development to school staff on PBIS implementation. This can
include in-person workshops, online modules, and coaching support. Third, it is recommended
that the district collects and analyzes data from school sites using a program such as SWIS. This
data can be used to inform decisions about where supplemental funding should be directed and
how to improve implementation. Fourth, districts need to prioritize including PBIS-specific
items on the agenda. Just as they would analyze data from student testing, grade-level or content-
level teams should use this time to analyze common behavior concerns, generate solutions, and
propose a plan of action. The district should establish clear lines of communication between
schools and between the district and schools to facilitate the sharing of best practices. Finally, the
district should recognize and celebrate schools that are successfully implementing PBIS.
Celebrations can include recognition events, awards, and sharing stories with the community. A
focus on district created structures and supports will establish common and consistent practices
of PBIS.
Limitations and Delimitations
This research was subject to several limitations beyond the control of the researcher.
Three limitations were present in this study that could be addressed in future research. First, time
constraints of an Ed. D program require data to be collected in a three-month span. A study of
this nature would benefit from a longitudinal study to better understand the impacts of school
culture and self-efficacy on PBIS implementation. Time constraints lend themselves to the

109
second limitation, the sample size of the study. This study was dependent on voluntary
participation within a short time. This limitation resulted in a non-representative sample based on
local demographics and would benefit from a larger sample size to make results more
generalizable (Johnson & Christensen, 2017).
The third limitation is common in qualitative research. In a qualitative study, the
researcher acts as the key instrument (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As such, researcher biases may
have impacted the collection and interpretation of data. Checking data against literature and
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model and triangulation ensured that personal biases were
consistently analyzed and used to benefit rather than inhibit the research process (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
The delimitations are aspects the researcher chose to control to enhance the study’s
findings. The following boundaries were predetermined by the researcher as necessary for
producing relevant results based on the research questions. The first delimitation is the research
setting. The researcher focused on one middle school campus in Southern California to better
understand the culture of the school and its effect on teachers’ PBIS implementation efforts.
School culture is unique and personal to each school site and encompasses the attitudes of all
staff members involved. The inimitable nature of school culture makes it more meaningful to
question multiple teachers within one district rather than explore multiple districts. In addition,
the chosen district is required to employ PBIS. Teachers were chosen as the targeted population
for questioning since they are primarily responsible for administering PBIS techniques in the
classroom. These delimitations may have produced limited findings that are not generalizable to
other settings.

110
Recommendations for Future Research
This study illustrated the success, challenges, and support experienced by ten middle
school teachers in Middleton School District regarding self-efficacy during PBIS
implementation. It has contributed to the understanding and analysis of school culture’s impact
on self-efficacy and supports the growing literature on PBIS implementation. While a thorough
examination was conducted in this study, further questions beyond the scope of the research
questions have emerged. This section outlines four recommendations for future studies that have
resulted from the findings.
The inimitable nature of school culture discussed in the delimitations section creates a
need for additional research on a grander scale. Middleton School District teachers reported low
levels of teacher turnover, resulting in high levels of collegiality which positively impact the
school culture. Similar research should be conducted in a school district with high teacher
attrition to see if retention is an enabler of teacher self-efficacy. Furthermore, a cross-case
analysis of several school districts that utilize PBIS may yield valuable data on what promising
practices are found most frequently in schools that positively support teachers’ self-efficacy. As
common practices emerge, they can be included in schools’ PBIS implementation plans and
better prepare teachers for effective implementation.
Relatedly, the Covid-19 pandemic created inimitable conditions that required schools to
alter their practices. This often had an effect on school-wide traditions, such as PBIS celebrations
and in-person collaborative meetings. Several participants referred to practices that were used
prior to the pandemic that are no longer operational. This study took place during Southern
California’s first complete year without social distancing requirements in most public schools. It

111
would be instructive to conduct a replication of this study in the future to allow schools time to
stabilize their practices.
The next recommendation emerged from the participants’ requests for a larger PBIS
budget. Similar research should be conducted analyzing the implementation effectiveness
between school districts with varying PBIS-specific funding. Further mixed studies might
examine whether funding is a barrier or facilitator to teacher self-efficacy when implementing
PBIS. Furthermore, an examination of funding’s influence on student motivation and behavioral
achievement should be explored.
A final recommendation addresses the demographics of the study. On average, Alpha,
Beta, and Epsilon Middle Schools’ student demographics are 29.3% Asian, 4.1% Black or
African American, 5.86% Filipino, 32.4% Hispanic or Latino, 0.73% Native Hawaiian or Pacific
Islander, 15.73% White, and 10.23% identifying as two or more races. Participants were 20%
Hispanic or Latino, 60% White, and 20% identifying as two or more races. Further studies
should recruit teachers whose demographics are more representative of the students they serve.
Also, literature discussed enhanced implementation issues in low-income school settings. Alpha,
Beta, and Epsilon Middle Schools’ student demographics are comprised of 37.5%, 30.1%, and
26.8%, respectfully, socioeconomically disadvantaged students. Similar studies should be
conducted in schools situated in communities with high levels of poverty.
Conclusions
PBIS continues to grow in popularity as inequitable behavioral practices come to the
forefront. Policymakers encourage adoption because it is an evidence-based, proactive, equity-
focused approach to promoting positive behavior. With these increases in utilization comes a
need to better understand the barriers and facilitators to implementation, as implementation

112
fidelity is critical to its overall success and effectiveness. As a qualitative analysis of ten middle
school teachers, this study sought to increase understanding of how perceptions of school culture
can impact a teacher’s PBIS implementation abilities. Findings suggest that tenets of a strong
school culture enhance teachers’ self-efficacy with PBIS implementation. Specifically, factors
including collaboration and shared expectations created an environment where teachers openly
gave feedback, showed support, developed deeper understanding, and asked for help. This in-
turn impacted teacher retention, which was also revealed as having an impact on teachers’ PBIS
self-efficacy. This is critical, as self-efficacy is a driver of teacher buy-in, one of the main
predictors of implementation success.
Additionally, this study probed teachers’ needs at different systems levels in promoting a
culture that supports PBIS. A strong school culture is indicative of an organization’s success and
is a determining factor in how well an organization will respond and adapt to change. The role of
a principal is constantly evolving to meet the changing needs of students, staff, and society. As
the role becomes more complex, it is increasingly important to understand a teachers’ role in
promoting a supportive school culture. This study found that supportive leadership from both
administrators and teachers assisted teachers in their promotion of a school culture that
encourages PBIS. This research especially leaned on teacher leadership since principal attrition
rates are increasing. Principals must start prioritizing teacher leadership development, as it is
becoming necessary to develop capacity amongst staff to withstand changes in leadership and
sustain PBIS implementation efforts. Finally, resources such as funding and professional
development opportunities increased teachers’ likelihood to promote supportive aspects of their
school’s culture. As schools prioritize cultivating a culture that positively impacts teacher
perceptions of implementation abilities, they will see higher levels of PBIS implementation

113
fidelity. Understanding the relationship between school culture and evidence-based programs
like PBIS will support schools in their mission to provide equitable behavior interventions for all
students.

114
References
Achurra, C., & Villardón, L. (2012). Teacher self-efficacy and student learning. The European
Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences.
Adamy, P., & Heinecke, W. (2005). The influence of organizational culture on technology
integration in teacher education. Journal of technology and teacher education, 13(2), 233-
255.
Aldridge, J. M., & Fraser, B. J. (2016). Teachers’ views of their school climate and its
relationship with teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Learning Environments
Research, 19, 291-307.
American Bar Association. (2018). ABA Task Force on Reversing the School-To-Prison
Pipeline: Report, recommendations, and preliminary report.
American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force. (2008). Are zero tolerance
policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. The
American Psychologist, 63(9), 852.
Amtu, O., Makulua, K., Matital, J., & Pattiruhu, C. M. (2020). Improving Student Learning
Outcomes through School Culture, Work Motivation and Teacher Performance.
International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 885-902.
Angus J. MacNeil, Doris L. Prater & Steve Busch (2009) The effects of school culture and
climate on student achievement, International Journal of Leadership in Education, 12:1,
73-84, DOI: 10.1080/13603120701576241
Antinluoma, M., Ilomäki, L., & Toom, A. (2021). Practices of professional learning
communities. In Frontiers in education (p. 89). Frontiers.

115
Arcia, E. (2006). Achievement and enrollment status of suspended students: Outcomes in a large,
multicultural school district. Education and Urban Society, 38(3), 359-369.
Archibald, S., Coggshall, J. G., Croft, A., & Goe, L. (2011). High-Quality Professional
Development for All Teachers: Effectively Allocating Resources. Research & Policy
Brief. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Attard Tonna, M. (2019). The benefits of mentoring newly qualified teachers in Malta.
International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 8(4), 268-284.
Baker-Doyle, K. J. (2017), "How Can Community Organizations Support Urban Transformative
Teacher Leadership? Lessons from Three Successful Alliances", Educational Forum,
Vol. 81 No. 4, pp. 450-466.
Bambara, L. M., Nonnemacher, S., & Kern, L. (2009). Sustaining school-based individualized
positive behavior support: Perceived barriers and enablers. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 11(3), 161-176.
Barni, D., Danioni, F., & Benevene, P. (2019). Teachers’ self-efficacy: The role of personal
values and motivations for teaching. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 1645.
Bartanen, B., Grissom, J. A., & Rogers, L. K. (2019). The impacts of principal
turnover. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 41(3), 350-374
Bayar, A., & Karaduman, H. A. (2021). The Effects of School Culture on Students Academic
Achievements. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9(3), 99-109.
Beachum, F., & Dentith, A. M. (2004, September). Teacher leaders creating cultures of school
renewal and transformation. In The educational forum (Vol. 68, No. 3, pp. 276-286).
Taylor & Francis Group.

116
Bobbett, J. J. (2001). School culture, teacher efficacy, and decision-making in demonstrably
effective and ineffective schools. Louisiana State University and Agricultural &
Mechanical College.
Bowman, M. (2014). Teacher Mentoring as a Means to Improve Schools. BU Journal of
Graduate Studies in Education, 6(1), 47-51.
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/teacher-
mentoring-as-means-improve-schools/docview/2461118449/se-2
Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Bevans, K. B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of
school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) on the organizational
health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462.
Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Thornton, L. A., & Leaf, P. J. (2009). Altering school climate
through school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports: Findings from a
group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention science, 10, 100-115.
Bradshaw, C. P., Pas, E. T., Goldweber, A., Rosenberg, M. S., & Leaf, P. J. (2012). Integrating
school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports with tier 2 coaching to student
support teams: The PBIS plus model. Advances in School Mental Health
Promotion, 5(3), 177-193.
Bradshaw, C. P., Pas, E. T., Debnam, K. J., & Lindstrom Johnson, S. (2015). A focus on
implementation of positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) in high schools:
Associations with bullying and other indicators of school disorder. School Psychology
Review, 44(4), 480-498.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). Contexts of child rearing: Problems and prospects. American
psychologist, 34(10), 844. Brown, W., Yoshioka, C. F., & Munoz, P. (2004).

117
Organizational Mission as a Core Dimension in Employee Retention. Journal of Park &
Recreation Administration, 22(2).
Burns, M. K., Warmbold-Brann, K., & Zaslofsky, A. F. (2015). Ecological systems theory in
school psychology review. School Psychology Review, 44(3), 249-261.
Cai, Yonghong, Li Wang, Yan Bi, and Runjia Tang. "How Can the Professional Community
Influence Teachers’ Work Engagement? The Mediating Role of Teacher Self-
Efficacy." Sustainability 14, no. 16 (2022): 10029.
Camera, L. (2019, July 23). Race and School Discipline. U.S News and World Report. Retrieved
March 29, 2022, from https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2019-07-
23/civil-rights-commission-tackles-discipline-of-black-students-with-disabilities
Cansoy, R., & Parlar, H. (2017). Examining the relationship between school culture and teacher
leadership. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 9(2).
Cherkowski, S. (2018). Positive Teacher Leadership: Building Mindsets and Capacities to Grow
Wellbeing. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 9(1), 63-78.
Cherkowski, S., & Walker, K. (2014). Flourishing communities: re-storying educational
leadership using a positive research lens. International Journal of Leadership in
Education, 17(2), 200.
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-
journals/flourishing-communities-re-storying-educational/docview/1516057159/se-2
Cherkowski, S., & Walker, K. (2016). Purpose, esion and play: Exploring the construct of
flourishing from the perspective of school principals. Journal of Educational
Administration.

118
Cherkowski, S., & Walker, K. (2019). Mentorship for flourishing in schools: an explicit shift
toward appreciative action. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in
Education, 8(4), 345-360. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-02-2019-0018
Clark, C. M. (2019). Fostering a culture of civility and respect in nursing. Journal of Nursing
Regulation, 10(1), 44-52.
Clayton, J. K., & Johnson, B. (2011). If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it: A new principal is in
town. Journal of cases in educational leadership, 14(4), 22-30.
Clifford, M., M., Condon, R., & Hornung, C. (2012). Measuring School Climate for Gauging
Principal Performance: A Review of the Validity and Reliability of Publicly Accessible
Measures. American Institute for Research. Available online at:
www.air.org/focusarea/education/index.cfm?fa=viewContent&content_id=1869
Corcoran, R. P. (2017, October). Preparing principals to improve student achievement. In Child
& Youth Care Forum (Vol. 46, No. 5, pp. 769-781). Springer US.
Cooperrider, D., & Srivastva, S. (2017). The Gift of New Eyes: Personal Reflections after 30
Years of Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational LifeAppreciative Inquiry in
Organizational Life☆. In Research in organizational change and development (Vol. 25,
pp. 81-142). Emerald Publishing Limited.
Cressey, J. M., Whitcomb, S. A., McGilvray-Rivet, S. J., Morrison, R. J., & Shander-Reynolds,
K. J. (2014). Handling PBIS with care: Scaling up to school-wide
implementation. Professional School Counseling, 18(1), 2156759X0001800104.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into
practice, 39(3), 124-130.

119
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among
five approaches. Sage publications.
Cruz, R. A., Firestone, A. R., & Rodl, J. E. (2021). Disproportionality reduction in exclusionary
school discipline: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 91(3),
397-431.
Damanik, E., & Aldridge, J. (2017). Transformational leadership and its impact on school
climate and teachers’ self-efficacy in Indonesian high schools. Journal of School
Leadership, 27(2), 269-296.
Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1995). Policies that support professional
development in an era of reform. Phi delta kappan, 76(8), 597-604.
Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D., Orr, M. T., & Cohen, C. (2007). Preparing
school leaders for a changing world: Lessons from exemplary leadership development
programs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute
Dawson, P. (2017). Assessment rubrics: towards clearer and more replicable design, research and
practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 347-360.
Deal, T. E., & Peterson, K. D. (2016). Shaping school culture. John Wiley & Sons.
Deal, T.E., & Kennedy, A.A. (1999). The New Corporate Cultures: Revitalizing The Workplace
After Downsizing, Mergers, And Reengineering.
deMarrais, K. (2004). Elegant communications: Sharing qualitative research with communities,
colleagues, and critics. Qualitative inquiry, 10(2), 281-297.
Demir, K. (2014). Teacher leadership culture scale: The study of validity and reliability.
Elementary Education Online, 13(2), 334-344.

120
Demirtas, Z. (2010). Teachers’ job satisfaction levels. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 9, 1069-1073.
Dinsdale, R. (2017). The Role of Leaders in Developing a Positive Culture. BU Journal of
Graduate Studies in Education, 9(1), 42-45.
Discipline. National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments (NCSSLE). (n.d.).
Retrieved March 28, 2022, from https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/topic-
research/environment/discipline
Donohoo, J., Hattie, J., & Eells, R. (2018). The power of collective efficacy. Educational
Leadership, 75(6), 40-44.
Duan, X., Du, X., & Yu, K. (2018). School culture and school effectiveness: The mediating
effect of teachers’ job satisfaction. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and
Educational Research, 17(5), 15-25.
DuFour, R. (2002). The learning-centered principal. Educational leadership, 59(8), 12-15.
DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities. Bloomington, IN: National
Educational Service, 230.
DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2009). Professional learning communities at work tm: best practices
for enhancing students’ achievement. Solution Tree Press.
DuFour, R., & Fullan, M. (2013). Cultures built to last: Systemic PLCs at work TM. Solution
Tree Press.
DuFour, R., & Reeves, D. (2016). The futility of PLC lite. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(6), 69-71.
Duyar, I., Gumus, S., & Sukru Bellibas, M. (2013). Multilevel analysis of teacher work attitudes:
The influence of principal leadership and teacher collaboration. International Journal of
Educational Management, 27(7), 700-719.

121
Evanovich, L. L., & Scott, T. M. (2016). Facilitating PBIS implementation: An administrator's
guide to presenting the logic and steps to faculty and staff. Beyond Behavior, 25(1), 4-8.
Fabelo, T., Thompson, M. D., Plotkin, M., Carmichael, D., Marchbanks, M. P., & Booth, E. A.
(2011). Breaking schools’ rules: A statewide study of how school discipline relates to
students’ success and juvenile justice involvement. New York: Council of State
Governments Justice Center.
Fackler, S., & Malmberg, L. E. (2016). Teachers' self-efficacy in 14 OECD countries: Teacher,
student group, school and leadership effects. Teaching and teacher education, 56, 185-
195.
Fiore, D. (2014). Creating connections for better schools: How leaders enhance school culture.
Routledge.
Flannery, K. B., Fenning, P., Kato, M. M., & McIntosh, K. (2014). Effects of school-wide
positive behavioral interventions and supports and fidelity of implementation on problem
behavior in high schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(2), 111.
Forman, S. G., Olin, S. S., Hoagwood, K. E., Crowe, M., & Saka, N. (2009). Evidence-based
interventions in schools: Developers’ views of implementation barriers and
facilitators. School Mental Health, 1, 26-36.
Fronius, T., Persson, H., Guckenburg, S., Hurley, N., & Petrosino, A. (2016). Restorative Justice
in US Schools: A Research Review. WestEd.
Fullan, M. (2001). Whole school reform: Problems and promises. Chicago, IL: Chicago
Community Trust.
Fullan, M. (2007). Leading in a culture of change. John Wiley & Sons.

122
Fullan, M. (2009). Large-scale reform comes of age. Journal of educational change, 10(2-3),
101-113.
Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (1996). What’s worth fighting for in your school? New York,
Teachers College Press.
Fuller, E., Young, M., & Baker, B. D. (2011). Do Principal Preparation Programs Influence
Student Achievement Through the Building of Teacher-Team Qualifications by the
Principal? An Exploratory Analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(1), 173–
216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000010378613
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American
educational research journal, 38(4), 915-945.
Gaziel, H. H. (1997). Impact of school culture on effectiveness of secondary schools with
disadvantaged students. The journal of educational research, 90(5), 310-318.
Gehrke, G. (2001). Toward a definition of mentoring. American Educational Research
Associations, XXVIIQ), 190-194.
George, H. P., Cox, K. E., Minch, D., & Sandomierski, T. (2018). District practices associated
with successful SWPBIS implementation. Behavioral Disorders, 43(3), 393-406.
George, H., & Martinez, S. (2007). How to get PBIS in your school. Positive Behavioral
Supports Newsletter, 4(1), 1-29.
Gerlinger, Julie, Samantha Viano, Joseph H. Gardella, Benjamin W. Fisher, F. Chris Curran, and
Ethan M. Higgins. "Exclusionary school discipline and delinquent outcomes: a meta-
analysis." Journal of youth and adolescence 50, no. 8 (2021): 1493-1509.

123
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is right. Becoming qualitative
researchers: An introduction, 4, 162-183.
Glossary, E. (2013). The Glossary of Education Reform.
Glover, D., & Coleman, M. (2005). School culture, climate and ethos: interchangeable or
distinctive concepts?. Journal of in-service education, 31(2), 251-272.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning,
measure, and impact on student achievement. American educational research
journal, 37(2), 479-507.
Goldring, R., & Taie, S. (2018). Principal Attrition and Mobility: Results from the 2016-17
Principal Follow-Up Survey. First Look. NCES 2018-066. National Center for Education
Statistics.
Gramlich, J. (2018). America’s incarceration rate is at a two-decade low.
Grebing, E. M., Edmunds, J. A., & Arshavsky, N. P. (2023). The Relationship between Buy-in
and Implementation: Measuring Teacher Buy-in to a High School Reform Effort.
Evaluation and Program Planning, 102224.
Gregory, A., Skiba, R. J., & Noguera, P. A. (2010). The achievement gap and the discipline gap:
Two sides of the same coin?. Educational researcher, 39(1), 59-68.
Grissom, J. A., Eggalite, A. J., & Lindsay, C. A. (2021). How principals affect students and
schools: A systematic synthesis of two decades of research. The Wallace Foundation.
Gruenert, S. (2005). Correlations of collaborative school cultures with student achievement.
NASSP bulletin, 89(645), 43-55.
Gruenert, S. (2008, April). School Culture, They Are Not the Same Thing. NAEP. Retrieved
from https://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/resources/2/Principal/2008/M-Ap56.pdf

124
Gruenert, S., & Whitaker, T. (2015). School culture rewired: How to define, assess, and
transform it. ASCD.
Gruenert, S., & Whitaker, T. (2017). School culture recharged: Strategies to energize your staff
and culture. ASCD.
Guskey, T. R. (1994). Professional development in education: in search of the optimal mix.
Habegger, S. (2007). The principal’s role in successful schools. A study of Ohio’s Schools of
Promise at the elementary level (Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, 2007).
(Proquest No. AAT 3274103).
Hanson, K., & Stipek, D. (2014, May 19). Schools v. prisons: Education's the way to cut prison
population (op-ed by Deborah Stipek). Stanford Graduate School of Education. Retrieved
April 18, 2022, from https://www.mercurynews.com/2014/05/15/schools-v-prisons-
educations-the-way-to-cut-prison-population/
Hargreaves, D. H. (1995). School culture, school effectiveness and school improvement. School
effectiveness and school improvement, 6(1), 23-46.
Hargreaves, A. (2009). The fourth way of change: Towards an age of inspiration and
sustainability. Change wars, 11-43.
Hargreaves, A., & Dawe, R. (1990). Paths of professional development: Contrived collegiality,
collaborative culture, and the case of peer coaching. Teaching and teacher
education, 6(3), 227-241.
Härkönen, U. (2001). The Bronfenbrenner ecological systems theory of human development.
Harris A., Jones, M. and Huffman, J. (2017), Teachers Leading Educational Reform: The Power
of Professional Learning Communities, Routledge, London.

125
Hattie, J. (2016, July). Mindframes and maximizers. In Third annual visible learning conference.
Washington, DC. Abstract retrieved from http://www. sagepublications.
com/images/eblast/CorwinPress/PDF/AVL-program-2016. pdf.
Heck, R. H. (2009). Teacher effectiveness and student achievement: Investigating a multilevel
cross‐classified model. Journal of educational Administration, 47(2), 227-249.
Holme, J. J., & Rangel, V. S. (2012). Putting school reform in its place: Social geography,
organizational social capital, and school performance. American Educational Research
Journal, 49(2), 257-283.
Horner, R. H., & Sugai, G. (2015). School-wide PBIS: An example of applied behavior analysis
implemented at a scale of social importance. Behavior analysis in practice, 8, 80-85.
James, M. D., & Sewell, C. S. (2015). Building community among staff and fostering teacher
buy-in.
Jarboe, K. B. (2020). Positive behavior intervention and support: barriers and facilitators to
implementation.
Johnson, R.B. and Christensen, L.B. (2017). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and
mixed approaches. (6th ed.). Sage.
Jones, L., Stall, G., & Yarbrough, D. (2013). The importance of professional learning
communities for school improvement. Creative Education, 4(05), 357.
Kang-Brown, J., Trone, J., Fratello, J., & Daftary-Kapur, T. (2013). A generation later: What
we’ve learned about zero-tolerance in schools. Retrieved from:
http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/zero-tolerance-in-schools-
policy-brief.pdf

126
Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2009). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop
as leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching?. Review of
educational research, 86(4), 945-980.
Kincaid, D., Childs, K., Blase, K. A., & Wallace, F. (2007). Identifying barriers and facilitators
in implementing schoolwide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 9(3), 174-184.
Klassen, R. M., Tze, V., Betts, S. M., & Gordon, K. A. (2011). Teacher efficacy research 1998–
2009: Signs of progress or unfulfilled promise?. Educational psychology review, 23(1),
21-43.
Kodelja, Z. (2019). Violence in schools: zero tolerance policies. Ethics and Education, 14(2),
247-257.
Kramer, S., Cai, J., & Merlino, F. J. (2015). A lesson for the Common Core Standards era from
the NCTM Standards era: The importance of considering school-level buy-in when
implementing and evaluating Standards-based instructional materials. Large-scale studies
in mathematics education, 17-44.
Kretlow, A. G., & Bartholomew, C. C. (2010). Using coaching to improve the fidelity of
evidence-based practices: A review of studies. Teacher education and special
education, 33(4), 279-299.
Kunnari, I., Ilomäki, L., & Toom, A. (2018). Successful teacher teams in change: The role of
collective efficacy and resilience. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in
Higher Education.

127
Lacoe, J., & Steinberg, M. P. (2019). Do suspensions affect student outcomes?. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 41(1), 34-62.
Lazarides, R., & Warner, L. M. (2020). Teacher self-efficacy. In Oxford research encyclopedia
of education.
Leal Filho, W., Raath, S., Lazzarini, B., Vargas, V. R., de Souza, L., Anholon, R., ... & Orlovic,
V. L. (2018). The role of transformation in learning and education for sustainability.
Journal of cleaner production, 199, 286-295.
Lee, M., & Louis, K. S. (2019). Mapping a strong school culture and linking it to sustainable
school improvement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 81, 84-96.
Lee, S. W., & Min, S. (2017). Riding the implementation curve: Teacher buy-in and student
academic growth under comprehensive school reform programs. the elementary school
journal, 117(3), 371-395.
Leithwood, K., Anderson, S., Mascall, B., & Strauss, T. (2010). School leaders’ influences on
student learning: The four paths. The principles of educational leadership and
management, 2, 13-30.
Levin, S., & Bradley, K. (2019). Understanding and addressing principal turnover: A review of
the research. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Levin, S., Bradley, K., & Scott, C. (2019). Principal turnover: Insights from current
principals. Learning Policy Institute.
Lightner, S. C., Kersten Parrish, S., Drewry, R., & Scharer, P. L. (2021). Co-navigating the
complexities of school reform: The establishment and on-going maintenance of relational
trust in school reform efforts. Literacy Research and Instruction, 60(2), 107-126.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2020.1783403

128
Lochmiller, C.R. & Lester, J. N. (2017). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
Locke, L.F., Silverman, S.J., and Spirduso, W.W. (2010). Reading and understanding research.
(3rd ed.). Sage.
Lohrmann, S., Forman, S., Martin, S., & Palmieri, M. (2008). Understanding school personnel's
resistance to adopting schoolwide positive behavior support at a universal level of
intervention. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10(4), 256-269.
MacNeil, A. J., Prater, D. L., & Busch, S. (2009). The effects of school culture and climate on
student achievement. International Journal of leadership in Education, 12(1), 73-84.
Macy, M., & Wheeler, T. (2020). Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Factors that
Influence Teacher Buy-in. The International Journal of Educational Organization and
Leadership, 28(1), 17.
Maehr, M. L., & Braskamp, L. A. (1986). The motivation factor: A theory of personal
investment. Lexington Books/DC Heath and Com.
Marsh, C. (2019, November 15). Honoring the Global Indigenous Roots of Restorative Justice:
Potential Restorative Approaches for Child Welfare. Center for the Study of Social
Policy. Retrieved March 28, 2022, from https://cssp.org/2019/11/honoring-the-global-
indigenous-roots-of-restorative-justice
Matias, C. E. (2013). Tears worth telling: Urban teaching and the possibilities of racial justice.
Multicultural Perspectives, 15(4), 187-193.
Mattingly, J. W. (2007). A study of relationships of school climate, school culture, teacher
efficacy, collective efficacy, teacher job satisfaction and intent to turnover in the context
of year-round education calendars. University of Louisville.

129
Mayworm, A. M., Sharkey, J. D., Hunnicutt, K. L., & Schiedel, K. C. (2016). Teacher
consultation to enhance implementation of school-based restorative justice. Journal of
Educational and Psychological Consultation, 26(4), 385-412.
McPhee, K. M. (2020). Cultural humility in the context of teacher-student relationships.
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.
McGuinn, P. (2012). Stimulating reform: Race to the Top, competitive grants and the Obama
education agenda. Educational Policy, 26(1), 136-159.
McIntosh, K., Gion, C., & Bastable, E. (2018). Do schools implementing SWPBIS have
decreased racial and ethnic disproportionality in school discipline. PBIS Evaluation Brief.
OSEP National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports.
McIntosh, K., & Goodman, S. (2016). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI
and PBIS. Guilford Publications.
McLaughlin, M. W. (1991). The Rand change agent study. Education policy implementation, 1-
54.
McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2010). Professional learning communities: Building blocks
for school culture and student learning. Voices in Urban Education, 27(1), 35-45.
Mercer, S. H., McIntosh, K., & Hoselton, R. (2017). Comparability of fidelity measures for
assessing tier 1 school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Journal of
Positive Behavior Interventions, 19(4), 195-204.

130
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Mojavezi, A., & Tamiz, M. P. (2012). The Impact of Teacher Self-efficacy on the Students'
Motivation and Achievement. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 2(3).
Moos, R.H. (1979) Evaluating Educational Environments: procedures, measures, findings and
policy implications. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Morgan, K. P. (1996). Describing the emperor’s new clothes: Three myths of educational
in(equality). In Diller, A, Houston, B., Morgan, K.P., & Ayim, M. Editor (Ed.), The
gender question in education, theory, pedagogy, & politics (pp. 105-122). Boulder, CO
Muhammad, A. (2009). Transforming school culture: How to overcome staff division. Solution
Tree Press.
National School Climate Council (2012). The School Climate Improvement Process: Essential
Elements. School Climate Brief, No. 4. Available online at:
http://www.schoolclimate.org/climate/schoolclimatebriefs.
Naz, F., & Rashid, S. (2021). Effective instructional leadership can enhance teachers’ Motivation
and improve students’ learning outcomes. sjesr, 4(1), 477-485.
Nehez, J., & Blossing, U. (2022). Practices in different school cultures and principals’
improvement work. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 25(2), 310-330.
Newman, B. M., & Newman, P. R. (2020). Theories of adolescent development. Academic
Press.
Nichols, J. A., Nichols, W. D., & Rupley, W. H. (2020). Teacher Efficacy and Attributes on the
Implementation of Tiered Instructional Frameworks. International Journal of Evaluation
and Research in Education, 9(3), 731-742.

131
Opper, I. M. (2019). Teachers matter: Understanding teachers’ impact on student
achievement. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Orr, M. T. (2011). Pipeline to Preparation to Advancement: Graduates’ Experiences In, Through,
and Beyond Leadership Preparation. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(1), 114–
172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000010378612
Padgett, D. K. (2008). Strategies for rigor. Qualitative methods in sociology, 80-200.
Pavlacic, J. M., Kellum, K. K., & Schulenberg, S. E. (2022). Advocating for the use of
restorative justice practices: Examining the overlap between restorative justice and
behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 15(4), 1237-1246.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Chapter 7: Qualitative Interviewing. In Qualitative research & evaluation
methods (3rd ed.) (pp. 339-380). SAGE Publications.
Payne, C. M. (2008). So much reform, so little change. Education Policy for the 21stCentury,
239-278.
Payne, A. A., & Welch, K. (2015). Restorative Justice in Schools: The Influence of Race on
Restorative Discipline. Youth & Society, 47(4), 539–564.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X12473125
Piotrowsky, M. J. (2016). The impact of leadership on school culture and student
achievement (Doctoral dissertation, Clemson University).
Renn, K. A., & Arnold, K. D. (2003). Reconceptualizing Research on College Student Peer
Culture. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(3), 261–293.
Roby, D. E. (2011). Teacher leaders impacting school culture. Education, 131(4).

132
Rouse, K. W. (2021). Influential Factors of School Culture on Teacher Self-Efficacy and
Motivation: An Ethnographic Case Study (Doctoral dissertation, University of South
Carolina).
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.) (pp. 85-92). SAGE Publications.
Ryan, A. M., & Tippins, N. T. (2004). Attracting and selecting: What psychological research
tells us. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the School of
Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance with the Society of
Human Resources Management, 43(4), 305-318.
Shafer, L. (2018). What makes a good school culture. Harvard Graduate School of
Education, 23.
Schein, E. H. (1984). Coming to a new awareness of organizational culture. Sloan Management
Review, 25(2), 3-16.
Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture (Vol. 45, No. 2, p. 109). American Psychological
Association.
Schein, E. H. (1992). How can organizations learn faster?: the problem of entering the Green
Room.
Seashore Louis, K., & Lee, M. (2016). Teachers’ capacity for organizational learning: The
effects of school culture and context. School effectiveness and school improvement,
27(4), 534-556.
Shahzad, K., & Naureen, S. (2017). Impact of Teacher Self-Efficacy on Secondary School
Students' Academic Achievement. Journal of Education and Educational Development,
4(1), 48-72.

133
Skiba, R. J., & Losen, D. J. (2016). From reaction to prevention: Turning the page on school
discipline. American Educator, 39(4), 4.
Skiba, R. J., & Peterson, R. (1999). The dark side of zero tolerance: Can punishment lead to safe
schools? Phi Delta Kappan, 80(5), 372-382.
Slee, R. (2020). Changing theories and practices of discipline. Routledge.
Smith, P. S., Hayes, M. L. and Lyons, K. M. (2017), "The ecology of instructional teacher
leadership", The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, Vol. 46, pp. 267-288.
Snoek, M., Enthoven, M., Kessels, J., & Volman, M. (2017). Increasing the impact of a Master’s
programme on teacher leadership and school development by means of boundary
crossing. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(1), 26-56.
Solórzano, T. R. (2017). The Impact on the Culture and Beliefs in an Alternative School
Environment with the Implementation of Positive Behavior Interventions and
Support (Doctoral dissertation, Concordia University Irvine).
Sorensen, L. C., Bushway, S. D., & Gifford, E. J. (2022). Getting tough? The effects of
discretionary principal discipline on student outcomes. Education Finance and Policy,
17(2), 255-284.
Spencer, L. M., & Spencer, P. S. M. (2008). Competence at Work models for superior
performance. John Wiley & Sons.
Spicer, F. V. (2016). School culture, school climate, and the role of the principal.
Stahl, S. D. (2016). The evolution of zero-tolerance policies. CrissCross, 4(1), 7.
Stanulis, R., & Floden, R. (2009). Intensive mentoring as a way to help beginning teachers
develop balanced instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 112-122.

134
Steinberg, M.P., and Lacoe, J. (2017). What Do We Know About School Discipline Reform?
Education Next, 17(1), 44-52.
Stirling, D. (2016). Teacher motivation. Learndev. Org, 33, 11-28.
Stolp, S., & Smith, S. C. (1995). Transforming school culture: Stories, symbols, values & the
leader's role. Eugene, OR: ERIC.
Sugai, G., & Simonsen, B. (2012). Positive behavioral interventions and supports: History,
defining features, and misconceptions.
Superville, D. R. (2022, June 15). For principals, prep and PD fall short, new report finds.
Education Week. Retrieved June 26, 2022, from https://www.edweek.org/leadership/for-
principals-prep-and-pd-fall-short-new-report-finds/2022/06
Tableman, B. & Herron, A. (2004). School climate and learning. Best Practice Briefs. University
Community Partnerships, Michigan State University.
Taylor, R. D., & Gebre, A. (2016). Teacher–student relationships and personalized learning:
Implications of person and contextual variables. In M. Murphy, S. Redding, & J.
Twyman (Eds.), Handbook on personalized learning for states, districts, and schools (pp.
205–220). Temple University, Center on Innovations in Learning.
Teske, S. C. (2011). A Study of Zero Tolerance Policies in Schools: A Multi-Integrated Systems
Approach to Improve Outcomes for Adolescents. Journal of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatric Nursing, 24(2), 88–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-
6171.2011.00273.Tschannen-Moran, B., Tschannen-Moran, M: San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 2010.

135
Tschannen-Moran, M., & McMaster, P. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy: Four professional
development formats and their relationship to self-efficacy and implementation of a new
teaching strategy. The elementary school journal, 110(2), 228-245.
Ujifusa, A. (2018). Guns, Disadvantaged Students Take Center Stage at ESSA
Hearing. Education Week, 38(07), 13-13.
U.S. Department of Education. (2014). Overview of the School Discipline Guidance Package.
U.S. Department of Education. (2021). Top Five Takeaways for Supporting School Leadership.
Utt, J., & Tochluk, S. (2020). White teacher, know thyself: Improving anti-racist praxis through
racial identity development. Urban Education, 55(1), 125-152.
von Ravensberg, H. (2020). Funding PBIS Implementation Through ESSA Title IV, Part A
Funds. Part A Funds (January 28, 2020).
Wagner, K. (2016). A principal’s perspective: The importance of school culture.
Warnick, B. R., & Scribner, C. F. (2020). Discipline, punishment, and the moral community of
schools. Theory and Research in Education, 18(1), 98–116.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878520904943
Watt, H., & Richardson, P. (2013). Teacher motivation and student achievement outcomes.
International guide to student achievement, 271-273.
Welsh, R. O., & Little, S. (2018). The School Discipline Dilemma: A Comprehensive Review of
Disparities and Alternative Approaches. Review of Educational Research, 88(5), 752–
794. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318791582
Wenner, J. A., & Campbell, T. (2016). The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher leadership:
A Review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 87(1), 134-171.
doi:10.3102/0034654316653478

136
Westrup, S. (2015). "Restorative principles in practice: Developing a restorative school climate":
Corrigendum. Educational Psychology in Practice, 31(2), 220.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2015.1034449
Whisman, A., & Hammer, P. (2014). The association between school discipline and academic
performance: A case for positive discipline approaches. West Virginia Department of
Education: Office of Research, 7-26.
Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning
to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of educational
research, 68(2), 130-178.
Wyatt, M., & Ončevska Ager, E. (2017). Teachers’ cognitions regarding continuing professional
development. Elt Journal, 71(2), 171-185.
Xie, Z., Zhang, L. F., & Deng, M. (2022). Self-efficacy and work motivation among inclusive
education teachers in China. International Journal of Disability, Development and
Education, 1-15.
Yoo, J. H. (2016). The Effect of Professional Development on Teacher Efficacy and Teachers'
Self-Analysis of Their Efficacy Change. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability,
18(1), 84-94.
Yoon, S. Y. (2016). Principals’ data-driven practice and its influences on teacher buy-in and
student achievement in comprehensive school reform models. Leadership and Policy in
Schools, 15(4), 500-523.
You, S., Lee, J., Lee, Y., & Kim, A. Y. (2015). Bullying among Korean adolescents: The role of
empathy and attachment. Psychology in the Schools, 52(6), 594-606.

137
Zimmerman, J. (2006). Why some teachers resist change and what principals can do about it.
Nassp Bulletin, 90(3), 238-249.

138
Appendix A
Interview Protocol
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study! I know we have talked via email and
phone but it is so nice to meet you in person. My name is Maria Stamatogiannakis and I am a
doctoral student at USC. I appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedule. The interview
should last between 30 and 45 minutes, does this still work for you?
Before we get started, I want to quickly go over the study and answer any questions you
may have. I am conducting a study on teachers’ perceptions of school culture’s impact on PBIS
implementation. I am particularly interested in understanding how teachers think their school’s
culture affects their ability and confidence level when it comes to proper implementation
methods. I am also interested in learning more about what type of support is needed by teachers
to promote a culture that is supportive of PBIS. I am talking to multiple teachers at your school
to learn more about this.
I want to assure you that the purpose of this interview is non-evaluative. I am neither
judging nor providing feedback on your teaching methods. My goal is to understand your
perspective and experience as a teacher. As a reminder, this interview is entirely confidential.
This means that I will use a pseudonym to protect your confidentiality and that your name will
not be shared with your school, principal, or district.
I have a recorder so that I can accurately capture what you share with me. The recording
is solely for my purposes to best capture your perspectives and will not be shared with anyone
outside the research team. Likewise, I will be jotting down notes throughout our conversation.
May I have your permission to record our conversation?

Do you have any questions before we get started?

139
Alright, let’s get started. I’d like to begin by asking you some questions about yourself.
1. First, tell me about your background in education. (background)
1. How did you become interested in teaching?
2. How long have you worked as a classroom teacher?
Thank you so much for sharing some of your teaching experiences with me. I now want to
move on to your school site. I’d like to start by asking you some questions about your
school culture. When I say, “school culture,” I am referring to the attitudes, expected
behaviors, and values that impact how the school operates.
2. How would you describe the culture at your school? (RQ #1)
1. Is there a clear, shared goal within the school?
2. What are some positive elements of your school culture?
3. What would you change about your school’s culture?
Next, I’m going to ask some questions about different stakeholders in your school and how
they may have an impact on your self-efficacy. Teacher self-efficacy is defined as a
judgment of one's own capabilities to bring about desired outcomes of student engagement
and learning.
3. How does professional development play a role in your confidence to implement PBIS?
(RQ #2)
4. How does collaboration with your colleagues support or hinder your confidence in
implementing PBIS? (RQ #2)
1. How have you used collaboration to support PBIS implementation?
5. Has the school provided any other resources that may impact your confidence level with
PBIS?

140
We’re now going to switch gears and talk about PBIS at your school.
7. What do you see as the successes of PBIS in your school? (RQ #1)
8. What do you see as the challenges of PBIS in your school? (RQ #1 and #2)
1. In what ways do you think your school culture has had an impact on these
successes and/or challenges?
Lastly, I am going to ask you some questions about what you think would be helpful in
promoting a supportive school culture.
9. What sort of school culture is needed to support PBIS? (RQ #1 and #2)
10. How would you describe your ability to influence your school’s culture? (RQ #2)
11. What advice would you give to a principal who wants to start implementing PBIS at their
school? (RQ #1 and #2)
12. What advice would you give you a teacher who is starting to work at a school using
PBIS?
13. What additional support, if any, would have been beneficial when you were first
introduced to PBIS? (RQ #2)

Is there any other insight would you like to share about our conversation regarding school culture
and its impact on PBIS implementation?
V. Closing Comments:
I really appreciate your time and willingness to share your thoughts with me today! Everything
that you have shared is really helpful for my study. If I find myself with a follow-up question,
can I contact you? What is your preferred method of communication? Thank you so much for
your time and I wish you the best of luck with the rest of the school year!

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Reducing suspensions through implementation of schoolwide PBIS

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

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

PDF

Implementation of restorative justice in schools from a teacher's perspective

PDF

Promising practices: promoting and sustaining a college-going culture

PDF

Teachers' voices: SEL perceptions in a grade 9-12 school

PDF

Examining teacher pre-service/credential programs and school site professional development and implementation of culturally relevant teaching of BIPOC students

PDF

Promising practices for building a college-going culture: a case study of a comprehensive high school

PDF

Interrupting inequitable systems: evaluating a teacher leadership development program

PDF

Math teachers and growth mindset

PDF

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

PDF

The continuous failure of Continuous Improvement: the challenge of implementing Continuous Improvement in low income schools

PDF

School-based interventions for chronically absent students in poverty

PDF

In the shadows: the perceived experiences of women principals in secondary schools

PDF

Preparing teachers to advance equity through deeper learning and antiracist practices

PDF

A culture of care in elementary schools to impact Black student academic achievement: a case study

PDF

Promising practices for developing leadership capacity in future school administrators

PDF

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

Asset Metadata

Creator Stamatogiannakis, Maria Christina (author)

Core Title School culture and its impact on PBIS implementation

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 06/05/2023

Defense Date 04/27/2023

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

Tag implementation,middle school teachers,OAI-PMH Harvest,PBIS,school culture

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Stowe, Kathy (committee chair), Malloy, Courtney (committee member), Ott, Maria (committee member)

Creator Email mariacstam@gmail.com,stamatog@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113147818

Unique identifier UC113147818

Identifier etd-Stamatogia-11923.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-Stamatogia-11923

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Stamatogiannakis, Maria Christina

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230606-usctheses-batch-1052 (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