University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content i

PROMOTING A POSITIVE SCHOOL CULTURE FROM THREE PERSPECTIVES:
A PROMISING PRACTICES STUDY FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR PERSPECTIVE

by

Lisa Minami-Lin

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

August 2020

Copyright 2020 Lisa Minami-Lin

ii
DEDICATION
To my dearest husband, Dean who has loved and cherished me for as long as I can remember…
in sickness and health, for richer or poorer. You lift me up when I fall, make me pancakes when
I’m hungry. You have been steadfast by my side through the years. No one truly understands my
folly like you do. You give me hope and strength to live out my dreams. You believe in me when
I cannot. Thank you for your making all of my dreams come true.

To my dearest Ashley and Nick, “As long as I’m living my babies you’ll be.” My love for you
two began the moment each of you came into our lives. You are my sunshine and moonbeam.
Thank you for being my inspiration. Always love and take care of one another.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

To Dr. Kenneth Yates, my committee Chair, Thank you for your expertise and guidance
throughout my journey of a thousand steps. Thank you for requiring the very best of me. Ten
thousand blessings to you for being my North Star, I am grateful.

To Dr. Briana Hinga, my committee member. Thank you for being the lamp unto my feet,
requiring me to think hard about my data analysis. I had imaginary discussions with you
throughout my analysis constantly seeking and asking the question about the story behind my
numbers.

To Dr. Katherine Shone, my committee member. Thank you for your wisdom, guidance and
steadfast support through the fire. I am thankful that you shepherded our team. May you and
your family continue to be blessed.

To my dissertation team, Dr. Katie Gerrans and Dr. Carmen Madrigal, on the day that we met at
our orientation three years ago there seemed to be a gravitational pull that linked us together. We
made it good doctors. We stand at the pinnacle of this watershed moment. Salute!

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Introduction ...............................................................................................................1
Organizational Context and Mission ...................................................................................2
Organizational Performance Status ......................................................................................4
Related Literature.................................................................................................................6
Importance of a Promising Practice Study ...........................................................................7
Organizational Performance Goal and Current Performance ..............................................8
Organizational Stakeholders ................................................................................................9
Stakeholder for the Study...................................................................................................11
Definitions..........................................................................................................................14
Organization of the Study ..................................................................................................16
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .........................................................................................18
Zero Tolerance ...................................................................................................................18
Zero-Tolerance History ................................................................................................18
Exclusionary Discipline Practices................................................................................19
Effectiveness of Zero Tolerance ..................................................................................20
PBIS History and Foundations...........................................................................................21
What Is PBIS? ..............................................................................................................22

v
PBIS: Decades of Change ............................................................................................23
PBIS Misconceptions-Reshaping education: What PBIS Can and Cannot Do ...........24
PBIS and the Positive Effects of a Promising Practice ................................................25
Current State of Intervention Systems to Support Students ..............................................27
MTSS ...........................................................................................................................27
Response to Instruction and Intervention (RTI2) ........................................................29
The Role of the Teacher .....................................................................................................30
The Role of Coaches ..........................................................................................................31
Data: Professional Development..................................................................................32
Practices: Selecting and Organizing Data ....................................................................33
The Role of Administrators ...............................................................................................34
Conceptual Framework ......................................................................................................36
Adaptation of the Gap Analysis Framework as a Promising Practice .........................36
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ...............................36
Knowledge and Skills Influences.................................................................................36
Motivation ....................................................................................................................39
Organization .................................................................................................................42
Chapter Three: Methodology .........................................................................................................46
Conceptual and Methodological Framework .....................................................................46
Adaptation of the Gap Analysis Framework as a Promising Practice .........................47
Assessment of Performance Influences .............................................................................48
Knowledge Assessment ...............................................................................................48
Motivation Assessment ................................................................................................51

vi
Organization/Culture/Context Assessment ..................................................................53
Participating Stakeholders and Sample Selection ..............................................................55
Sampling ......................................................................................................................56
Recruitment ..................................................................................................................56
Instrumentation ..................................................................................................................57
Interview Protocol Design ...........................................................................................57
Document Analysis Design..........................................................................................58
Data Collection ..................................................................................................................59
Surveys .........................................................................................................................59
Interviews .....................................................................................................................60
Documents ...................................................................................................................60
Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................60
Trustworthiness of Data .....................................................................................................62
Chapter Four: Results and Findings ...............................................................................................64
Stakeholders .......................................................................................................................65
Determination of Assets and Needs ...................................................................................66
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes.....................................................................67
Factual Knowledge ......................................................................................................67
Conceptual Knowledge ................................................................................................71
Procedural Knowledge .................................................................................................72
Metacognitive Knowledge ...........................................................................................73
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes .....................................................................75
Value ............................................................................................................................75

vii
Self-Efficacy ................................................................................................................77
Mood ............................................................................................................................79
Attribution ....................................................................................................................81
Results and Findings for Organization Causes ..................................................................83
Resources .....................................................................................................................83
Policies, Process, & Procedures ...................................................................................88
Culture..........................................................................................................................90
Summary of Validated Influences .....................................................................................91
Knowledge ...................................................................................................................92
Motivation ....................................................................................................................92
Organization .................................................................................................................93
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Evaluation ..........................................................................95
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................95
Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences .....95
Knowledge Recommendations ....................................................................................96
Motivation Recommendations ...................................................................................101
Organization Recommendations ................................................................................106
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ..............................................................111
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations .......................................................111
Implementation and Evaluation Framework ..............................................................112
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ....................................................................112
Level 3: Behavior .......................................................................................................115
Level 2: Learning .......................................................................................................119

viii
Level 1: Reaction .......................................................................................................126
Evaluation Tools ........................................................................................................127
Data Analysis and Reporting .....................................................................................128
Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation ......................................................129
Limitations and Delimitations ..........................................................................................129
Recommendations for Future Research ...........................................................................130
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................131
References ....................................................................................................................................132
Appendix A Suspension Rate Comparison Over Six Years ........................................................142
Appendix B Expulsion Rate Comparison Over Six Years ..........................................................146
Appendix C Ethnicities of Students in Participating Schools ......................................................150
Appendix D Demographics at Participating Schools...................................................................151
Appendix E Survey Protocol .......................................................................................................152
Appendix F Interview Protocol ....................................................................................................159
Appendix G Informed Consent/Information Sheet ......................................................................162
Appendix H Recruitment Letter...................................................................................................165
Appendix I Immediate Evaluations (Level 1 and Level 2) ..........................................................166
Appendix J Delayed Evaluation Tools ........................................................................................169

ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Organizational Vision and Mission and Stakeholder Goals, and Critical Behaviors .......10
Table 2 Summary of Administrators’ Knowledge Influences .......................................................38
Table 3 Summary of Motivation Influences for Administrators ...................................................42
Table 4 Summary of Organization Influences for Administrators ................................................45
Table 5 Summary of Administrators’ Knowledge Influences and Method of Assessment ...........49
Table 6 Summary of PBIS Site Administrators’ Motivation Influences and Method of
Assessment .....................................................................................................................................52
Table 7 Summary of Administrators Organization Influences and Method of Assessment..........54
Table 8 Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of PBIS ...............................................................68
Table 9 Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of PBIS. ..............................................................70
Table 10 Survey Results for Metacognitive Knowledge ...............................................................74
Table 11 Survey Results for Value ................................................................................................76
Table 12 Survey Results for Self-Efficacy and PBIS ....................................................................78
Table 13 Survey Results for Mood and PBIS ................................................................................80
Table 14 Survey Results for Attribution with PBIS ......................................................................82
Table 15 Survey Results for Resources with PBIS ........................................................................84
Table 16 Survey Results for Resources with PBIS ........................................................................86
Table 17 Survey Results for Policies, Processes, and Procedures with PBIS ...............................89
Table 18 Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ................................................92
Table 19 Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ................................................92
Table 20 Organization Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data .............................................93
Table 21 Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ..........................................96
Table 22 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations .........................................102
Table 23 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations .....................................107

x
Table 24 Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ........................114
Table 25 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation ..............................116
Table 26 Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ...........................................................117
Table 27 Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program. .......................................125
Table 28 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program. .....................................................126

xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Relationship between MTSS, RtI
2
, & PBIS. Reprinted from the California
Department of Education (CDE, 2019c). .........................................................................................2
Figure 2. Demographic breakdown for participating schools. .........................................................4
Figure 3. Comparison of suspension rates: VUSD, County, statewide, and participating
schools..............................................................................................................................................5
Figure 4. Comparison of expulsion rates: VUSD, County, statewide, and participating schools. ..5
Figure 5. Gap analysis process. Reprinted from Clark and Estes, 2008. .......................................47
Figure 6. The SOS professional development. ............................................................................124
Figure 7. SOS Dashboard ...........................................................................................................129

xii
ABSTRACT
Adapting the Gap Analysis problem-solving framework (Clark & Estes, 2008: Rueda,
2011), this study examined the promising practices for promoting a positive school culture
through the full implementation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS)
with fidelity in one school district. The overall study consisted of three concurrent studies
that included teacher (Gerrans, 2020) and PBIS coaches and team, (Madrigal, 2020) of
seven school within one district. This study focuses on the role of the site administrators.
The purpose of this study was to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organization
(KMO) factors that contribute to the promising practices of the PBIS framework
implementation. This study used mixed methods to collect survey data from 11
administrators, interview data from two administrators, and district documents to determine
(KMO) influences that contribute to implementing PBIS as promising practices. The
findings show that school climate is improving. According to the data, site administrators
possess the knowledge and the motivation to support this initiative. In the area of
organization, the site administrators agreed they have time to implement this initiative.
However, it appears that the site administrators need more resources. Based on the findings,
recommendations are made for a comprehensive PBIS professional development to include
all three stakeholders to strengthen continuity, commitment and consistency. This study,
along with the concurrent studies, revealed how stakeholders can systematically apply the
Gap Analysis promising practices model to promote a positive school culture through the
full implementation of the PBIS framework with fidelity.
1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Written by
Katie Gerrans, Carmen Madrigal, Lisa Minami-Lin
1

Organizations implementing a strong Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports
(PBIS) framework have a positive school climate, or a decrease in suspensions and expulsions.
Programs with accompanying school climate change provide a promising practice worthy of
study. Identifying factors that contribute to transformation allows other institutions to replicate
the methods of practice to promote positive school cultures. The promising practices within the
organizations are essential to examine in order to foster a deeper understanding of the effects and
implications of these programs.
The California Department of Education (CDE, 2019c) defines a multi-tiered system of
support (MTSS) as an integrated, comprehensive framework focused on Common Core State
Standards (CCSS), core instruction, differentiated learning, student-centered learning,
individualized student needs, and systems alignment for students’ academic, behavioral, and
social success. The components of MTSS include both Response to Instruction and Intervention
(RtI
2
) and PBIS, as seen in Figure 1. MTSS components offer the potential for systemic change
through design and redesign of services and supports to identify and match all students’ needs
(CDE, 2019c).

1
This chapter was jointly written by the authors using a team approach. The authors are listed alphabetically and
reflect equal contribution.

2

Figure 1. Relationship between MTSS, RtI
2
, & PBIS. Reprinted from the California Department
of Education (CDE, 2019c).

Studying the implementation of MTSS aids in understanding how student behavioral
outcomes can be addressed through discipline instruction and behavioral expectations (Sugai and
Horner, 2006). This project represents the larger national problem that students who do not
receive effective comprehensive behavioral interventions may have larger global issues affecting
their learning (McIntosh and Goodman, 2016).
Based on specific criteria, Valley Unified School District (VUSD; a pseudonym)
identified seven schools of focus (A, B, C, D, E. F, G; pseudonyms) as demonstrating how
student behavioral outcomes may be positively addressed through sustainable, culturally and
contextually relevant, and high-fidelity implementation of multi-tiered practices and systems of
support. Therefore, VUSD has identified these schools as potential models for a promising
practice study.
Organizational Context and Mission
The mission of the seven schools of focus, located in Southern California, ensure students
excel in higher education and/or career and technical education while sustaining personal growth
and good citizenship. In collaboration with all stakeholders, VUSD provides a high quality
educational program for all students. Career, and technical experiences, and whole-student

3
supports needed for college and career success are a focus in the school community. VUSD
stands to serve and empower students to succeed with trust and pride.
According to the CDE (2019c), “We seek the day when all students are prepared to
pursue their dreams, participate in the rich cultural life of our state and compete in our global
economy.” As the CDE continues to support local LEAs in their endeavors to ensure students
learn and thrive, supplemental fiscal support is provided to districts for their unduplicated count
of students. Moreover, VUSD serves English Learners, Foster Youth, Homeless, SES
Disadvantaged, and Students with Disabilities. According to CDE (2019a), the unduplicated
count of students is calculated by the number of Homeless students, Foster Youth, and SES
Disadvantaged students. Specifically, VUSD serves 11.7% students who are Homeless, 1.1%
Foster Youth, and 90.1% students from low SES families. Figure 2 depicts the demographic
breakdown for the participating schools.

4

Figure 2. Demographic breakdown for participating schools.

Organizational Performance Status
In 2014, VUSD began the implementation of the PBIS framework. The overall problem
of practice at the time had a direct effect on school climate, student achievement, and social-
emotional learning. Two of the central indicators of school climate are suspensions and
expulsions, which affect the time students are out of class (Gregory, Skiba, & Noguera, 2010).

5
This research surmises that a multi-tiered intervention system will lower this statistic and
improve the overall school climate. While PBIS is a preventative, proactive, and systematic
framework, the strengthening of the core, or Tier 1, and the requirement of data-driven results
make its practices clear and explicit, leading to improvements in school climate. Figure 3
reveals a change in suspension rate from 2011-2019 (CDE, 2019b). Figure 4 reveals a change in
the expulsion rate for these same years (CDE, 2019a). The complete data to formulate these
figures are found in Appendices A and B.

Figure 3. Comparison of suspension rates: VUSD, County, statewide, and participating schools.

Figure 4. Comparison of expulsion rates: VUSD, County, statewide, and participating schools.

6
Related Literature
The fundamental purpose of PBIS is to make schools more effective, efficient, and
equitable learning environments for all students. The PBIS framework is devised to help students
recognize and manage the academic and behavioral aspects of school life to move forward, thereby
increasing their accomplishment. According to Sugai and Horner (2006) when PBIS positively
influences student behavior, the result is a positive school culture with students who are
academically and socially successful.
Schools that implement the PBIS framework have systems, data, and practices resulting in
improved academic engagement and positive school climate (PBIS, 2018a). The PBIS framework
refers to structures and supports which district and site leaders use to strengthen teachers’
instructional practice. To ensure students are making academic progress and the school climate is
improving, data is analyzed to identify areas of growth along with areas of strength. PBIS schools
implement school-level and classroom-level supports that include preventative and responsive
approaches to students’ needs (PBIS, 2018a). Ensuring effective implementation of PBIS requires
enhancing the capacity of teachers, PBIS coaches and team members.
While there is limited research regarding school connectedness as it relates to the overall
implementation of a positive school culture, there is evidence that fostering a positive school
culture improves students’ social and emotional health, which, in turn, results in an improvement
in academic engagement and achievement (Blum & Libbey, 2004; Catalano, Oesterle, Fleming,
& Hawkins, 2004; Wilson, 2004). Meaningful inclusion within all communities in the school
fosters these improvements. Establishing a safe environment decreases anxiety among students,
further fostering the increase in their social-emotional well-being, as well as that of faculty and
staff, due to the decrease in school violence and inequity. According to Sugai et al., (2000),

7
“Schools that are safe, effective and controlled are not accidents”. Hence, it takes proactive steps
to create a safe school culture where students and staff flourish. Therefore, VUSD demonstrates
excellence in achieving the outcome of changing school culture to an environment that surpasses
goals set by the district’s board of education for a positive school climate as measured by the
CDE’s Dashboard (CDE, 2019a) and the PBIS School-wide Information System (SWIS).
Importance of a Promising Practice Study
Studying an asset model, as within the seven schools, reveals the foundation of a
promising practice. An investigation of how this organization implements PBIS within the
MTSS framework may allow other institutions to develop a feasible model to emulate in their
own organizations. The potential promising practices demonstrated by VUSD provides useful
information to those seeking to identify the causes for their own performance gaps. The seven
VUSD schools demonstrate how a positive school culture can produce academically and socially
successful students. The supporting data are revealed in the California School Dashboard (CDE,
2018a) and the PBIS SWIS. Utilizing VUSD as a case study further supports current research
showing social-emotional learning (SEL) affects academic performance, academic engagement,
and school conditions and climate (Blum & Libbey, 2004; Biag, 2016; Catalano, Oesterle,
Fleming, & Hawkins, 2004; Salisbury & McGregor, 2002; Wilson, 2004).
The issues of academic success, academic engagement, and school climate are not local
in scope. They represent the larger national and societal problems educators and educational
institutions face daily. The California Department of Education (2018a) Dashboard data
demonstrate a need for a positive school culture to reduce exclusionary measures used to control
behavior. For students to find academic and social-emotional success, the school culture must

8
support all students’ needs as well as the responsibilities of the individuals instituting the
programs.
Organizational Performance Goal and Current Performance
VUSD identified seven schools that directly demonstrate how effective changes in
student behavior affect outcomes in school climate and academic engagement, making using
these schools potential models for a promising practice study. Schools within VUSD will
continue to implement the PBIS framework with fidelity to ensure students’ behavioral success
measured by suspension and expulsion rates (CDE, 2019b).
The CDE (2019b) defines school climate as addressing student suspension rates, expulsion
rates, and other local measures, including surveys of students, parents, and teachers on sense of
safety and school connectedness. Schools are monitored consistently for achievement in these
standards and reported annually via the Dashboard system which contains reports on school and
student performance to identify strengths, challenges, and areas in need of improvement (CDE,
2018). The data noted in Appendix A and in Figure 4, illustrate improvement in suspension rates in
VUSD as compared with county and state data. These trends are consistent with VUSD being a
potential model for other organizations to emulate in identifying barriers to a positive school
culture.
According to Algozzine et al., 2010, when schools implement the PBIS framework with
fidelity the outcome is a positive school climate resulting in improved academic and positive
behavior outcomes. The VUSD overarching mission is to further develop global citizens supported
by the PBIS framework. The seven schools surpass the minimum goal requirements set forth by
the district in demonstrating excellence through achieving the outcomes of reducing suspensions

9
and expulsions resulting in a positive school culture, as evidenced on the California Department of
Education Dashboard (CDE, 2019a).
Organizational Stakeholders
The three stakeholder groups who have the most influence on implementation and high
fidelity are the teachers, PBIS coaches and team members, and administrators. Each researcher in
this group of studies examined one stakeholder, or stakeholder group, to create a full spectrum of
data for the breadth of this study.
The classroom teachers are identified as the teachers of record for each classroom. These
individuals are trained and supported by a site coach in the implementation of PBIS.
The PBIS coaches and team members are responsible for the support and education of the
classroom teachers. They are responsible for creating and conducting all professional
development training and for coaching classroom teachers as they fully implement the PBIS
framework with fidelity. Each coach and team members are supported by the site administrator
to maintain high fidelity in PBIS implementation.
Administrators establish the school commitment to PBIS through high visibility and
coordinated budget and resource support. In addition, site administrators focus on building a
common school-wide support system for developing the capacity for sustaining the PBIS
implementation. For example, the site administrators explain how the PBIS system is organized,
and they establish and sustain political support for the program. Implementation of PBIS is fully
supported by the site administration through creating a strong school culture that supports
positive student outcomes.
As evidenced in the critical behaviors delineated, the stakeholders are dedicated to
maintaining a strong PBIS framework. Each member is committed to the implementation and

10
high fidelity of the program to ensure students are well supported in their behavioral outcomes.
Table 1 delineates the vision and mission of VUSD. It expresses the organizational global goal
along with each individual stakeholder’s goal. The table also details the critical behaviors of the
three stakeholders for the study.
Table 1
Organizational Vision and Mission and Stakeholder Goals, and Critical Behaviors
Valley Unified School District Vision

VUSD ensures students excel in higher education and/or career and technical education while
sustaining personal growth and good citizenship.
Valley Unified School District Mission

In collaboration with all stakeholders, VUSD provides a high quality educational program for
all students. Career, and technical experiences, and whole-student supports needed for college
and career success are a focus in the school community. VUSD stands to serve and empower
students to succeed with trust and pride.
Organizational Global Goal

Schools within VUSD have committed to positive student outcomes through the full
implementation and fidelity of the PBIS framework. Students’ academic and social-emotional
learning is of high priority as measured by improvement in student suspension and expulsion
rates.
Stakeholder 1

Teachers
Stakeholder 2

PBIS Coaches
Stakeholder 3

Administrators
Stakeholder 1
Intermediate Goal

Teachers fully implement the
PBIS framework with
fidelity.

Stakeholder 2
Intermediate Goal

PBIS Coaches support
teachers with full
implementation and
fidelity to the PBIS
framework.

Stakeholder 3
Intermediate Goal

Administrators provide the
resources needed to ensure
the PBIS framework is fully
implemented with fidelity.

11
Table 1, continued
Critical Behaviors
Teachers implement PBIS
strategies within daily
instruction to improve the
climate of the classroom with
fidelity.

Teachers implement and
follow PBIS intervention and
screening protocols to
identify students for ongoing
specialized services.
PBIS coaches provide weekly
observations and coaching as
needed.

PBIS coaches provide
professional development to
all teachers on how to
effectively implement the
PBIS strategies at monthly
staff meetings
Administrators align their
organizational, policies,
processes, and procedures
with the district office
leadership to secure support
for the PBIS framework.

Stakeholder for the Study
Due to the collaborative nature of this study, the three individual stakeholder groups were
examined independently. Each stakeholder has interdependent functions within the scope of
PBIS at each of the schools. Each stakeholder of focus was examined by a separate dissertation
team member.
An expectation for teachers is to implement the PBIS framework with fidelity in the
classroom using relevant data to make decisions. PBIS coaches and team members facilitate
monthly grade-level or content level team meetings in implementing PBIS. Each individual
serves as an active team member, providing input on school-wide matters. Teachers would
benefit from communicating with and soliciting feedback from colleagues about PBIS
implementation progress and priorities.
The primary function of PBIS coaches and team members is to support teachers in their
implementation and fidelity to the PBIS framework to ensure students are academically and
socially successful. PBIS coaches use multiple types and sources of data to inform problem-
solving efforts at either the organizational, meaning implementation, or student, meaning

12
learning, levels. PBIS coaches disseminate content knowledge and strategies to teachers through
engaging, hands-on professional development (PD). They support the teachers and staff to
sustain the MTSS framework effectively and efficiently over time. Each site coach and team is
independently supported by a site administrator and/or an administrative team.
Administrators primarily provide leadership, decision making and resources. These
stakeholders are directly and indirectly responsible for the implementation of the evidence-based
behavioral interventions that support academic and social behavior outcomes for all students.
The district’s PBIS team uses a train-the-trainer model with districtwide systematic
implementation as a guiding principle. Site administrators focus on creating a positive school
climate to ensure positive student academic and behavior outcomes. Moreover, site
administrators create a culture of commitment for initiative sustainability by establishing the
internal capacity through site alignment of PBIS policies, processes, and procedures to sustain
the PBIS implementation with fidelity.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to examine the potential promising practices of seven
VUSD schools as they support a change to a positive school culture and school climate (PBIS,
2019a). While a comprehensive analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes,
the stakeholders to be focused on in this study are teachers, PBIS coaches and team members,
and administrators.

13
As such, two questions guided this study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that contribute to
teachers, PBIS coaches and team members, and administrators’ successful
implementation of PBIS framework to create a positive school culture in the Valley
Unified School District?
2. What recommendations in the area of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources may be appropriate for other organizations attempting to promote a positive
school culture through the implementation of PBIS?
This study focuses on the stakeholder group, site administration. See Gerrans (2020) and
Madrigal (2020) in which the coaches and team members, and teachers stakeholder’s respective
roles are examined.
Methodological Framework
This is a collaborative action research project using Clark and Estes’ (2008) performance
analysis model. Systematic analytical, the model helps to clarify organizational goals and
identify the current and preferred performance level within an organization. In this regard, Rueda
(2011) specified, when a disconnect in the methods employed in promising practices occurs or
when goals and approaches are not aligned, the overall effectiveness in applying the solutions to
the organizational issues are not followed, resulting in a lack of success. The gap analysis
framework (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011) was adapted and utilized to identify potential
promising practices at Valley Unified School District (VUSD) by examining assumed influences
as assets or needs. Research-based approaches and how they meaningfully identify the influences
in the study are presented to increase solution alignment.

14
To answer the study questions, data are collected from participants in the form of surveys
covering knowledge, motivation, and organizational influence assessments as well as individual
interviews to learn more about the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that
promote the potential promising practice. Document data are analyzed to identify evidence of the
outcomes for PBIS schools (CDE, 2018).
The adapted gap analysis framework utilizes both qualitative and quantitative data.
Qualitative data are participants’ thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (Patton, 2002). Qualitative
methods also identify potential human causes for promising practices and gaps (Clark & Estes,
2008). Quantitative data are compiled from the CDE Testing & Accountability California School
Dashboard System of Support and other documents (CDE, 2019a). The elements contributing to
the potential promising practices are strategically examined based on participants’ knowledge,
motivation, and organizational structures. Recommendations can then be derived holistically
(Rueda, 2011).
Definitions
The following key terms and definitions are used throughout this study:

Academic engagement: Refers to how well schools are engaging students in their
learning (CDE, 2019c)
Academic Performance: The extent to which a student, teacher or institution has
achieved their short or long-term educational goals in English language arts, mathematics,
English learner progress, and college and career readiness (CDE, 2019c).
Accrediting Commission for Schools Western Association of Schools and Colleges
(ACS WASC): ACS WASC accreditation assures the educational community, the public, and
other organizations and agencies that an institution has clearly defined objectives appropriate to

15
education; has established conditions under which their achievement can reasonably be expected;
appears in fact to be accomplishing them substantially; is so organized, staffed, and supported
that it can be expected to continue to do so; and demonstrates that it meets ACS WASC’s criteria
and accreditation standards (ACS WASC, 2019).
Conditions and Climate or School Climate: A focus on school safety and a response to
discipline concerns (CDE, 2019c).
Fidelity: Refers to the outcome of the TFI.
Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS): An integrated, comprehensive framework
that focuses on CCSS, core instruction, differentiated learning, student-centered learning,
individualized student needs, systems alignment for students’ academic, behavioral, and social
success (CDE, 2019c).
PBIS coach: Teachers who specialize in PBIS to provide technical support to school
personnel and are often not part of the classroom teacher faculty (PBIS, 2019).
PBIS teachers: Teachers who lead the grade levels through PBIS practices (PBIS, 2019).
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS): Based on a problem-solving
model, aims to prevent inappropriate behavior through teaching and reinforcing appropriate
behaviors (PBIS, 2019).
Promising Practice: A collection of ideas, values, procedures, techniques and tools,
forming a coherent, integrated whole commonly repeatable in configurations of distinct elements
(Leseure, Bauer, Birdi, Neely, & Denyer, 2004).
School climate: Addresses student suspension rates, expulsion rates, other local
measures, including surveys of students, parents, and teachers on the sense of safety and school
connectedness (CDE, 2018).

16
School culture: Physical, environmental, and social aspects of a school that have an
impact on student experiences, attitudes, behaviors, and performance (CDE, 2018).
The Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI). Assessment used to provide a valid, reliable, and
efficient measure of the extent to which school personnel are applying the core features of PBIS.
(PBIS, 2019).
Unconscious bias: Social stereotypes about certain groups of people that individuals
form outside their own conscious awareness (University of California San Francisco, 2019).
Unduplicated count of students: Students who are eligible to receive Free or Reduced
Price Meals (FRPM) based on applying for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), or who
are determined to meet the same income eligibility criteria as the NSLP, through their local
schools; and students who are automatically eligible for free meals based on their foster, migrant,
or homeless status, or because they were "directly certified" as being eligible for free meals
based on their participation in California's food stamp program (CDE, 2018).
Organization of the Study
Five chapters are used to organize this case study. Chapter One provides the key concepts
and terminology commonly found in a discussion about the implementation of PBIS in VUSD as
a potential promising practice case study. The organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders, as
well as the initial concepts of adapted gap analysis are introduced. Chapter Two provides a
review of current literature on the scope of the study. Topics pertaining to PBIS and its
connections to MTSS are addressed. As a potential promising practice case study, an
examination of individual stakeholder roles is also carried out. Chapter Three details the
assumed causes and rationale for this study as well as the methodology in terms of choice of
participants, data collection procedures, and data analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results

17
are described and analyzed for the individual stakeholders. Chapter Five provides
recommendations for practice based on data and literature as well as recommendations for
evaluation and implementation of a positive school culture.

18
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Written by
Katie Gerrans, Carmen Madrigal, Lisa Minami-Lin
2

The general problem of practice encompasses school climate as it affects academics as
well as the social emotional learning (SEL) components. Two central indicators for school
climate are suspensions and expulsions (Gregory et al., 2010). Gregory et al. (2010) posited
behavior interventions can benefit school climate, thus lowering suspension and expulsion rates.
This study is representative of the larger national problem relative to the issue that students who
do not receive effective comprehensive behavioral interventions may have larger global issues
that affect their learning (McIntosh and Goodman, 2016).
This chapter reviews early influences on the development of PBIS, changes in PBIS over
the decades, and influences of exclusionary practices such as Zero Tolerance policies. Each of
the three stakeholder groups is discussed individually. The stakeholder groups of teachers, PBIS
coaches, and administrators are examined through the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences.
Zero Tolerance
This study provides a brief history of Zero Tolerance policies, unintended consequences
of Zero Tolerance policies and the effectiveness of Zero Tolerance policies.
Zero-Tolerance History
According to Skiba and Knesting, (2001) the use of Zero Tolerance in student discipline
began in the 1990s. Skiba and Knesting, (2001) found that the term which was used by drug

2
This chapter was jointly written by the authors using a team approach. The authors are listed alphabetically and
reflect equal contribution.

19
enforcement agents was adopted by school districts as a disciplinary policy to demonstrate to the
public that zero-tolerance policies make schools safer. The 1990’s was the era of accountability
for schools which added to the pressure on school administrators to enforce this exclusionary
practice in order to convince their communities that schools were safe places Skiba & Knesting,
(2001). Furthermore, tragic random incidents like the Columbine High School shooting added
pressure to use exclusionary practices as a safety tool.
School safety has been a debated issue for decades without improvement. Suspensions
and expulsions contribute to adverse behavioral and academic outcomes for students. Skiba and
Knesting, (2001) found that Zero Tolerance measures used in school discipline is perhaps the
most misused disciplinary solution. For example, the one size fits all consequences of suspension
and expulsion to send a message to students has not made schools safer or absent of random
active shooter scenarios. However, research on this issue had produced generalized information
on Zero Tolerance measures. Missing were the research studies of Zero Tolerance exclusionary
consequences that result in dire student behavior outcomes in schools across America. Moreover,
research to document the unintended consequences of severe punishment for all offenders,
especially those that have been historically marginalized was needed. Skiba and Knesting,
(2001) found through their studies that Zero Tolerance does not resolve the problem of school
safety, but there is a need for alternative interventions to address student behavior and school
safety.
Exclusionary Discipline Practices
According to Noguera (1995) using suspension as a means of student discipline may lead
to more violence. For example, students who are not connected to their school exhibit anger
towards school administration causing further isolation. Moreover, the drop-out rate for students

20
suspended once is three times than students who have never been suspended. Noguera (1995)
found that in order for schools to be safe places, a strong sense of community must be built from
within by the school staff. Through his work with the Oakland Unified School District, Noguera
(1995) found that school cultures that focused on building student relationships did not have a
high crime rate or experience random violence. Students liked attending school and were able to
form personal connections to a teacher or counselor who they trusted.
Effectiveness of Zero Tolerance
Skiba and Peterson, (1999) found that the Zero Tolerance assumption of creating safer
schools does not exist in the field of study. Furthermore, Skiba and Knesting (2001);Skiba and
Peterson (1999) found that Zero Tolerance policies resulted in the disproportionate rate of
suspension and expulsion of historically marginalized populations. The American Psychological
Association Zero Tolerance Task Force (2008), evaluated the evidence regarding Zero Tolerance
policies. The ZT Task Force (2008) found that there is a lack of data that supports the use of this
exclusionary discipline practice. In fact, the opposite was occurring. The ZT task force (2008)
found that students most often historically marginalized populations were excluded from school
for minor offenses and became emotionally detached from the school bond between teacher and
student. In addition, schools with reported higher rates of suspension did not result in higher
rates of safety. Furthermore, the ZT Task Force (2008) highlights the importance of searching for
models that foster safe school cultures. The results from studies show promise of practices that
have three levels of intervention. The study concluded that these models needed to be
comprehensive in their scope.
According to Duncan, (U.S. Department of Education, 2014), the United States,
Secretary of Education claimed that school discipline in America was neither “applied equitably

21
nor effectively” and it was time to change. In Secretary Duncan’s joint “Dear Colleague Letter”
along with Catherine Hamon and Jocelyn Samuels, heads of Civil Rights Offices, at the
Department of Education and the Department of Justice, the letter instructs school districts across
America on how to discipline students without discrimination (U.S. Department of Education,
2014). For example, Secretary Duncan (U.S. Department of Education, 2014) stated that
“exclusionary practices” were applied “disproportionately”, noting that one southern state’s data
was six times greater than schools in the north. Furthermore, Secretary Duncan pointed out that
in 2009-10 the suspension rate in South Carolina was 12.7% compared to North Dakota’s
suspension rate of 2.2% (U.S. Department of Education, 2014). Secretary Duncan (U.S.
Department of Education, 2014) stated schools should provide levels of support and intervention
equitably for all students. Moreover, Secretary Duncan (U.S. Department of Education, 2014)
stated that students should attend schools with positive school climates where all student
behavior and academic needs are met.
PBIS History and Foundations
The constructs of PBIS began in the 1960s as a method of intervention with behaviorally
challenged students in special education. The methods and practice changed significantly with
the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and its later
reauthorization in 1997. Of importance in PBIS historical context is the inclusion of data on the
disproportionate discipline measures with regard to students from marginalized communities.
Today, PBIS is a framework creating a system designed for monitoring social behaviors and
academic outcomes as an entangled cooperative network of processes reliant on data and the
fidelity of implementation within each school from student through district level.

22
What Is PBIS?
The concepts, frameworks, and approaches that comprise PBIS allow institutions
utilizing the methodologies to create research-validated systems of response to behavioral issues
that create barriers to learning, in both achievement and social settings. The concepts of PBIS
encompass addressing school-wide, classroom, as well as individual behavior issues while
working within the constraints of school/district/state policies & procedures (Sugai, et al., 2000).
The PBIS approach enables these entities to define and operationalize the policies and
procedures to meet the needs of all students using substantiated approaches to behavior
management.
The PBIS approaches give latitude to the schools/districts/states to create systems that fit
the individual teaching and learning environments (Sugai, et al., 2000). The earliest official use
of PBIS came about as a response to the identification, implementation, and documentation of
students with behavioral disorders. The early use pushed educators and providers towards a more
prevention-based process over the intervention/punishment model. (Sugai et al, 2012).
Critical documentation began pointing towards a disproportionate number of disciplinary
measures in the direction of minority students. The disproportionality focus was not on the
system but, individually focused, placing the problem in the hands of the teachers, families, and
students creating a process that further enhances the disparity in educational outcomes for
marginalized students (Bal, 2016). PBIS has a long and involved history moving from its original
intent of aiding students with disabilities to the individuals with behavior difficulties, both of
which incurred difficulties accessing learning. Keeping the historical intent in mind, PBIS has
moved forward to address student equity and access, as well as serve school communities to

23
address the students from social-emotional wellness to achievement in both the academic and
social settings.
PBIS: Decades of Change
PBIS is not a new concept, as its earliest semblances occurred in the 1960’s and 1970’s
through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and was not meant for use
strictly within schools. During the early 1970’s, IDEA was originally called the Education for
All Handicapped Children Act. In November of 1975, President Gerald Ford signed this act into
place establishing a “landmark civil rights measure” that would create greater opportunity for
children with disabilities in all areas to positively contribute to their communities (IDEA, 2019).
In the 1980’s, efforts were shifted towards more preventative intervention away from the
earlier punitive reaction based response to discipline, especially in the overidentified populations
(Sugai et al,, 2012). In 1990, under President George Bush, IDEA was officially coined to
replace the original Education for All Handicapped Children Act. In 1997, under President Bill
Clinton, IDEA was reauthorized to give students specific support, especially those with
diagnosed behavior disorders. During this decade, PBIS was officially noticed as a means to
introduce the newest framework for implementation (Sugai et al., 2012).
Beginning in 2000 to current, many aspects of the earliest pieces of IDEA significantly
changed. PBIS moved to includes the reference of school-wide positive behavior supports, and is
supported by a professional organization to assist more than 16,000 schools who are
implementing or in the process of implementing the PBIS framework and methodologies. The
support includes professional development opportunities, professional presentations, national
publications, as well as technical assistance in the utilization of the data collection technologies.
(Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). The origin of PBIS was from PBS, which was simply Positive

24
Behavior Support. PBIS emerged from three sectors: applied behavior analysis,
normalization/inclusion movement, and person-centered values, all originating within the realm
of operant psychology. The original goal of PBS was to give identified individuals direction and
to aid the stakeholders involved (all inclusive: self, parents, friends, teachers, employers)
opportunities to enjoy their life or to have an improved life. (Carr et al., 2002).
Utilizing data from more than four decades of research and findings, practitioners are
able to implement and manage the PBIS system components to create better social and learning
environments. Although PBIS has become a framework for solution based interventions, it is not
the end-all for discipline and behavior corrections.
PBIS Misconceptions-Reshaping education: What PBIS Can and Cannot Do
PBIS itself is not an intervention or practice and cannot change behavior, but acts as a
framework from which behavior and other indicators of success within the educational system
can be implemented with fidelity and endurance over time. The indicators of success include
both academic achievement and a positive school climate (Safran & Oswald, 2003; Sugai &
Simonsen, 2012).
A number of misconceptions exist regarding PBIS and its effect on intrinsic motivation
through rewards. Rewards are not part of PBIS. Instead, feedback informs individuals of proper
behavioral actions and their consequences (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). As stated before, PBIS is
not new and came about through IDEA in the early 60s and is a seaming of behavioral theories
along with prevention and implementation science to guide schools in meeting the needs of all of
their students (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). Both PBIS and MTSS support behavior which in turn
support the academic achievements of students and are not separated into two separate domains
of application (Sugai, & Simonsen, 2012).

25
PBIS requires a collaborative effort between all stakeholders within the education system.
Archival data is utilized to set foundations for behavioral guidelines. PBIS must utilize informed
research to make decisions in program changes with efficacy. Students will change their
behaviors, thus affecting change in other areas of school climate when they are motivated to do
so by observing and experiencing the support of the faculty and staff (Safran & Oswald, 2003).
The collaborative nature of PBIS moves the education system towards positive change when
implementation is done with fidelity through consistency and constancy. Understanding how
these changes occur, and the circumstances under which they do, is evidenced through a
promising practice evaluation and study.
PBIS and the Positive Effects of a Promising Practice
Promising practices set benchmark values for implementation within the school setting
for utilization across the community of practitioners. “Best practices” is the term most often used
synonymously with promising practices, however this is a misnomer in relation to the promising
practice concepts (Leseure et al., 2004). Promising practices can best be described as “a
collection of ideas, values, procedures, techniques and tools, forming a coherent, integrated
whole commonly repeatable in configurations of distinct elements” (Leseure et al., 2004).
Identifying the best practice within a promising practice study is the most important
benchmarking step for participants in any program. Promising practice literature utilized within
the business world to determine best practice can also be used in an educational setting when
evaluating the methods in the classic setting (Leseure et al., 2004).
Promising practices in an educational setting begin when students see their teachers
create caring environments. For students, this environment has the structure that supports

26
learning and is replete with clear and high expectations. Students in these settings are more likely
to be connected to school (Leseure et al., 2004).
Teacher variables such as the types of praise and their frequency, along with teacher
enthusiasm, questioning types, answer wait time, and the providing frequent opportunities to
respond (OTR), will have noteworthy effects on student performance (Regan & Michaud, 2011).
In order to increase student readiness for learning, creating a safe and positive environment both
within the classroom and school-wide is essential. This preemptive and preventive practice may
also play a significant role in reducing problem behavior (Sugai & Horner, 2006). Having a
common language for teachers and students works to create a positive and safe environment.
This includes a regular system that recognizes positive behaviors while simultaneously not
tolerating behaviors that are violent and disruptive. As educators mitigate or eliminate the
behavioral risk factors, while enhancing the protective factors, academic gains are duly noted
(Sugai & Horner, 2006). This combination allows students a predictable space whereby they are
free to learn unimpeded (Cressey et al., 2018). Creating these environments will not be simple,
nor will it come fast. Schools must commit 3-5 years to come to fruition (Cressey et al., 2018).
With PBIS in place, educators, school teams, and administration have the tools and
systems to organize the necessary resources and supports to effectively implement and sustain a
strong PBIS framework. Once the interventions and practices are in place and established, the
effects on the overall school climate have been shown to be positive (Sugai & Horner, 2006).
Studying a promising practice and disseminating the applications and implementations, aids in
promoting methods to improve the overall climate of the educational institution (Sugai &
Horner, 2006). The implementation of a promising practice in PBIS is foundational to resolving
many of the global issues of discipline caused by different social constructs.

27
Current State of Intervention Systems to Support Students
With the introduction of Assembly Bill 104, Chapter 13, Statutes of 2015, money was
appropriated to the development, alignment, and improvement of systems of academic and
behavioral supports. Soon after, other initiatives increased funding to local education agencies to
establish and align school-wide data-driven systems of academic and behavioral support to meet
the needs of California’s diverse learners in the most inclusive environment. Thus, providing a
MTSS became the focus for school districts.
MTSS
MTSS is a framework that provides systems of support to the whole child. It begins with
the belief that the person is separate from the negative behavior and continues with a data-driven
plan (Brown-Chidsey & Bickford, 2016). According to the California Department of Education
(2018) MTSS promotes an alignment of initiatives, supports, and resources to educate students
of all ability levels. No longer is there a sole focus of at-risk students, however there is an effort
to continue developing the skills of gifted and high achieving students as well. To meet the needs
of all students, it is necessary to be intentional with data-driven supports and interventions
implemented. The use of universal screening systems for academic, behavior, and social-
emotional well-being are critical to analyzing the needs of students before implementing
interventions school-wide (Brown-Chidsey & Bickford, 2016).
Brown-Chidsey and Bickford (2016) posit that a school is more successful when there is
a well-defined multi-tiered system of support. In this research the authors discuss the role of
universal screenings as one that includes pre-planning what materials will be needed, creating
appropriate schedules, and providing the necessary training to teachers to successfully administer
universal screeners in the classroom.

28
After students are screened for baseline data, it is necessary to begin the process of
problem-solving. According to Bransford and Stein (1984) and Deno (2013), found in Brown-
Chidsey and Bickford (2016), there are five problem-solving steps in MTSS referred to as
IDEAL. That is, it is essential to identify the problem (I), define the problem (D), explore
alternate interventions (E), apply the selected intervention (A), and look at the effects (L).
Following IDEAL, there must be progress-monitoring including a regular and systematic
collection of data for student progress.
Understanding student data is critical to the progress and success of students. Brown-
Chidsey and Bickford (2016) discuss the importance of utilizing three data points organized and
understood by all team members. Using three data points provides the team with a baseline,
informs the team of the frequency of the interventions and its stability, as well as demonstrates to
the team positive or negative trends (Brown-Chidsey & Bickford, 2016). Throughout this
process, the team must decide what behavior or skill should be measured and agree to monitor
students at least every three-four weeks, however, keeping in mind that if students are in Tier 2
and Tier 3, they should be monitored more frequently.
MTSS is a collaborative approach to providing all students support in academic and
social and emotional learning. The team must be intentional with its interventions as well as with
its progress monitoring. Critical to its success is the alignment of supports and resources from the
site level to the district level. While MTSS were derived from RTI, one of the major differences
is the addition of monitoring the progress of all students, including gifted and higher achievers.
RTI began as a system of support for only those students struggling academically and
behaviorally.

29
Response to Instruction and Intervention (RTI2)
RTI provides a framework with tiered support systems for struggling students. California,
in particular, strives to provide Response to Instruction and Intervention (RTI2) with its addition
of prevention strategies. According to the California Department of Education (2018), RTI had
its inception in the reauthorization of the IDEA 2004 related to the determination of a specific
learning disability and other legislation. RTI and RTI2 are processes that utilize all resources in a
school and school district collaboratively to create a single, well-integrated system of instruction
and interventions informed by student outcome data.
Believing every student can achieve through high-quality instruction and early
intervention prevention and research-based behavioral strategies are critical to the overall
progress of students. Schools must use research-based interventions to support struggling
students to close the achievement gap and research-based positive behavioral supports for
achieving important social and learning outcomes (California Department of Education, 2018).
According to the Education Policy Center at American Institutes for Research (n.d.)
schools that implement RTI with fidelity begins with leadership creating a team with universal
beliefs and protocols. Through data analysis, struggling students are identified and appropriate
interventions are implemented to mitigate achievement gaps. School leadership continually
monitors students, coaches teachers, and evaluates students’ success. Knowing when and how
frequently to monitor students is critical to the success of students as everyone continues to work
as a team to meet every individuals’ needs.
RTI or RTI2 begins with providing students with a high-quality education, identifying
struggling students, and planning research-based interventions. Taking a collaborative approach,
students receive interventions and are monitored frequently before evaluating them for special

30
education. Since the inception of RTI2 and MTSS, student access and expectations have
improved school culture and climate
The Role of the Teacher
Written by Katie Gerrans

The teachers are the spokes in the wheels of PBIS. The teachers model the appropriate
behaviors and attitudes that make PBIS possible. These individuals display high levels of self-
efficacy and, as such, convey to students the rationale for positive behavior to create individuals
who, when working together, improve the overall school climate and influence outcomes in
achievement.
A teacher’s self-efficacy at schools implementing PBIS affects classroom and school
climate outcomes. The ability to incorporate specific strategies to avoid exclusionary practices,
which have shown to lead to lower order and higher disciplinary measures, have been shown to
promote the positive classroom climate (Mitchell & Bradshaw, 2013). Teachers with low self-
efficacy are unable to adapt to the needs of students with discipline issues, creating the
unwelcoming classroom leading to the disruptive atmosphere (Mitchell & Bradshaw, 2013).
The level of self-efficacy is correlated with classroom teachers who use high rates of
general praise in the classroom management. Praise is central to support PBIS and necessary for
the well-being of the teacher. Research points to teachers who are unable to balance disciplinary
actions have higher rates of emotional exhaustion (Reinke et al.,2013).
The PBIS choice requires the coordinated efforts of the stakeholders in the design and
implementation of the process, which is elevated when the teacher stakeholder group has the
choice of the type of intervention mode they wish to employ within individual classrooms (Ennis
et al., 2016). Utilizing the contingency model of intervention allows the classroom teacher to

31
enforce policies with personal preferences in application of PBIS, thereby increasing the efficacy
of the implementation both from a personal perspective as well as from the perspective of
student response (Ennis et al., 2016). The individual contingency choices must increase the
overall fit & validity of the intervention implementation.
In sum, in order for this stakeholder group to be successful, they must have strong self-
efficacy in the application of the intervention, keeping the various sociocultural aspects of their
students in mind while being self-aware of their own personal biases in the PBIS process.
Although the teachers’ role is the spoke for the process of PBIS, it is the coach’s role that creates
the wheel of support and gives solidarity to the teacher stakeholders for their own progress and
success.
The Role of Coaches
Written by Carmen Madrigal

Coaches are an integral piece to the overall fidelity in implementation of PBIS. Without
coaches, PD training may not be applied to its full potential. Teachers require the follow-up of
coaches to ensure students receive the highest quality instruction, research-based strategies, and
evidence-based interventions. Through collaboration, a positive school climate will prevail.
Systems: Foundations to Support Teachers
It is critical to the overall implementation of PBIS for teachers to have the support of
coaches to ensure the systems of support for students continue to be effective. According to
Hershfeldt et al., (2012) understanding the culture of the school is critical to establishing a PBIS
plan. Building rapport, trust, and collaboration is essential to the work coaches do with teachers.
They must be able to facilitate teachers to move from frustration to focus. Separating the person
from the act is necessary to provide students successful interventions. Coaches must be present

32
in classrooms to support teachers and model for teachers how to use data to inform practice
(Hershfeldt et al., 2012)
Vygotsky ‘s sociocultural learning theory (1978) states that individuals embrace new
information through both learning and practice. Coaches provide the opportunity to learn in
context ensuring that best practices are implemented for the success of students. Sociocultural
learning theory provides the foundation for side-by-side coaching as it relates to PBIS. Through
data collected from direct observation, coaches can provide specific feedback to teachers to
improve on the strategies being implemented in the classroom (Stormont & Reinke, 2012).
According to Stormont and Reinke (2012) collaborative coaching allows for the coach
and teacher to monitor data, implement high-quality strategies, problem-solve, and adapt when
necessary. It is vital that the coach is aware of the available resources, values, and skills of the
teacher with whom they work. A collaborative partnership makes successful planning and
implementation of PBIS most likely.
In short, the purpose of coaching is to provide teachers with feedback in the context of
their classrooms to support students. It promotes fidelity of PBIS implementation. Social-cultural
learning theory provides the rationale for school districts to allocate resources to provide teachers
with PBIS coaches.
Data: Professional Development
Professional development must be followed with coaching support. It cannot stand alone.
Schnorr (2013) discusses the many facets of coaching. Multi-level coaching is a process that
includes (a) high-quality PD, (b) follow-up supervisory coaching, and (c) side-by-side coaching
for teachers who demonstrate the need for additional support. Supervisory coaching is when the
coach observes the teacher using the new strategy and collects data to later provide specific

33
feedback. Side-by-side coaching is when the coach is in the classroom with the teacher providing
immediate feedback and intervening by modeling the new strategy when needed. Just like RTI
or RTI2 provides three levels of support to students, in multi-level coaching there are three levels
of support to the teachers (level 1: in-service training, level 2: supervisory coaching, level 3:
side-by-side coaching).
Professional development is integral to the fidelity of MTSS. Coaches must have
extensive knowledge of the subject matter or research-based strategies and interventions.
According to March et al., (2016) there is evidence that continuity in coaches increases fidelity
in interventions to support students. MTSS requires PD and multi-level coaching. Thus, teachers
require scaffolded coaching support in their efforts to provide interventions to students. MTSS
are effective when PD is followed by all personnel being supported in their endeavors to promote
a positive school climate.
Practices: Selecting and Organizing Data
If novices are to become experts, it is critical to know how they process information and
learn. Ambrose et al., (2010) discuss the importance of connecting information to prior
knowledge for the novice to have the ability to make connections to new learning. A novice
needs to develop rich, meaningful knowledge structures to become experts. Organizing
information into categories is beneficial to understanding what is important and using tools such
as a graphic organizer can facilitate analyzing information to create meaning.
Information processing theory (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006) explains how we process
information using sensory memory, working memory, and long-term memory. This theory
explains the ability to process the data being collected, organize it in a meaningful way, and
determine the best course of action. PBIS coaches must understand how teachers learn to assist

34
them in analyzing data to determine the best research-based strategies to implement in the
classroom. Understanding how adults process information leads to better coaching.
The Role of Administrators
Written by Lisa Minami-Lin

According to Fullan (2007), school administrators lead change efforts as “transformation
agents” focusing on the culture of their schools. Specifically, how school administrators respond
to the demands of federal and state mandates directly affect student outcomes. Moreover,
according to Sugai and Simonsen (2012) site administrators who focus on school climate
transformation will change their student outcomes. Critically, the site administrator's role is to
define clear and purposeful vision and mission statements to promote a safe school culture with
positive behavior outcomes for all students. Dufour and Eaker (1999) claim that without a
focused vision, the staff will do what they individually believe is the right thing to do. Therefore,
site administrators distribute leadership within the site organizational system to include coaches,
a leadership team, and inclusion of the staff in decision making. As a result, the administrator
develops a school culture in which initiative sustainability occurs due to the organization of the
site system.
The school site’s organizational culture affects performance at all levels within the
system through the knowledge and skill and motivation levels of its employees. Horner and
Sugai (2015) acknowledges that site administrators have the most impact on school climate. The
first action that the site administrator contributes to the success of PBIS implementation is to
develop and maintain a clear and compelling focus on positive student behavior outcomes that is
known to all school site stakeholders (Dufour and Eaker, 1999). Furthermore, site administrators
organize their school climate in a manner that promotes collective efforts of all stakeholders. In

35
practice, school climate transformation requires that the site administrator selects proven multi-
tiered supports in concert with the determination of the site PBIS implementation readiness.
According to Dufour and Eaker (1999) in order to combat poor school culture, site
administrators cannot operate in silos. Site administrators lead the PBIS implementation through
creating systems that coordinate and prioritize the development of the PBIS implementation
systems which include policy alignment, visibility, technical, and political support. Therefore,
site administrators determine the drivers of PBIS implementation through the establishment of
distributed leadership (Horner & Sugai, 2015). Specifically, the site PBIS leadership team has
site decision making authority. By establishing this empowered collective group of teacher
leaders, site administrators use their collective beliefs in their efficacy (Bandura, 1977) to move
the school culture forward during PBIS implementation. Accordingly, the PBIS leadership team
establishes PBIS site agreements with students and staff. The PBIS leadership team works
collectively on behalf of the staff. As a result teachers have been given both choice and
empowerment in generating the support systems.
In sum, the role of the site administrator in the PBIS framework implementation is to
develop their school climate policies and processes for the purpose of sustainability with or
without the same leader. According to Horner and Sugai (2015), site administrators who focus on
school climate transformation will change student outcomes. Therefore, site administrators who
secure the political, resource, and policy support while building collective and distributive
stakeholder leadership establish the school culture foundation critical to implementation fidelity
and the sustainability of the PBIS framework at a school site.

36
Conceptual Framework
This is a collaborative action research project using Clark and Estes’ (2008) performance
analysis model. The model helps clarify organizational goals and identify both current and
preferred performance. The gap analysis promising practices framework (Clark & Estes, 2008)
was utilized to identify primary reasons for the promising practice of PBIS. Research-based
approaches and how they meaningfully identify the influences in the gap are presented to align
proposed solutions.
Adaptation of the Gap Analysis Framework as a Promising Practice
This promising practice study is adapted from the original gap analysis framework of
Clark and Estes (2008) influenced by Rueda (2011). The study focuses on the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational culture and climate to find measurable outputs along with goals
which contribute to high achievement in response to changes. The lens was one of influences to
identify the stakeholders’ promising practices. Analysis of the data can aid like-organizations’
promising practices.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Written by Lisa Minami-Lin

Knowledge and Skills Influences
Using Krathwohl’s (2002) taxonomy, the assumed influences are categorized for each
stakeholder by knowledge types: declarative factual, declarative conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive. The literature establishes assumed knowledge influences affecting site
administrators. The four types of knowledge are necessary for learning (Anderson & Krathwohl,
2001; Krathwohl, 2002).

37
Declarative factual knowledge influences. Declarative factual knowledge involves
recalling what is previously learned to process new learning. It is the knowledge identified to
solve problems within a domain (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001; Rueda, 2011). Site
administrators must know the purpose and expected outcomes of the framework.
Declarative conceptual knowledge influences. Declarative conceptual knowledge
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001) involves the site administrators’ access to schemas, models, and
theories in their applications of PBIS. I\For example, it is classifying and categorizing the
learned aspects of its theories (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Moreover, based on the literature
(PBIS, 2018a), it is assumed that site administrators have the knowledge to direct, coordinate,
and institutionalize PBIS practices school-wide. This requires the site administrators to identify
students who need the most support to be academically, socially, and emotionally successful.
Furthermore, this also requires stakeholders to analyze data to identify strengths and challenges
for goal-setting to ensure promising solutions. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) recommended
using inquiry methods requiring participants to demonstrate interrelationships among basic
elements within a larger structure to enable them to function together.
Procedural knowledge influences. Procedural knowledge involves site administrators
knowing the steps to complete a task. Specifically, it is also the ability to chunk a complex task
into incremental steps (Clark & Estes, 2008). Moreover, the procedural knowledge site
administrators need to perform well is how to analyze data to create goals along with an action
plan outlining the progression for implementation, including knowing the skills required to
implement PBIS with fidelity. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) recommended using inquiry
methods requiring participants to demonstrate how to do something. This knowledge of skills
and procedures including techniques, methods, and criteria for using the skills and methods

38
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Site administrators know how to evaluate teacher
implementation of the PBIS framework with fidelity through the use of formative and summative
assessment tools (Algozzine et al, 2010). The data that the assessments provide will be used to
evaluate the effect that the PBIS framework had on positive student behavior outcomes.
Metacognitive knowledge. Metacognitive knowledge is being aware of one’s own
cognitive process (Clark & Estes, 2008). Site administrators must reflect on their own
comprehension of PBIS implementation and data-driven results. The fidelity and sustainability of
the PBIS implementation are contingent on the site administrators’ understanding and reflecting
on their personal role in implementation and fidelity. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001)
recommended using inquiry methods requiring participants to demonstrate knowledge of
cognition as well as awareness and knowledge of their own strategies for learning and thinking.
This requires site administrators to reflect and become more aware of one’s own beliefs,
knowledge of planning strategies, and knowledge of progress monitoring strategies. Site
administrators reflect on the PBIS implementation evaluation data. Table 2 shows the knowledge
influences and literature for administrators.
Table 2
Summary of Administrators’ Knowledge Influences
Assumed Knowledge Influences Literature
Declarative Factual
Site administrators know the components of PBIS.
Site administrators know the district's goals and objectives for PBIS
implementation.
Algozzine et al.,
2010
Horner & Sugai,
(2015)

39
Assumed Knowledge Influences Literature
Declarative Conceptual
Site administrators know the guiding principles of implementing the
PBIS framework.

Algozzine et al.,
(2010)
Horner & Sugai
(2015)
Procedural
Site administrators know how to evaluate the PBIS components at their
school site.
Algozzine et al.,
(2010);
Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001;
Horner & Sugai
(2015)
Metacognitive
Site administrators reflect on the PBIS implementation evaluation data.

Clark & Estes
(2008);Mitchell &
Bradshaw (2013)

Motivation
According to Clark and Estes (2008), there is a distinction between knowledge and
motivation. The researchers defined knowledge as knowing what to do based on life experiences
and motivation as the choice to start on a task, persistence in continuing the task, and the
application of mental effort to complete the task (Clark & Estes, 2008). Deciding to start on a
goal is referred to as an active choice. Active choice (Clark & Estes, 2008) is intentionally taking
steps towards achieving a goal even when the goal is not created by the learner. It is the learner
stepping out of the planning phase to the implementation phase.
Stakeholder/topic-specific factors. Persistence of goals is required when the learner is
distracted by other pertinent tasks (Clark & Estes, 2008). A learner must be focused and not
easily distracted as he or she works towards the completion of the goal. A learner must be
cognitively aware of what is needed to foster his or her own learning to stay motivated on the

40
task. It is expected that the learner would encounter difficulties and obstacles to achieving the
goal. However, as the learner gains confidence, this should reinforce the mental effort being
projected to continue in a task. According to Clark and Estes (2008), overconfidence may cause
mistakes to happen more frequently, and a balance of mental effort is required for success (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
Motivation is an internal process that initiates and sustains goal-directed behavior (Clark
& Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011). The literature establishes a set of assumed
motivation influences that affect stakeholders as they implement the PBIS framework. For
purposes of this study, it is the researchers’ that the stakeholders have actively chosen to promote
critical behaviors to ensure the sustainability of PBIS at VUSD (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Value. Research (Clark & Estes, 2008; Eccles, 2006) discussed the influence value has
on motivation. If a learner values the task or feels there is value in completing the task for the
tangible reward or benefits, then she or he is motivated to complete the task or goal. Goals are
motivating when they are clear, attainable, and challenging but doable. It is imperative that
teachers value implementing PBIS strategies, PBIS coaches value supporting teachers in their
implementation of the framework, and site administrators value partnering with district PBIS
leaders to align site PBIS goals with district PBIS goals.
Self-efficacy. Pajares (2006) defined self-efficacy as individuals’ self-perception of their
ability to complete a task or goal. Pajares (2006) also discussed the effect of a learner’s
confidence level on motivation. When the individual is confident, he or she perseveres through a
task (Pajares, 2006). However, if an individual is overconfident, minimal effort is exerted,
resulting in errors or lack of achievement. Assessing the motivational influence of self-efficacy
requires an appraisal of one’s personal capabilities to execute the functions performed in a group

41
(Usher and Pajares, 2008). In this study, teachers were asked how confident they were in
implementing the PBIS framework effectively, and PBIS coaches were asked how confident they
are to apply the steps to mentor individual teachers and create PD. Site administrators were
asked how confident they were in taking steps to create systems to improve student behavior
outcomes.
Mood. Encouraging learners to set productive, challenging, and achievable goals for
themselves and encouraging self-evaluation contributes to achieving an organization’s goals
(Denler et al., 2009 ). The site administrators were interviewed to determine how they feel about
their individual roles in the full implementation of and fidelity to PBIS practices. Teachers
should feel positive about implementing the PBIS framework. PBIS coaches should feel positive
about supporting teachers, and administrators should feel positive about supporting the full PBIS
implementation at their sites.
Attribution. Weiner’s model of attribution theory states learners are affected by
environmental and personal factors (Anderman & Anderman, 2006). It is the belief that personal
experiences affect future decisions and will contribute to how individuals deal with a situation.
The theory is affected by the individual’s locus of control, the stability of the cause, and the
individual’s control or lack of control over the cause. Attributions are the amount of control an
individual or group believes they have on an outcome (Rueda, 2011). While Anderman and
Anderman (2009) attribute success or failure to effort, Clark and Estes (2008) attribute success
or failure of a goal to perceiving the goal is within or out of an individual’s control. This study
assessed whether teacher believed their students’ academic and behavioral success was in their
control, whether PBIS coaches believed their success in providing teachers the support they

42
needed was in their control, and whether administrators attribute success in implementing the
PBIS framework to their own leadership efforts.
Tables 3 show the influences and the method of assessments for value, self-efficacy,
mood, and attribution for administrators.
Table 3
Summary of Motivation Influences for Administrators
Assumed Motivation Influences Literature
Value
Site administrators value the PBIS program support the
district office leaders provide to site administrators
Clark & Estes, (2008);
Eccles, (2006);
Horner & Sugai (2015)

Self-Efficacy

Site administrators are confident in creating PBIS goals to
improve student behavior outcomes.
Clark & Estes, (2008);
Pajares (2006)
Mood
Site administrators feel positive about creating PBIS
implementation systems to support teachers and coaches.
Denler et al., (2009)
Leseure, Bauer, Birdi, Neely,
& Denyer (2004)
Attribution
Site administrators attribute their success or failure in the
implementing PBIS to their own effort.
Anderman & Anderman,
(2006);
Clark & Estes, 2008;
Sugai et al., (2000)

Organization
According to Clark and Estes (2008), time, money, and people are the resources required
to meet performance goals. When there is an alignment of policies, processes, and procedures,
there is minimal conflict, and individuals are influenced to meet their performance goals (Clark
& Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) described the concept of culture

43
using two units of analysis. Their framework consists of two key ideas: cultural settings and
cultural models. Their research emphasizes school reform requires identifying cultural models
and settings. Resources, policies, processes, procedures, and culture are critical components of
meeting an organization’s performance goals.
Resources. Clark and Estes (2008) discussed the allocation of the right resources to an
organization’s overall performance goal. Organizations must provide the time, money, and
personnel to their employees to meet goals. VUSD must commit to providing teachers PD to
support full implementation of PBIS and provide PBIS coaches the resources to support teachers.
Administrators then must align the site budget to the PBIS initiative which is followed by
focused resource allocation for PBIS sustainability.
Policies and procedures. When policies, processes, and procedures in an organization
are in conflict with its culture or when there is a lack of alignment, there is a high probability that
the organization’s performance goals will not be met (Clark & Estes, 2008). However, minimal
conflict and alignment of policies, processes, and procedures can influence stakeholders’
progress toward performance goals (Rueda, 2011). Teachers were asked if procedures to support
students’ academic and behavioral success are aligned with school and district policies. PBIS
coaches were asked if the procedures assisted them in their efforts to support teachers that are
aligned with school and district policies. Administrators were asked questions about the
alignment of policies, processes, and procedures.
Cultural setting. Cultural settings are exhibited when two or more people come together
to accomplish a task. In the classroom, cultural settings include students collaborating to achieve
the objective. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2011) noted a setting is created when people
collaborate on something they value. At VUSD, there is a culture of collaboration, positive

44
attitudes, and commitment to the full implementation of and fidelity to PBIS. There is
cooperation from PBIS coaches and site administrators to ensure resources and support is
allocated to teachers to fully implement PBIS strategies in their classroom. VUSD recognizes the
administrators, teachers, PBIS coaches, and staff for their efforts to improve school climate
through the full implementation of the PBIS framework.
Cultural models. Cultural models are one’s mental schema related to who one is and
how one should act in a setting or situation. It is one’s personal ideas of how the world works or
how one thinks it should be. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2011) discussed people are mentally
shaped by their home environment or upbringing. Cultural models are behaviors individuals do
not have to think about and naturally exhibit. Thus, cultural models happen over time. They
develop as groups of individuals share experiences and communicate with each other. It is
difficult to recognize cultural models unless placed in a setting with others who exhibit models
of culture different from one’s own.
Tables 4 show the influences and the method of assessment for resources, policies,
processes, procedures, and culture for site administrators.

45
Table 4
Summary of Organization Influences for Administrators
Assumed Organizational Influences Literature
Resources
Site administrators secure resources and support for the
PBIS implementation.

Site administrators have time to implement the PBIS
framework at their sites.
Clark & Estes (2008);
Horner & Sugai (2015)

Clark & Estes (2008);
Horner & Sugai (2015)
Policies, Processes, & Procedures
Site administrators align site PBIS policies, process and
procedures to the district’s policies, process, and
procedures.

Clark & Estes (2008);
Horner & Sugai (2015);
Rueda (2011)
Culture
There is a district culture of commitment that supports
school sites with a common multi-tiered system of
positive behavior support.
Clark & Estes (2008);
Gallimore and Goldenberg (2011);
Horner & Sugai (2015)

This promising practice study utilizes knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO)
influences (Clark & Estes, 2008) that promote a positive school culture to set criteria for data
collection. These factors guide administrators at VUSD, as the study examined the noteworthy
improvement in school climate.

46
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Written by
Katie Gerrans, Carmen Madrigal, Lisa Minami-Lin
3

The purpose of this project is to examine the potential promising practices of seven
VUSD schools as they support a change to a positive school culture with a focus on student
engagement and conditions in school climate (PBIS, 2018a). While a comprehensive analysis
would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholders of focus in this study are
teachers, PBIS coaches and team members, and site administrators. As such, two questions
guided this study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that contribute to
teachers, coaches, and administrators’ successful implementation of PBIS to create a
positive school culture in the Valley Unified School District?
2. What recommendations in the area of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources may be appropriate for other schools attempting to promote a positive school
culture through the implementation of PBIS?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
This collaborative action research project used Clark and Estes (2008) systematic and
analytical performance method to clarify organizational goals and identify current and preferred
performance within an organization. A disconnect in the methods or misalignment in goals and
approaches will diminish the effectiveness of proposed solutions (Rueda, 2011). Figure 5 shows
the gap analysis framework as an improvement model.

3
This chapter was jointly written by the authors using a team approach. The authors are listed alphabetically and
reflect equal contribution.

47

Figure 5. Gap analysis process. Reprinted from Clark and Estes, 2008.

Adaptation of the Gap Analysis Framework as a Promising Practice
In this study, the original gap analysis framework of Clark and Estes (2008) was adapted
and utilized as a promising practice. Rather than causes for performance gaps, the framework, as
adapted, focused on knowledge, motivation, and organization factors that contribute to the high
levels of goal achievement. As such, the researchers examined influences to identify promising
practices of the stakeholders in the study. Analysis of the data can thus contribute to
recommendations for similar settings. Utilizing both qualitative and quantitative methods of data
collection, the gap analysis framework served as a lens to analyze the promising practice of PBIS
framework implementation. Qualitative methods of data collection identify potential human
causes for promising practices and gaps as well as participants’ thoughts, feelings, and behaviors
(Clark & Estes, 2008; Patton, 2002). According to Creswell (2014), quantitative data instruments
include both open and close-ended questions along with multiple data sources to triangulate and
support the promising practice premise. This approach allows for the triangulation of data to
support internal validity (Creswell, 2014). The elements contributing to the promising practices
were strategically examined based on participants’ KMO structures.

48
Assessment of Performance Influences
Written by Lisa Minami-Lin

The literature identified the KMO influences (Clark & Estes, 2008) guiding the
administrators who implemented the PBIS intervention strategies at VUSD. The purpose of this
project was to analyze promising practices of administrators at seven schools which enabled
them to reach the organizational performance goal of sustained high-fidelity implementation of
the PBIS framework.
The promising practice study examined the noteworthy improvement in school climate
due to the full implementation of and fidelity to the PBIS framework. As an organization, VUSD
provided resources, policies, processes, procedures, and a positive culture for administrators to
support coaches, coaches to support teachers, and teachers to implement the guiding principles of
PBIS, resulting in a positive school culture with a focus on using school-wide and classroom
research-based positive behavioral supports for achieving social and learning outcomes.
Knowledge Assessment
The literature established assumed knowledge influences affecting stakeholders. The
research described knowledge assessments necessary for learning by renaming and reorganizing
them using Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001; Krathwohl, 2002). Krathwohl’s
(2002) taxonomy characterized the knowledge types as declarative factual, declarative conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive. The researcher identified the influences on the site administrator
stakeholder group in these knowledge areas.
The methods of assessment for knowledge were a survey, an interview and document
analysis. Both survey and interview options addressed the aspects of declarative and factual
knowledge, procedural knowledge, and metacognitive knowledge. The survey utilized multiple

49
types of questions: Likert scale questions and multiple-choice questions. The stakeholder
interviews further assessed site administrator’s knowledge. The participants discussed what they
knew about the PBIS guiding principles. Table 5 show the influences and the method of
assessments for factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and
metacognitive knowledge for the site administrator stakeholder group. The researcher identified
the influences for the site administrator group.
Table 5
Summary of Administrators’ Knowledge Influences and Method of Assessment
Assumed Knowledge
Influences
Survey Item Interview
Item
Document Item
Factual
Site administrators
know the components
of PBIS.
What are the four components of
PBIS? Check all that apply.

(a) outcomes, data, systems,
practices*
(b) goals, data, support, review
(c) progress monitoring, support,
outcomes, review*
(d) data, analyze, monitor,
evaluate
Describe your
school’s use of
the PBIS
components.
District website:
County Office of
Education 2017-2018
PBIS Training Scope
and Sequence, PBIS
Context video, PBIS
Implementation: 2017-
2018 PBIS Scope and
Sequence, revealed the
PBIS components
information access
Site administrators
know the district's
goals and objectives
for the PBIS
implementation.
What are the district PBIS
implementation goals? Check all
that apply.

a) Reduce suspensions and
expulsions.*
b) Use data analysis to determine
fidelity implementation.
c) Provide students with a MTSS.
d) Provide equitable discipline
outcomes for all students.
Describe the
district’s
expectations
for data
analysis and
progress
monitoring of
the PBIS data.
District website: What
is the Purpose of
PBIS, School
Accountability Report
Card (SARC), CDE
Dashboard, and the
PBIS Progress
Monitoring video

50
Table 5, continued
Assumed Knowledge
Influences
Survey Item Interview
Item
Document Item
Conceptual
Site administrators
know the guiding
principles of
implementing the PBIS
framework.
The survey did not question this
influence.

Describe the
guiding
principles of
the PBIS
framework.
District website, PBIS
Progress Monitoring -
Teaching Behavioral
Expectations in
Context video and
PBIS Implementation
Scope and Sequence

Procedural
Site administrators
know how to evaluate
the PBIS components
at their school site.

A survey question was not asked. Describe
how you
evaluate
the PBIS
framework
component
s
District website, PBIS
Progress Monitoring -
Teaching Behavioral
Expectations in
Context video and
PBIS Implementation
Scope and Sequence,
County Office of
Education 2017-2018
PBIS Training Scope
and Sequence, PBIS
Context video, and
PBIS Implementation:
2017-2018 PBIS
Scope and Sequence
Metacognitive
Site administrators
reflect on the PBIS
implementation
evaluation data.

Multiple choice. Complete the
sentence. After collecting data, I…
a. Share the results with
coaches and the PBIS
leadership team.*
b. Analyze the data to make
sure that everyone is on the
same page and then share
results with administrators.
c. Provide protocols to use the
data analysis in the cycle of
inquiry.*
Tell me
how you
self-reflect
on the
PBIS
implementa
tion
evaluation
data.
District website, PBIS
Progress Monitoring -
Teaching Behavioral
Expectations in
Context video and
PBIS Implementation
Scope and Sequence,
County Office of
Education 2017-2018
PBIS Training Scope
and Sequence, PBIS
Context video, and
PBIS Implementation:
2017-2018 PBIS
Scope and Sequence

51
Motivation Assessment
The literature in Chapter Two established assumed motivation influences that affected
the administrators as they implemented the PBIS framework. According to Clark and Estes
(2008), motivation is the choice to start on a task, persistence in continuing the task, and the
application of mental effort to complete the task. Active choice is intentionally taking steps
towards achieving a goal even when the goal is not created by the learner (Clark & Estes, 2008).
This is the point when an individual steps out of the planning phase to start implementing the
organization’s performance goals. Persistence of goals (Clark & Estes, 2008) is required when an
individual is distracted by other pertinent tasks. According to Clark and Estes (2008), mental
effort requires that new knowledge be applied to novel situations to be successful. Thus,
motivation is an internal process that initiates and sustains goal-directed behavior (Clark & Estes,
2008; Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011).
Surveys and interviews were used to ask the administrators about the strengths and
challenges of students and staff as they relate to the full implementation of PBIS. Confidence
levels with best practices in the areas of personal approaches to behavioral management along
with PD were addressed. The survey addressed the factors contributing to success as the
stakeholder attributes the positive outcomes to their work in implementation. The survey utilized
Likert scale questions and multiple-choice questions. During the interview, the stakeholders
reflect and discuss how they felt about their individual responsibilities in the implementation of
the PBIS framework. The researcher identified the influences for the stakeholder in these
motivation areas that contributed to promising practices of the PBIS framework. Table 6 shows
the influences and the method of assessments for value, self-efficacy, mood, and attribution for
the stakeholder.

52
Table 6
Summary of PBIS Site Administrators’ Motivation Influences and Method of Assessment
Assumed Motivation
Influences
Survey Item Interview
Item
Document Item
Value
Site administrators value
the PBIS program
support the district office
leaders provide to site
administrators

On a scale of 1-5 (1-low and 5-high)
to what degree do you value the PBIS
program support the district office
leaders provide to site administrators?

Tell me why
you value
partnering
with the
District PBIS
leaders.
District website,
the PBIS
Implementation:
2017-2018 PBIS
Scope and
Sequence
Self-Efficacy
Site administrators are
confident in creating
PBIS goals to improve
student behavior
outcomes.

On a scale of 1–5 (1-low and 5-high)
When thinking about defining PBIS
goals how do you rate your
confidence in doing the following
right now?
1. Setting specific targeted goals.
2. Aligning the targeted goal budget to
goal actions.
3. Allocating personnel to implement the
targeted goal.
4. Analyzing the benchmark data.
Tell me why
you are
confident in
creating
systems to
improve
student
behavior
outcomes.

District website,
School
Accountability
Report Card
(SARC) and
PBIS video
Mood
Site administrators feel
positive about creating
PBIS implementation
systems to support
teachers and coaches.

On a scale of 1–5 (1-low and 5-high)
how do you rate the following
statement. I feel positive about
supporting teachers and coaches with
the implementation of PBIS.

Describe your
feelings about
the systems of
support you
created.

District website,
LCAP video and
the PBIS videos,
PBIS Resources
for Coaches and
Teams, PBIS
Link to
Incentive/Reinfo
rcement System
and Link to
PBIS Apps

53
Table 6, continued
Assumed Motivation
Influences
Survey Item Interview
Item
Document Item

Attribution
Site administrators
attribute their success or
failure in the
implementing PBIS to
their own effort.
On a scale of 1-5 (1-low and 5-high)
how do you rate the following
statement: Site administrators attribute
their success or failure in the
implementing PBIS to their own effort.

Tell the PBIS
about the
reasons you
believe
attribute to the
successful
PBIS
implementation
at your site.

Organization/Culture/Context Assessment
The literature established a set of assumed organizational influences affecting the
stakeholders as they fully implemented PBIS with fidelity. Time, money, and people are required
to meet performance goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Individuals are influenced to meet their
performance goals when there is alignment in policies, processes, and procedures (Clark & Estes,
2008; Rueda, 2011). Gallimore and Goldenberg’s (2001) framework of culture consists of
cultural settings and cultural models emphasizing the importance of identifying them if school
reform is to be successful. To meet the organization’s performance goals, it is critical that
resources, policies, processes, procedures, and culture are addressed.
The survey and interview questions included the areas of resources and management of
resources, policies, processes, and procedures pertaining to the full implementation of PBIS.
The questions also included the areas of the culture of collaboration, positive attitudes, and
commitment to the full implementation of and fidelity to PBIS. As with the other sections of
knowledge and motivation, questions included Likert scale questions, and multiple-choice
responses. Stakeholders elaborated on how the policies, processes, and procedures aligned with

54
the culture of the district during the interview. Table 7 shows the influences and the method of
assessments for resources, policies, processes, procedures, and culture for the stakeholder.
Table 7
Summary of Administrators Organization Influences and Method of Assessment
Assumed
Organizational
Influences
Survey Item Interview Item Document Item
Resources
Site administrators
secure resources and
support for the PBIS
implementation.

Site administrators
have time to
implement the PBIS
framework at their
sites.

Using the scale provided rate
the following statements:
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neutral
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree

I have access to district
funding to fully support staff
PBIS professional
development.

I have access to district
funding to fully support
PBIS data analysis.

I have access to district
funding to fully support
PBIS personnel positions.

I have time to plan for the
PBIS initiative.

I have time to monitor the
goals for the PBIS initiative.

I have time to evaluate the
effectiveness of PBIS
strategies.

I have time to evaluate the
effectiveness of PBIS
professional development.
Tell me why you
secure support and
resources for the
PBIS
implementation.

Tell me how you
have time to
implement PBIS at
your site
LCAP video, the School
Accountability Report
Card (SARC), PBIS
videos and PBIS
Resources for coaches
and teams

55
Table 7, continued
Assumed
Organizational
Influences
Survey Item Interview Item Document Item
Policies, Processes,
& Procedures

Site administrators
align site PBIS
policies, processes
and procedures to the
district’s PBIS
policies, processes
and procedures.
No survey question for this
influence.
Tell me why PBIS
policy alignment
between the school
site and the district
office is important
to you.
District website, the
LCAP video, School
Accountability Report
Card (SARC), CDE
Dashboard
Culture
There is a district
culture of
commitment that
supports school sites
with a common
multi-tiered system
of positive behavior
support.
Using the scale provided rate
the following statements:

I am confident in aligning
my site goals with the
district's Local Control and
Accountability Plan (LCAP):
School Climate goal.

I am confident in aligning
my site PBIS goal actions
with the district's Local
Control and Accountability
Plan (LCAP): School
Climate plan actions.

I am confident in aligning
my site budget allocation
with the district's Local
Control and Accountability
Plan (LCAP): School
Climate budget.
Tell me why the
district’s culture of
commitment is
important to the
PBIS
implementation at
your site.

District website, district’s
Vision and Mission
statement, district’s Core
Values statement, LCAP
video, and the
Superintendent’s video

Participating Stakeholders and Sample Selection
The stakeholder groups of focus for this study consists of 11 administrators from the
seven identified schools. These schools demonstrate how effective changes in school climate and
student engagement affect student behavior outcomes. The schools have shown positive trends

56
making them models of a promising practice for other institutions to emulate in identifying
promising practices to change school culture.
Sampling
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), typical purposeful sampling is a subset of
population representatives in the context the researcher desires. A link was sent to all seven
schools to participate in an anonymous survey. Out of the seven schools, there were 11
respondents. Once the survey was completed, the respondent was invited to provide personal
information if they were willing to participate in a voluntary interview. Three VUSD site
administrators volunteered to be interviewed. However, due to time constraints, only two site
administrators were interviewed. Site administrators are responsible for leading the PBIS
framework implementation. Site administrators, teachers (Gerrans, 2020), and PBIS coaches and
team members (Madrigal, 2020) have different perspectives, adding to the depth of the study.
Recruitment
Participants were pooled through contact with the district PBIS administrator. The
researcher aimed to survey and interview individuals who best represent the stakeholder group at
each site. One researcher served as the communications liaison with the district PBIS
administrator to obtain access to the pooled participants. All participants received information in
accordance with the institutional review board (IRB) approval process.
Each participant received an individual invitation containing a link to the survey sent
through the district email system. The aim was for all site administrators to be surveyed to
maximize the data. At the close of the survey, each participant received an additional link to a
separate page asking for voluntary participation in a follow-up interview. They were asked to
provide their contact information to set up individual interviews. Survey participants who agreed

57
to be interviewed were de-identified and assigned a number based on the response sequence and
not identified by the individual school they were associated with.
Instrumentation
The instruments used for this study were surveys and interviews, along with supporting
document examination for individual stakeholders as necessary. The design for each stakeholder
survey and interview was guided by the assessment indices introduced earlier in this chapter.
Each of the assumed KMO influences identified in Chapter Two were included in the survey and
were further investigated in the interview process. Each researcher triangulated the survey and
interview data with document data analysis as necessary to support the assumed influences as
assets or needs.
Survey Design
The survey design utilized the influences within the KMO framework as suggested by
Clark and Estes (2008). The survey contains nine items. The survey items were based on the
critical behaviors of the stakeholders and the assumed influences. Survey items covered the
assumed causes identified in the literature review. The survey items were developed using each
stakeholder’s critical behaviors along with their assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organization influences. The survey was developed by the researcher, who is a Director of
Student Support Services at a school district located in southern California. The three stakeholder
surveys were aligned with one another to further ensure reliability of the study. The survey is
presented in Appendix E. .
Interview Protocol Design
The interview protocol consisted of an introduction to the study, as well as an
introduction to the researcher. Bogdan and Biklen (2007) noted the importance of establishing a

58
rapport with the person being interviewed. Confidentiality was ensured and the interviewee was
asked if the interview could be recorded. Having a good instrument to record ensures the
interview is transcribed accurately (Patton, 2015). Participants were asked questions about KMO
factors. All questions were open-ended and several probes helped the interviewee elaborate on
responses.
Document Analysis Design
Document analysis was conducted to support VUSD improvements as they relate to the
seven schools in the study. Any document data utilized were triangulated with the data from the
surveys and interviews to support the assertion the influence was determined as an asset or need
(Alkin & Vo, 2018; Lichtman, 2014). Coding was carried out in concert with the analysis of the
surveys and interviews to establish possible themes and patterns. The researcher obtained
documents through the district website and the California Department of Education (CDE)
website. The documents examined included the Local Control and Accountability Plan,
California School Dashboard, Data Quest Report, Performance & Accountability, Video
Message from the Superintendent, Video presentation communicating the California School
Dashboard, School Accountability Report Card (SARC), Strategic Plan, Strategic Plan Interview
with the Superintendent, Mission & Vision, Facts Sheet, Equity & Culturally Responsive
Practices, Positive Behavior Intervention and Support, PBIS Progress Monitoring - Teaching
Behavioral Expectations in Context video, PBIS Participating Schools page, PBIS
Implementation: 2017-2018 PBIS Scope and Sequence, PBIS Resources for Coaches and Teams
and Awards & Recognition.

59
Data Collection
Following University of Southern California IRB approval, the district administrator
solicited the participants. The district administrator directed the researchers to specific
individuals identified as site administrators. The researcher analyzed multiple sources of data:
interviews, surveys and documents (Creswell, 2014).
Surveys
The instrument was designed and administered using a private USC account on
Qualtrics
XM
cloud-based survey platform and distributed as an anonymous hyperlink via VUSD
email to VUSD site administrators by a VUSD employee. Utilizing this program ensured
participants the flexibility of completing the survey with convenience and ease. Respondents
were not limited by the type of device they utilized to complete the survey. Participation was
voluntary and anonymous, with no personally identifying information collected. The survey
included a brief introduction of the study, which included language required by IRB along with a
copy of the IRB approval for the study. Respondents were provided informed consent
information and asked whether they consent to participate, before being taken to the survey
questions.
At the end of the anonymous survey, a thank you page appeared and the survey
participants were asked to participate in a voluntary follow-up interview. Respondents were
asked to participate in a 30-minute interview. Once the researcher identified an interviewee,
email introductions were conducted and interview dates and times were established. At the onset
of the interview, specific introductions were conducted and the participants were asked if the
interview may be recorded for accuracy. .

60
Any documents provided by district personnel or individual stakeholders were returned
or destroyed upon completion of the analysis. No documents with student identities were used.
The documents represent materials supporting PBIS implementation at the schools and the
knowledge, motivation, and organization factors for each stakeholder group.
Interviews
At the end of the survey, respondents were presented with a Google Form link that
directed the respondents to include personal contact information if they were willing to be
interviewed. There were seven respondents to the survey, however three respondents
volunteered to be interviewed. Two respondents were interviewed. One respondent was not
interviewed due to time constraints.
Documents
Using documents that can publicly be found on the website helped to triangulate
information gleaned from surveys and interviews. Any documents provided by VUSD personnel
were destroyed upon completion of the analysis. No documents with student identities were
used. The documents analysis would be used to determine KMO influences to be assets or
needs.
Data Analysis
According to Creswell, 2014, the researcher conducts data analysis through examining
patterns, themes and categories. The researcher kept a focus on learning the meaning that the
participants held, not the meaning the researcher brought to the study. Survey responses were
analyzed using descriptive statistics from Qualtrics
XM
to determine what KMO assets contribute
to the overall sustainability of PBIS in VUSD. Knowledge aspects were analyzed by frequency
of response according to declarative, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive factors.

61
Motivation sections were analyzed according to value, self-efficacy, mood, and attribution
looking for patterns in response as they support PBIS. Finally, the organizational factors of
resources, policy, procedure, and process, and culture were separated and categorized for
patterns and themes of influence on PBIS. Due to the low response rate of the surveys, the
information analyzed was utilized to inform the interview protocols and was not directly used to
inform the findings for the site administrators.
To begin data analysis of the interviews, the data collected by the survey instrument in
Qualtrics was exported from the survey system to an excel file, and then examined for analysis.
The researcher reviewed the transcripts individually for accuracy. The interviews were coded
using a priori codes derived from the knowledge, motivation, and organization influences and
survey questions.
During the coding, ideas outside of the items being coded were open coded and then axial
coding was applied. According to Lichtman (2014), this approach allows the researcher to
navigate different themes through what is being read and heard. Coding was done by hand,
which broadened the researcher’s thinking resulting in drawing attention to patterns (Maxwell,
2005). Once codes were identified, the researcher made assertions about the data. According to
Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña (2014), an assertion is made once the data have been coded and
themes are identified.
Document codes were developed to identify themes and patterns by the researcher as they
pertain to specific influences. The collected documents were triangulated with the data collected
in the surveys and interviews. Triangulation was utilized to determine the influence of the PBIS
framework on school climate. Although methods and procedures do not guarantee validity in
triangulation, it is good practice to have sound methods and procedures to help the credibility of

62
results (Maxwell, 2013). To help reduce bias and increase trustworthiness, the research team
worked together to determine conclusions about the data analysis (Alkin & Vo, 2018).
Trustworthiness of Data
The researcher established the protocols and procedures for the study to ensure credibility
and trustworthiness (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Miles et al., 2014). The researcher used
triangulation to show that the research findings are credible. According to Maxwell (2013), to
improve trustworthiness, it was important to triangulate the data. Moreover, the researcher turned
to peers and fellow researchers for feedback regarding the themes. The peer reviews helped keep
objectivity and an open mind to other considerations when analyzing the data. The researcher
exercised self-awareness in the role of collecting, analyzing and interpreting the data in order to
base the findings on the participants’ responses without potential bias or personal motivation.
Role of Investigator
The researcher was not a current employee of VUSD. The researcher was a former site
administrator in VUSD. As a former site administrator, the researcher did not participate in the
initiative of the study. The researcher is a current district administrator and PBIS district
administrator in southern California. The researcher did not contact the district nor serve as the
point of contact for the research team. The researcher worked with two other researchers
(Gerrans, 2020; Madrigal, 2020) to collect data from three different stakeholders, teachers, PBIS
coaches, and administrators. The researcher/team obtained permission from the IRB at the
University of Southern California to obtain data and conduct the study. The researcher responded
independently to all requests for information or materials solicited by the IRB and conducted the
study in strict accordance with IRB-approved research protocol. The investigator individually

63
reported the separate stakeholder findings for their own stakeholder group in Chapters Four and
Five. All participants were treated with respect and confidentiality was maintained at all times.

64
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
Written by Lisa Minami-Lin

Findings from the data collected will be reported in this chapter as they relate to the
assumed influences delineated in Chapter Three and will be reported as they relate to the KMO
influences that have the identified schools of this study within the Valley Unified School
District, specifically the administrators. This study was adapted from the original gap analysis
framework of Clark and Estes (2008) as a promising practice. The framework, as adapted,
focuses on KMO factors that contribute to the high levels of goal achievement. The researcher
examined influences to identify promising practices of the stakeholder in the study. Quantitative
and qualitative data from multiple sources were analyzed and reviewed to determine the assumed
influences as assets or needs (Creswell, 2014). Specifically, an administrative survey, an
interview, and document data were collected to understand the emerging themes of the collective
KMO factors VUSD administrators use when leading the PBIS implementation at their school
sites.
The researcher used purposeful sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015),
inviting only site administrators to participate in the survey. First, the Qualtrics
XM
survey was
distributed electronically to site administrators as identified by the VUSD district administrator
and delivered directly through the VUSD district email system by a VUSD designated employee.
The investigator was not given access to nor made privy to the stakeholder survey distribution
list.
After completion of the survey, the researcher provided an interview link for site
administrators to use if they chose to be interviewed for this study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016;

65
Patton, 2015). The researcher set up the interviews following IRB guidelines and completed
interviews within the timeframe determined by VUSD.
Lastly, the researcher requested a third source of data: documents for analysis from
VUSD. However, the researcher did not receive documents. Therefore, the researcher collected
documents that were made available and those that were useful from among them were retrieved
from public sources such as the district website and the California Department of Education
website for document analysis. According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), these documents are
“grounded” because the documents were originally produced for other reasons than the study.
No observations were conducted for any of the KMO influences.
Stakeholders
With the establishment of PBIS initiative in VUSD, site administrators were tasked to
create a school climate in which PBIS implementation would be established and sustained. Site
administrators lead the PBIS implementation by establishing the vision and mission for positive
student behavioral outcomes through focusing on policy alignment, securing political support for
resources, and funding. For this study, the researcher analyzed the site administrators as they
lead school climate transformation.
The stakeholders participating in this study were seven site administrators in K–12
settings from identified schools within the VUSD. Moreover, due to the anonymity of the site
administrators, specific demographics identifiers such as age, ethnicity, and gender, as well as
individual schools within the district, were not recorded or identified through the survey process.
The researcher’s choice of stakeholders most likely to exhibit the phenomenon of interest were
site administrators for these schools. According to Maxwell (2013), the study of “cultural
groups” does not necessarily conclude they are homogeneous in thinking or membership.

66
Out of the 11 site administrators in the population, seven responded to the administrators’
survey. Of those who responded, three agreed to be interviewed, and two interviews were
conducted. One respondent was not interviewed due to time constraints. The two site
administrators requested to be interviewed in person. The researcher interviewed one site
administrator at their residence while the other site administrator was interviewed at the school
site. The two interviewees were both from the same school site; therefore, these interviews
offered a perspective of the PBIS leadership phenomenon from only one site within the VUSD.
Determination of Assets and Needs
This study focused on multiple sources of data: surveys, interviews, and
documents/artifacts. According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), data triangulation provides a
depth of understanding of the phenomenon though nuances that a survey alone cannot display.
The three sources of data were examined and organized into themes that cut across all data
sources for the KMO influences identified in Chapter Three (Creswell, 2014). For example, the
researcher used different methods as a check to support a single determination to reduce the risk
of bias from a single source. The researcher used triangulation of data to broaden the range of
information about the phenomenon collected (Creswell, 2014).
Using descriptive statistics to analyze the survey data, the researcher did not use a
threshold to determine the influence as an asset or a need due to the low respondent rate (Fink,
2017). The researcher examined discrepant data responses to check for alternative explanations
(Maxwell, 2013). For example, the researcher acknowledged the participant response selection
might be due to a poorly written question, the participant’s misunderstanding of the question, or
the terminology used within the question. For the purpose of examining discrepant data, the

67
researcher took into consideration sample size, quality of survey question and the context
(Creswell, 2014).
The researcher collected phenomenon data through site administrator interviews.
Specifically, the researcher used participant “holistic” accounts analyzing the perspectives that
emerged to aid in the determination of the influence as an asset or need due to the low interview
response rate Creswell, 2014). The researcher reached saturation during the interviews when
participants responded in a similar manner and fresh data no longer revealed new themes
(Creswell, 2014). Furthermore, the researcher used open-ended questioning to collect data that
explained the site administrator’s perspective. According to Lichtman (2014), the researcher can
navigate the themes by what is heard and observed.
The researcher examined documents that revealed evidence of the phenomena.
Observations were not conducted for this study. Therefore, observations were not utilized in
determining the asset.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes
There are four types of knowledge necessary for learning (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001;
Krathwohl, 2002). The knowledge categories are factual, conceptual, procedural and
metacognitive (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001; Krathwohl, 2002). Each of the four knowledge
areas were individually assessed using the survey, interview, and document analysis to determine
the stated influence as an asset or a need. The interviewees met the participant agreement on a
holistic level.
Factual Knowledge
Site administrators’ assumed knowledge influences were analyzed through surveys,
interviews, and documents/artifacts to determine whether these were assets or needs. The

68
knowledge categories are factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001). Each of the four knowledge types are individually analyzed by assumed
influence and reported within each separate knowledge area.
Influence 1. Site Administrators know the components of PBIS.
Survey results. The participants were asked to identify the PBIS components. Question
1 asks participants, which items are included as part of the PBIS components out of a list of four
responses. As shown in Table 8, all seven participants responded to the question, and four
responded correctly. Despite (a) and (c) being the correct answers, all other answer choices are
practices congruent with PBIS. It is plausible the question may have caused confusion and,
therefore, is being given less significance. Therefore, this assumed influence is determined to be
a need.
Table 8
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of PBIS
Factual Knowledge (n = 7)
Item Number Q1
Choose the correct answer. What are the four components of PBIS?
(a.) outcomes, data, systems, practices* 22.22%
(b.) goals, data, support, review 16.67%
(c.) progress monitoring, support, outcomes, review* 27.78%
(d.) data, analyze, monitor, evaluate 33.33%
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. The participants were asked to identify the components of PBIS. The
assumed influence that site administrators know the components of PBIS is supported as an asset
based on their responses. Both participants shared the importance of knowing and implementing

69
the PBIS systems, practices, and data as the components foundational to meeting program
fidelity. The administrators fit the PBIS components with their school culture and beliefs about
student discipline. The two participants spoke directly about PBIS components. The PBIS
components are communicated through the County Office of Education training. One participant
stated, “The PBIS County Office of Education PBIS Training Unit provides training on this
topic: the PBIS components.” The other participant stated, “The County Office of Education
provides all PBIS professional development for the team. Our district PBIS coach is wonderful
and provides us with guidance to address site-specific needs.” Lastly, they shared that
collaboration between administrators and collaboration with the district PBIS administrator is
critical to implementation. Based on the interview responses, this influence is determined to be
an asset.
Document analysis. The documents examined on the website, titled Implementation:
County Office of Education 2017-2018 PBIS Training Scope and Sequence, PBIS Context video,
and PBIS Implementation: 2017-2018 PBIS Scope and Sequence, revealed access to information
on the PBIS components. Based on the document analysis, this assumed influence is determined
to be an asset.
Summary. This influence was determined to be an asset based on the interview and
document analysis. Moreover, in the interview, both site administrators robustly described the
components of PBIS. The interviewees met the participant agreement on a holistic level. The
interviews and the document analysis were given more weight, as they provided essential
information than the survey question. The combined data from the interviews and the document
analysis support this as a valuable practice for site administrators and an asset.

70
Influence 2. Administrators know the district's PBIS goals and objectives.
Survey results. The participants were asked if they knew the district’s PBIS goals and
objectives. Question 2 asks which items are part of the district’s goals and objectives out of a list
of four responses. As shown in Table 9, all seven participants responded to the question, and four
responded correctly. Thus, this influence is determined to be a need.
Table 9
Survey Results for Factual Knowledge of PBIS.
Factual Knowledge (n = 7)
Item Number Q2
Choose the correct answer. What are the district PBIS implementation goals?
(a.) Reducing suspension and expulsions* 25%
(b.) Using data analysis to determine fidelity implementation 20.83%
(c.) Providing students with a multi-tiered system of supports* 29.17%
(d.) Providing equitable discipline outcomes for all students 25%
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. The participants were asked to identify the district’s PBIS
implementation goals. The assumed influence that site administrators know the district’s PBIS
implementation goals is supported as an asset based on the interview responses. The interview
data reveal the two participants spoke directly about the district PBIS implementation goals.
Both participants shared the importance of the positive outcomes for students, the reduction of
suspensions, and how the staff’s response to student behavior has changed over time. One
participant stated, “Learning goals are clear. In addition, having a shared purpose and a small
number of goals tied to positive student outcomes has been positive for PBIS at my site. Student

71
behavior has changed with the PBIS implementation for the better. Our outcome data is very
positive.” Based on the interview response, this influence is determined to be an asset.
Document analysis. The documents examined on the website, titled, What is the Purpose
of PBIS, School Accountability Report Card (SARC), CDE Dashboard, and the PBIS Progress
Monitoring video, revealed the district’s goals and objectives were provided to site
administrators. Based on the document analysis, this assumed influence is determined to be an
asset.
Summary. The participants correctly identified the district’s PBIS goals and spoke
directly to the role in the implementation process. Moreover, in the interview, both site
administrators explicitly and robustly described the district’s PBIS goals. The interviewees met
the participant agreement on a holistic level. The interviews and the document analysis were
given more weight, as they provided more essential information than the survey question. The
combined data from the interviews and the document analysis support this as a valuable practice
for site administrators and an asset.
Conceptual Knowledge
Influence 1. Site Administrators know the guiding principles of implementing the
PBIS framework.
Survey results. A survey question was not asked for this assumed influence.
Interview findings. Participants were asked if they know the PBIS guiding principles. t
was evident that the two participants knew the guiding principles. Both participants discussed
how they apply the guiding principles every day. Good teaching, interventions, and constant
monitoring transformed the staff, which resulted in student behavior outcomes being met. One
participant stated, “It is very important for me to know the guiding principles as the leader of the

72
PBIS initiative.” The other participant explained, “I attend the County Office of Education, PBIS
training where the PBIS Trainers consistently review the PBIS principles. It is important that we
all have the same knowledge.” The participants explained that they are focused on the
framework fidelity. Therefore, this assumed influence is determined to be an asset.
Document analysis. The document examined on the website, PBIS Progress Monitoring -
Teaching Behavioral Expectations in Context video and PBIS Implementation Scope and
Sequence, revealed the PBIS guiding principles were provided to site administrators. Therefore,
this assumed influence was determined to be an asset.
Summary. The assumed conceptual knowledge influence that site administrators know
the PBIS guiding principles is supported as an asset based on the interview and document
analysis. Moreover, in the interview, both site administrators explicitly and robustly described
PBIS guiding principles. The interviewees met the participant agreement on a holistic level. The
interviews and the document analysis were given more weight as they provided essential
information than the survey question. The combined data from the interviews and the document
analysis support this as a valuable practice for site administrators and an asset.
Procedural Knowledge
Influence 1. Site administrators know how to evaluate the PBIS components at their
school site.
Survey results. A survey question was not asked for this assumed influence.
Interview findings. Participants were asked if they knew how to conduct formative
progress monitoring for the PBIS framework. It was evident that both participants knew and
spoke to how to conduct weekly school-wide progress monitoring for the PBIS framework. Both
participants shared how the PBIS SWIS fidelity assessments strengthened their current progress

73
monitoring practice of conducting walkthrough protocols focused on PBIS components.
Participant 1 stated, “At our site, we conduct PBIS progress monitoring regularly both formal
and informal with weekly walk-throughs and PBIS SWIS assessments. The progress monitoring
process supports our intentional work.” Participant 2 stated, “Yes, we conduct both informal and
formal progress monitoring through PBIS SWIS Self-Assessment Survey, PBIS Tiered Fidelity
Inventory, and classroom walkthroughs.” Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to
be an asset.
Document analysis. The documents examined on the website, PBIS Progress Monitoring
- Teaching Behavioral Expectations in Context video and PBIS Implementation Scope and
Sequence, County Office of Education 2017-2018 PBIS Training Scope and Sequence, PBIS
Context video, and PBIS Implementation: 2017-2018 PBIS Scope and Sequence, revealed the
site administrators know how to evaluate the PBIS components. Therefore, this assumed
influence was determined to be an asset.
Summary. The assumed procedural knowledge influence that site administrators know
how to evaluate the PBIS components is supported as an asset based on the interviews. The
interviewees met the participant agreement on a holistic level. The combined data from the
interviews and the document analysis support this as a valuable practice for site administrators
and an asset.
Metacognitive Knowledge
Influence 1. Site administrators reflect on the PBIS implementation evaluation
data.
Survey results. The participants were asked to respond to three statements regarding how
they self-reflect when conducting formative progress monitoring of the PBIS components.

74
Question 3 asks the site administrators to complete the sentence. As shown in Table 10, all seven
participants responded to the question, and six participants responded correctly. Thus, this
assumed influence is an asset.
Table 10
Survey Results for Metacognitive Knowledge
Metacognitive Knowledge (n = 7)
Item Number Q3
Complete the following sentence: Site administrators know how to conduct formative progress
monitoring of the PBIS components at their school sites. I self-reflect by…
(a.) Share results with coaches and the
PBIS leadership team.*
57.14
(b.) Analyze the data to make sure that
everyone is on the same page and
then share the results with
administrators.
14.29
(c.) Provide protocols to use the data
analysis on the cycle of inquiry.*
28.57
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. Participants were asked how they self-reflect on the PBIS the
implementation evaluation data. It was evident that Participant 1 and Participant 2 knew and
spoke to personal self-reflection in regards to the PBIS implementation evaluation data. Both
participants shared that deep contemplation occurs regarding the progress monitor the PBIS
framework and the subsequent data findings. Both site administrators described how self-
reflection improved their leadership decisions and actions. Participant 1 stated, “Yes, I am very
concerned about the PBIS data as a whole. It is my strong desire that student outcomes improve
on my campus.” Participant 2 stated, “Yes, I do self-reflect on our PBIS SWIS data. This data
informs our decisions.” Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to be an asset.

75
Document analysis. The document examined on the website, PBIS Progress Monitoring -
Teaching Behavioral Expectations in Context video and PBIS Implementation Scope and
Sequence, County Office of Education 2017-2018 PBIS Training Scope and Sequence, PBIS
Context video, and PBIS Implementation: 2017-2018 PBIS Scope and Sequence, revealed the
site administrators know how to evaluate the PBIS components. Therefore, this assumed
influence was determined to be an asset.
Summary. The assumed metacognitive knowledge influence that site administrators self-
reflect on the PBIS the implementation evaluation data was supported by six participant
responses. Moreover, in the interview, both site administrators explicitly and robustly described
progress-monitoring self-reflection. The interviewees met the participant agreement on a holistic
level. The interviews and the document analysis were given more weight, as they provided
essential information than the survey question. The combined data from the interviews and the
document analysis support this as a valuable practice for site administrators and an asset.
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes
Administrator motivation assets were assessed through survey and interview. The
motivation influence components are value, self-efficacy, mood, and attribution types (Anderson
& Krathwohl, 2001). Each assumed influence was validated or not validated based on the
findings from the survey, interview, and document analysis.
Value
Influence 1. Site administrators value the PBIS program support the district office
leaders provide to site administrators.
Survey results. The participants were asked to respond to the degree to which they value
the PBIS program support the district office leaders provide to site administrators. As shown in

76
Table 11, all seven participants responded that they valued partnering with the district with a
combined relatively high (4) to high (5). For the researcher to determine this influence as an
asset, it was necessary for the participants to rate themselves a four or higher. Therefore, this
influence as an asset for this assumed influence.
Table 11
Survey Results for Value
Value (n = 7)
Item Number
On a scale of 1-5, (1 low item value - 5 high item value) rate to what degree do you value the following
statement.
1
(Low)
2
(Relatively Low)
3
(Neutral)
4
(Relatively High)
5
(High)
Site administrators value the
support district office
leaders provide to site
administrators for the PBIS
implementation.
0%

0% 0% 28.57% 71.43%
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. Participants were asked to explain why they value PBIS program
support the district office leaders provide to site administrators. It was evident that Participant 1
and Participant 2 knew and spoke to personal value with regards to partnering with the district
PBIS leaders. Both participants shared that the district PBIS administrator and district PBIS
coach were key to PBIS implementation at their site. Both agreed that the district PBIS team
supports the schools with strong guidance. Participant 1 stated, “It is important because we have
coherence within the district.” Participant 2 stated, “It is important to ensure we are all on the
same page.” Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to be an asset.

77
Document analysis. The document examined on the website, the PBIS Implementation:
2017-2018 PBIS Scope and Sequence, revealed the site administrators value the support district
administrators provided during the PBIS implementation and PBIS videos. Therefore, this
assumed influence was determined to be an asset.
Summary. The assumed influence that site administrators value partnering with district
leaders for the PBIS implementation was supported by the survey responses. Moreover, in the
interview, both site administrators explicitly and robustly described that they value district
administrative support during the PBIS implementation. The interviewees met the participant
agreement on a holistic level. The interviews and the document analysis were given more weight,
as they provided essential information than the survey question. The combined data from the
interviews and the document analysis support this as a valuable practice for site administrators
and an asset.
Self-Efficacy
Influence 1. Site administrators are confident in creating PBIS goals to improve
student behavior outcomes.
Survey results. The participants were asked to rate their confidence level right now,
when performing various administrative tasks. As shown in Table 12, all seven participants
responded to the question, nine participants responded they felt confident setting specific
targeted goals at a combined rate,; four participants responded they felt confident aligning the
targeted goal budget to goal actions, four participants responded they felt confident allocating
personnel to implement the targeted goal; and seven participants responded they felt confident
analyzing the benchmark data. As a result, this influence was determined to be an asset.

78
Table 12
Survey Results for Self-Efficacy and PBIS
Self-Efficacy (n = 7 )
Item Number Q5
On a scale of 1-5, (1 low - 5 high) when doing the following tasks, rate your level of
confidence right now using the provided scale.
1
(low)
2
(Relatively Low)
3
(neutral)
4
(Relatively High)
5
(High)
Setting specific
targeted goals.
0.0% 0.0% 14.29% 42.86% 42.86%
Aligning the
targeted goal
budget to goal
actions.
14.28% 28.57% 0% 42.86% 14.29%
Allocating
personnel to
implement the
targeted goal.
28.57% 0.0% 14.29 42.86% 14.29%
Analyzing the
benchmark data.
0.0% 0.0% 0% 57.14% 42.86%
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. Participants were asked to rate their confidence in creating PBIS
goals and systems. It was evident that Participant 1 and Participant 2 knew and spoke to personal
value with regards to partnering with the district PBIS leaders. Both participants expressed their
enthusiasm and inspiration regarding creation of systems. Both referred to their desire to create a
system that provides the support for historically underserved students. Participant 1 stated, “I
have created a culture of collaboration, where teachers are nurtured. I am very confident in my

79
ability to create systems that support teachers.” The other participant stated, “I have no problems
creating systems.” Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to be an asset.
Document analysis. The documents examined on the website, School Accountability
Report Card (SARC) and PBIS video, revealed site administrators’ confidence in creating
systems for PBIS implementation. Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to be an
asset.
Summary. The assumed influence that site administrators are confident in creating PBIS
goals to improve student behavior outcomes was supported by the survey results. Participant
confidence in responses ranged from 4 to 7 participants responding they were confident in
performing the task. Moreover, both site administrators explicitly and robustly described their
confidence in completing these tasks. The interviews and the document analysis were given more
weight, as they provided essential information. This determination was made using holistic
participant interview agreement along with the document data analyzed from the website that
was clear and robust. The combined data from the interviews and the document analysis support
this as a valuable practice for site administrators and an asset.
Mood
Influence 1. Site administrators feel positive about creating PBIS implementation
systems to support teachers and coaches.
Survey Results. The participants were asked to rate the degree to which they felt positive
about supporting teachers and coaches with the PBIS implementation. As shown in Table 13, all
seven participants responded that they felt positive at a level of four or five. For the researcher to
determine this influence as an asset, it was necessary for the participants to rate themselves a
four or higher. Therefore, this assumed influence is determined to be an asset.

80
Table 13
Survey Results for Mood and PBIS
Mood (n = 7)
Item Number Q7
On a scale of 1-5, (1 low item value - 5 high item value) how do you rate the following
statement?
1
(Low)
2
(Relatively low)
3
(Neutral)
4
(Relatively High)
5
(High)
I feel positive about
supporting teachers
and coaches with the
PBIS implementation.
0% 0% 0% 71.43%% 28.57%
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. Participants were asked if they felt positive about supporting teachers
in the PBIS implementation. It was evident that Participant 1 and Participant 2 knew and spoke
to feeling positive about creating PBIS implementation systems to support teachers and coaches.
Both participants shared that supporting the staff was their focus so that they could make the
behavioral shift to support the students. Participant 1 stated, “I feel very positive about
supporting my staff. We have seen a lot of growth with our students and our staff.” Participant 2
stated, “I feel very positive about supporting my staff. The teachers have done a wonderful job
implementing PBIS. We have a strong team.” Therefore, this influence was determined to be an
asset.
Document analysis. The documents examined on the website, LCAP video and the
PBIS videos, PBIS Resources for Coaches and Teams, PBIS Link to Incentive/Reinforcement
System and Link to PBIS Apps, revealed site administrators feel positive about supporting
teachers. Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to be an asset.

81
Summary. The assumed influence that site administrators feel positive about creating
PBIS implementation systems to support teachers and coaches was supported by the survey
results (100%). Moreover, in the interview, both site administrators explicitly and robustly
described feeling positive about creating PBIS systems to support staff. The interviewees met the
participant agreement on a holistic level. The interviews and the document analysis were given
more weight, as they provided essential information than the survey question. The combined data
from the interviews and the document analysis support this as a valuable practice for site
administrators and an asset.
Attribution
Influence 1. Site administrators attribute their success or failure in the
implementing PBIS to their own effort.
Survey results. The participants were asked if they attribute their success or failure in the
implementing PBIS to their own effort. As shown in Table 14, all seven participants responded
to the question, and two responded relatively high (28.57%). Five responded neutral (71.43%).
Thus, this influence is determined to be a need.

82
Table 14
Survey Results for Attribution with PBIS
Attribution (n = 7)
Item number Q8
On a scale of 1-5, (1-low - 5 high) how do you rate the following statement?
1
(Low)
2
(Relatively Low)
3
(Neutral)
4
(Relatively High)
5
(High)
Teachers and coaches
are successful in the
implementation of
PBIS framework
because of my
administrative support.
0%

0% 71.43% 28.57% 0.0%
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. Participants were asked if site administrators attribute their success or
failure in the implementing PBIS to their own effort. It was evident that Participant 1 and
Participant 2 knew and spoke to their leadership as the reason for teacher and coach
implementation success. Both participants spoke about their leadership beliefs; however, both
participants appeared reluctant to attribute the success to their efforts. Participant 1 stated, “It is
my responsibility to provide strong leadership for this implementation. The PBIS implementation
is very important to positive student outcomes. It has changed our campus.” Participant 2 stated,
“Although it is difficult to talk about myself, I do believe in my leadership skills.” Therefore, this
assumed influence was determined to be an asset.
Document analysis. The document examined on the CDE website, California School
Dashboard for Suspensions and Expulsions, shows the success that district sites have had in
reducing suspension and expulsions. Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to be an
asset.

83
Summary. The assumed influence that site administrators attribute their success or
failure in the implementing PBIS to their own effort showed that only two of the seven
participants attributed their success or failure to their own efforts. There was a significant neutral
response rate of 71.43%. The interviewees met the participant agreement on a holistic level.
Although the data from the interviews revealed this as a valuable practice for site administrators,
the discrepancy in the survey response suggests that confusion may exist regarding the
attribution of success or failure to their own efforts. This influence was determined to be an
asset.
Results and Findings for Organization Causes
Administrator organizational assets were assessed through survey and interview. The
organization influence component includes resources, policies, processes, and procedures, and
culture types (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Each assumed influence was validated or not
validated based on the findings from the survey, interview, and/or document analysis.
Resources
Influence 1. Site administrators secure resources and support for the PBIS
implementation.
Survey results. The participants were asked to rate the degree to which the district
provides resources to support the PBIS implementation. As shown in Table 15, all seven
participants responded to the question. Two responded they have access to district funding to
fully support staff PBIS professional development, three responded they have access to district
funding to fully support PBIS data analysis, and two responded they have access to district
funding to fully support PBIS personnel positions. For the researcher to determine this influence

84
as an asset, it was necessary for the participants to rate themselves agree or strongly agree.
Therefore, this influence is determined to be a need.
Table 15
Survey Results for Resources with PBIS
Resources (n = 7)
Item Number Q8
Rate the following statements.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
Strongly
I have access to district funding to
fully support staff PBIS professional
development.
42.86% 42.86% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29%
I have access to district funding to
fully support PBIS data analysis.
0% 42.86% 14.29% 14.29% 28.57%
I have access to district funding to
fully support PBIS personnel
positions.
42.86% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29%
I have time to plan for the PBIS
initiative.
0% 0% 0% 71.43% 28.57%
I have time to monitor the goals for the
PBIS initiative.
0% 0% 14.29% 57.14% 28.57%
I have time to evaluate the
effectiveness of PBIS strategies.
0% 0% 14.29% 42.86% 42.85%
I have time to evaluate the
effectiveness of PBIS professional
development.
0% 0% 28.57% 28.57% 42.56%
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. Participants were asked whether they secured resources and support
for the PBIS implementation. It was evident that Participant 1 and Participant 2 knew and spoke

85
to securing support and resources for the PBIS implementation. Both participants shared the
collaboration between the district and sites are strong with regular interaction. Both participants
expressed they were able to secure funding to support the transformation needed at their site.
The participants described their relationship with the district PBIS administrator to be helpful.
Participant 1 stated, “Yes, there is an on-going partnership between the sites and the PBIS
leadership. I speak often to the district PBIS leadership. My site budget is aligned to support the
PBIS implementation.” Participant 2 stated, “We receive resource support from the district PBIS
team. Our School Budget is aligned to support our PBIS goal.” Therefore, this assumed
influence was determined to be an asset.
Document analysis. The documents examined on the district website, the LCAP video,
the School Accountability Report Card (SARC), PBIS videos and PBIS Resources for coaches
and teams, revealed site administrators secured resources and support for the PBIS
implementation. Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to be an asset.
Summary. The survey response was significantly lower than expected given it is essential
to know how to secure resources for the PBIS implementation. The researcher reviewed how the
question was written. The researcher concludes it is plausible that the participants were confused
by the question format. However, in the interview, both site administrators described how they
secure resources for the PBIS implementation. The interviewees met the participant agreement
on a holistic level. Although the combined data from the interviews and the document analysis
revealed this as a valuable practice for site administrators, the discrepancy in the survey response
suggests that there may be a concern securing resources, which would indicate this assumed
influence is a need.

86
Influence 2. Site administrators have time to implement the PBIS framework at
their sites.
Survey results. The participants were asked to rate the degree to which the district
provides resources to support the PBIS implementation. As shown in Table 16, all seven
participants responded to the question and all responded they had time to plan for the PBIS
initiative. Six responded they had time to monitor the goals for the PBIS initiative, six responded
they had time to evaluate the effectiveness of PBIS strategies, and five responded they had time
to evaluate the effectiveness of PBIS professional development. For the researcher to determine
this influence as an asset, it was necessary for the participants to rate themselves agree or
strongly agree. Therefore, this assumed influence is determined to be an asset.
Table 16
Survey Results for Resources with PBIS
Resources (n = 7)
Item Number Q8
Rate the following statements.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Agree
I have access to district funding to
fully support staff PBIS professional
development.
42.86% 42.86% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29%
I have access to district funding to
fully support PBIS data analysis.
0% 42.86% 14.29% 14.29% 28.57%
I have access to district funding to
fully support PBIS personnel
positions.
42.86% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29%
I have time to plan for the PBIS
initiative.
0% 0% 0% 71.43% 28.57%

87
Table 16, continued
Resources (n = 7)
Item Number Q8
Rate the following statements.
I have time to monitor the goals for the
PBIS initiative.
0% 0% 14.29% 57.14% 28.57%
I have time to evaluate the
effectiveness of PBIS strategies.
0% 0% 14.29% 42.86% 42.85%
I have time to evaluate the
effectiveness of PBIS professional
development.
0% 0% 28.57% 28.57% 42.56%
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. Participants were asked if they had time to implement the PBIS
framework. It was evident that Participant 1 and Participant 2 knew and spoke to having time to
implement PBIS. Both participants shared that their management of time is a focal point. The
participants shared that the administrative team communicates, collaborates and functions well.
Participant 1 stated, “Yes, I do have time to implement PBIS.” Participant 2 stated, “Yes, this is
one of my main duties as I work closely with the Leadership Team and the teachers.” Therefore,
this assumed influence was determined to be an asset.
Document analysis. The document examined on the VUSD website, SARC, revealed site
administrators had time to implement PBIS. Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to
be an asset.
Summary. The assumed resource influence that site administrators have time to
implement the PBIS framework at their site is supported as an asset based on the interview and
document analysis. In the interviews, the site administrators explicitly explained and described
how they have time to implement the PBIS framework. This determination was made from the

88
interview responses, document data, the PBIS implementation webpage, and the SARC page
analyzed from the VUSD website that was clear and precise. The interview data support this as a
valuable practice for site administrators and an asset. The combined data from the interviews and
the document analysis support this as a valuable practice for site administrators and an asset.
Policies, Process, & Procedures
Influence 1. Site administrators align site PBIS policies, process and procedures to
the district’s policies, process and procedures.
Survey results. The participants were asked to rate their confidence using a Likert scale
of strongly disagree to strongly agree. Respondents were asked if they align site policies,
process, and procedures to the district. As shown in Table 17, all seven participants responded
they are confident aligning my site PBIS goals with the district's LCAP. Seven responded they
are confident aligning their site PBIS goal actions with the district's LCAP: School Climate plan
actions. Three responded they are confident in aligning their site budget allocation with the
district's LCAP: School Climate budget. For the researcher to determine this influence as an
asset, it was necessary for the participants to rate themselves as agree or strongly agree.
Therefore, this assumed influence is determined to be an asset.

89
Table 17
Survey Results for Policies, Processes, and Procedures with PBIS
Policies, Process, & Procedures (n = 7 )
Item Number Q9
Rate your confidence doing the following.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Agree
I am confident in aligning my
site PBIS goals with the
district's Local Control and
Accountability Plan (LCAP):
School Climate goal.
0% 0% 0% 71.43% 28.57%
I am confident in aligning my
site PBIS goal actions with the
district's Local Control and
Accountability Plan (LCAP):
School Climate plan actions.
0% 0% 0% 71.43% 28.57%
I am confident in aligning my
site budget allocation with the
district's Local Control and
Accountability Plan (LCAP):
School Climate budget.
0%

42.86% 14.28% 28.57% 14.29%
*Indicates correct response.

Interview findings. Participants were asked to rate their confidence when aligning
policies, processes, and procedures. It was evident that Participant 1 and Participant 2 knew and
spoke to how to align the policies, processes, and procedures. Participant 2 stated, “We all must
be on the same page for success. This is the one of many things that the PBIS administrator has
done well.” Therefore, this assumed influence is determined to be an asset.

90
Document analysis. The documents examined on the district website, the LCAP video,
School Accountability Report Card (SARC), revealed the importance of policy alignment.
Therefore, this influence was determined to be an asset
Summary. The assumed resource influence that site administrators was determined to be
an asset based on the interview and document analysis. Site administrators have time to
implement the PBIS framework. Although the survey results may be interpreted as inconclusive,
the researcher determined the influence was an asset overall, as the application of confidence in
budget application shows an in-depth understanding. Interview participants confirmed this
influence to be an asset as they had a robust understanding of how to apply understanding of
budgeting in context, which was evidenced in the SARC on the website. The interviewees met
the participant agreement on a holistic level. The interviews and the document analysis were
given more weight, as they provided essential information than the survey question. The
combined data from the interviews and the document analysis support this as a valuable practice
for site administrators and an asset.
Culture
Influence 1. There is a district culture of commitment that supports school sites with
a common multi-tiered system of positive behavior support.
Survey results. No survey question was asked for this assumed influence.
Interview findings. Participants were asked how the district’s culture of commitment
contributes to the PBIS implementation at their sites. It was evident that Participant 1 and
Participant 2 knew and spoke to the district’s culture of commitment that supports school sites
with a common multi-tiered system of support and practices. Both participants shared how they
really loved the culture and that the students are at the center of all decisions. Participant 1

91
stated, “Our district has a very strong system of supporting school sites. The support for PBIS
has been well planned by the district PBIS administrator and district coach. Participant 2 stated,
“Our district PBIS team is so supportive of this initiative. The PBIS framework is organized and
systematic. Therefore, this assumed influence was determined to be an asset.
Document analysis. The documents examined on the district website, district’s Vision
and Mission statement, district’s Core Values statement, LCAP video, and the superintendent’s
video, revealed the district’s culture of commitment. Therefore, this assumed influence was
determined to be an asset
Summary. The assumed resource influence that there is a district culture of commitment
that supports school sites with a common multi-tiered system of positive behavior support is
supported as an asset based on the interview and document analysis. The site administrators in
the interviews explicitly explained and described the district culture of commitment that supports
school sites with a common multi-tiered system of positive behavior support. This determination
was made from the interview responses, the document data, and the PBIS implementation
webpage. In addition, the district’s mission and vision statement, analyzed from the website, was
clear and robust. The combined data from the interviews and the document analysis support this
as a valuable practice for site administrators and an asset.
Summary of Validated Influences
Tables 18, 19, and 20 show the knowledge, motivation and organization influences for
this study and their determination as an asset or a need.

92
Knowledge
Table 18
Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Knowledge Influence Asset or Need
Factual
Site administrators know the components of PBIS.
Asset
Site administrators know the district's goals and objectives for PBIS
implementation.
Asset

Conceptual
Site administrators know the guiding principles of implementing the PBIS
framework.
Asset
Procedural
Site administrators know how to evaluate the PBIS components at their school
site.
Asset
Metacognitive
Site administrators reflect on the PBIS implementation evaluation data.
Asset

Motivation
Table 19
Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Motivation Influence Asset or Need
Value
Site administrators value the PBIS program support the district office leaders provide
to site administrators.
Asset
Self-Efficacy
Site administrators are confident in creating PBIS goals to improve student behavior
outcomes.
Asset
Mood
Site administrators feel positive about creating PBIS implementation systems to
support teachers and coaches.
Asset
Attribution
Site administrators attribute their success or failure in the implementing PBIS to their
own effort.
Asset

93
Organization
Table 20
Organization Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed Organization Influence Asset or Need
Resources
Site administrators secure resources and support for the PBIS implementation.

Need
Site administrators have time to implement the PBIS framework at their sites. Asset
Policies, Processes, and Procedures
Site administrators align site PBIS policies, processes, and procedures to the
district’s PBIS policies, processes, and procedures.
Asset
Culture
There is a district culture of commitment that supports school sites with a
common multi-tiered system of positive behavior support.
Asset

Summary
As the school site administrators continue to lead the PBIS framework implementation
with fidelity, it appears that the data shows that the district needs to review their allocation of
resources to the school sites as site administrators strive to implement the PBIS framework with
fidelity. According to the data, it was determined that school site administrators have needs in
the areas of assumed organization influence: resources. Site administrators do not feel confident
that they can secure resources and support for the PBIS implementation.
It appears that the needs suggest that school site administrators be given opportunities to
share their concerns and receive feedback from the district leaders to build their budget capacity
and knowledge of the LCAP funding to further develop their confidence levels. Clark and Estes
(2008) suggests effective change efforts ensure that everyone has the resources (equipment,

94
personnel, time, etc.) needed to do their job, and that if there are resource shortages, then
resources are aligned with organizational priorities. Moreover, work with the team to establish,
from the beginning, what the priorities are, so that when hard choices have to be made, the
guidance is already in place (Clark and Estes, 2008). This would suggest that it is necessary that
site administrators continue to secure resources for the PBIS implementation.
Using the new World Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick (2016) model of evaluation, Chapter
Five presents recommendations to maintain and improve continuity, consistency, and
commitment to support school site administrators as they lead the implementation of the PBIS
framework with fidelity.

95
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS AND EVALUATION
Written by Lisa Minami-Lin

Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to examine the promising practices of the seven VUSD
schools as they support a change to a positive school culture (PBIS, 2018a). The stakeholders of
focus in this study were site administrators. As such, two questions guided this study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that contribute to
teachers, coaches, and administrators’ successful implementation of the PBIS to create a
positive school culture in the Valley Unified School District?
2. What recommendations in the area of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources may be appropriate for other schools attempting to promote a positive school
culture through the implementation of PBIS?
This chapter addresses the second question. The recommendations and evaluation
outlined in this chapter emphasize the consistency, continuity, and commitment required for
sustained implementation and fidelity to PBIS in VUSD. Specifically, VUSD schools should
maintain consistency across the district with its PBIS framework initiative while coordinating the
design, development and implementation through formative assessments. Moreover, other school
districts can learn from VUSD’s commitment to the continuous improvement cycle through
evaluation of intended outcomes.
Recommendations to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences
The assumed KMO influences in the following table were determined to be assets. The
individual assumed influences were determined to be high priority for achieving the
organizational goal. Each KMO section is separated, and a brief overview is provided to identify

96
evidence-based principles to support the need for the influence in achieving the outcomes of a
promising practice.
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Knowledge recommendations are organized by factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge. Of the six influences, the ones listed in Table 21
provide a comprehensive list of validated results from data analysis. The six assumed influences
for the knowledge domain were all determined to be high priorities for the success of a
promising practice. Two factual influences, one conceptual influence, one procedural influence,
and one metacognitive influence were identified. All six were found to be assets. Table 21 lists
each of the six assumed knowledge influences.
Table 21
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Asset
or
Need
Priority
Yes or
No
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Factual
Site administrators know
the components of PBIS.
Asset Yes Information learned
meaningfully and
connected with prior
knowledge is stored
more quickly and
remembered more
accurately because it
is elaborated with
prior learning (Schraw
& McCrudden, 2006)
Provide site
administrators with an
infographic that connects
the PBIS framework with
prior knowledge and
learning.
Site administrators know
the district’s goals and
objectives for PBIS
implementation.
Asset Yes How individuals
organize, knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide site
administrators with an
infographic that
organizes how they learn
and apply the district’s
PBIS goals and
objectives.

97
Table 21, continued
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Asset
or
Need
Priority
Yes or
No
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Conceptual
Site administrators know
the guiding principles of
implementing the PBIS
framework.
Asset

Yes How individuals
organize, knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide site
administrators with an
infographic that
organizes how they learn
and apply the PBIS
framework guiding
principles.
Procedural
Site administrators know
how to conduct formative
progress monitoring of
the PBIS components at
their school site.
Asset

Yes Modeling to-be-
learned strategies or
behaviors improves
self-efficacy, learning,
and performance
(Denler et al., 2009).

Provide site
administrators with a
worked example of a
progress monitoring
PBIS component
checklist modeling to-be-
learned strategies or
behaviors to improve
self-efficacy, learning
and performance.
Metacognitive
Site administrators reflect
on the PBIS
implementation
evaluation data.
Asset

Yes The use of
metacognitive
strategies facilitates
learning (Baker,
2006).

Provide site
administrators with
instruction in
metacognitive skills to
increase self-regulation
as they self-reflect on the
PBIS implementation
evaluation process.

Factual knowledge solutions. Administrators know the district’s goals and objectives.
In the factual knowledge domain, two assumed influences were identified. Knowledge of the
district’s goals and objectives was given higher priority over knowing the PBIS components.
The findings and results showed an asset in factual knowledge how site administrators organize
knowledge, how they learn and apply what they know. Schraw and McCrudden (2006) suggest

98
that site administrators “organize knowledge” influences how they learn and apply what they
know. Moreover, learning is enhanced with continued practice, which promotes automaticity and
takes less capacity in working memory (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). This would suggest that
when site administrators understand the goals and objectives of a district led initiative, they will
apply this knowledge as they lead the initiative. Thus, it is recommended that the organization
continue to provide an infographic to show the district’s PBIS framework goals and objectives.
The information processing theory helps individuals connect new knowledge with prior
knowledge to construct meaning (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Providing site administrators
with an infographic that highlights the district’s PBIS goals and objectives will be meaningful
and help with the transfer of knowledge. According to Krathwohl (2002), performance requires
knowledge of basic facts, information and terminology related to a topic. Site administrators
must have clearly defined learning goals when leading a staff through an initiative (Fullan &
Quinn, 2016). For example, site administrators increase “coherence” between the site and the
district initiatives by adopting clear focused goals aligned to the desired outcome (Fullan &
Quinn, 2016). Specifically, the alignment to district outcomes is one of the foundational steps to
validating whether a school site has the potential to fully implement and sustain the PBIS
initiative (OSEP, 2018). Moreover, according to the Office of Elementary and Secondary
Education (OESE; 2018), the alignment of site goals to district outcomes: academic and social
emotional systems are foundational to PBIS program implementation readiness.
Conceptual knowledge solutions. Administrators know the relationships between
implementation of district to site goals and objectives. The findings and results showed an asset
in the conceptual knowledge of how site administrators implement the district’s goals and
objectives. Schraw and McCrudden (2006) suggest how site administrators organize knowledge

99
influences how they learn and apply what they know. Moreover, site administrators’ experiences
help make sense of the material rather than just focus on memorization (Schraw & McCrudden,
2006). This would suggest that, when site administrators understand the PBIS goals and
objectives, they will know how to provide the necessary support for the initiative based on their
prior knowledge. Thus, it is recommended the organization continue to provide training with an
infographic that organizes how and when to use the PBIS framework guiding principles.
Information processing theory suggests the brain receives sensory input, processes it, and
then outputs it. According to Schraw and McCrudden (2006), the information-processing model
provides implications for learning and instruction. Specifically, automaticity and prior
knowledge quickens the retrieval process for site administrators as they use the relationship of
prior knowledge of initiative driven results, adapting it to encoding of a new initiative such as
PBIS. Moreover, site administrators already possess a great deal of organized knowledge. This
knowledge facilitates their working memory. Site administrators improve their information
processing because learners are more efficient and process information deeply as they draw from
past learning strategies (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Procedural knowledge solutions. Administrators know how to implement progress
monitoring of the PBIS components. The findings and results showed an asset in procedural
knowledge regarding how site administrators conduct formative progress monitoring of the PBIS
components. Denler et al. (2009) suggest the modeling of to-be-learned strategies or behaviors
improves self-efficacy, learning and performance. Moreover, learning is enhanced when learners
acquire new behaviors through demonstration and modeling (Denler et al., 2009). This would
suggest that site administrators would benefit from models of progress monitoring, observation,
and corrective feedback. Thus, it is recommended the organization continue to provide training

100
with worked examples of a PBIS components checklist to use when conducting progress
monitoring to improve learning and performance.
Social cognitive theory (SCT) refers to a psychological model of behavior that emerged
primarily from Bandura’s (1977) work. According to Bandura, learning occurs in a social
context. Moreover, the majority of the learning is through observation. For example, site
administrators’ evaluation is shaped by the classroom-learning environment specifically by their
thoughts and beliefs regarding the active engagement. Furthermore, site administrators observe
live models of teachers demonstrating mastery. It is essential that corrective feedback shape the
new decisions that they will make about their next actions (Bandura, 1977). The Positive
Behavior Support is an evidence-based approach for establishing a positive whole-school social
culture, which requires site administrators to continually progress monitor the framework to
evaluate whether data based decision-making, is changing student outcomes (OSEP Center on
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, 2005).
Metacognitive knowledge solutions. The findings and results showed an asset in
metacognitive knowledge regarding how site administrators reflect on the PBIS implementation
evaluation data. Baker (2006) suggests the use of metacognitive strategies facilitates learning.
Moreover, learning is enhanced when site administrators are provided with opportunities to
engage in guided self-monitoring and self-assessment (Baker, 2006). This would suggest that site
administrators should self-reflect on their practices as they continue to progress monitor the
PBIS framework implementation fidelity. Thus, it is recommended the organization continue to
provide information with instruction in metacognitive skills, debriefing the thinking process after
completing a learning task to increase self-regulation as administrators self-reflect on the PBIS
implementation evaluation process.

101
Metacognitive theory focuses on how humans can actively regulate their own thought
processes (Baker, 2006). It is suggested that site administrators focus on monitoring, planning,
controlling, and evaluating tasks by setting goals, subdividing tasks, and predicting task
outcomes (Mayer, 2011). Moreover, it is recommended that site administrators engage in
metacognitive evaluation to reflect after a task is completed to keep track of progress, adjust
goals, while controlling their actions (Baker, 2006). Specifically, the district should provide site
administrators with training in metacognition skills to increase self-regulation when conducting
progress monitoring, analyzing data, and creating action plans. Furthermore, PBIS requires site
administrators to monitor the progress of the PBIS framework to determine the staff performance
level and framework fidelity, as a successful school climate depends on decision-making.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. Within the motivation domain, exist four subdomains: value, self-efficacy,
mood, and attribution. The four assumed influences for the motivation domain were all
determined to be high priorities for the success of a promising practice. All assumed influences
were found to be assets through survey, interview, and document analysis. Each of the four
influences is deemed critical to the overall fidelity for program sustainability in a promising
practice.
Table 22 lists the assumed motivation influence, asset/need, priority, principle, and
recommendation. Following the table is a detailed discussion for each influence and
recommendation, and the literature supporting the recommendation.

102
Table 22
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence
Asset
or
Need
Priority
High
Low
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Value
Site administrators
value the PBIS program
support the district
office leaders provide
to site administrators
Asset

Yes Learning and
motivation are
enhanced if the
learner values the
task (Eccles, 2006).
Provide site
administrators value
when partnering the
district office leaders
during the PBIS
implementation.
Self-Efficacy
Site administrators are
confident in creating
PBIS goals to improve
student behavior
outcomes.
Asset

Yes High self-efficacy
can positively
influence motivation
(Pajares, 2006).
Provide site
administrators with
balanced comments
about strengths and
challenges when
providing feedback that
improve student
behavior outcomes.
Mood
Site administrators feel
positive about creating
PBIS implementation
systems to support
teachers and coaches.
Asset Yes Positive emotional
environments
support motivation
(Clark & Estes,
2008).
Provide site
administrators
autonomy and choice
as they create systems
to support teachers and
coaches.
Attribution
Site administrators
attribute their success
or failure in the
implementing PBIS to
their own effort.
Asset

Yes Learning and
motivation are
enhanced when
individuals attribute
success or failures to
effort rather than
ability (Anderman &
Anderman, 2009).
Provide site
administrators with
feedback that stresses
the importance of
effort, strategies, and
self-control.

103
Value solutions. Site administrators value the PBIS program support the district office
leaders provide them. The findings and results showed an asset in how site administrators value
the PBIS program support the district office leaders provide to site administrators. Eccles (2006)
suggests site administrators’ learning and motivation are enhanced if the learner values the task.
Moreover, learning is enhanced when models are credible and similar can foster positive values
(Pajares, 2006). This would suggest that positive student behavior outcomes are positively
impacted when site administrators value district PBIS support. Thus, it is recommended the
organization continue to provide models that support site administrators as they lead the PBIS
implementation modeling the value of the task.
Expectancy-value theory posits that expectancies of individuals for success and the value
for success are important determinants of motivation in performance (Wigfield, 1994). If a
learner values the task or feels there is value in completing the task for the tangible reward or
benefits, then she or he is motivated to complete the task or goal. Goals are motivating when
they are clear, attainable, and challenging but doable (Eccles, 2006). Specifically, motivation and
learning are enhanced for learners when they have positive expectancies for success (Pajares,
2006). For example, site administrators who are provided with successful and credible models of
value, interests, and tasks will increase their performance and persistence as they lead the PBIS
framework implementation (Pajares, 2006). Thus, the value and expectancy for success a site
administrator possess positively impacts their PBIS leadership and the implementation of the
PBIS framework.
Self-efficacy solutions. The findings and results showed an asset in the self-efficacy
solution pertaining to how confident site administrators are in creating PBIS goals to improve
student behavior outcomes. Pajares (2006) suggests high self-efficacy can positively influence

104
motivation. Moreover, learning is enhanced when it is clear that site administrators are capable
of learning what is being taught or are capable of performing a task (Pajares, 2006). This would
suggest that site administrators would benefit from positive feedback to promote confidence in
creating goals to improve positive student behavior outcomes. Thus, it is recommended the
organization continue to foster positive motivational support to increase the site administrator’s
desire to be effective through positive expectations for success in balancing comments about
strengths and challenges when providing feedback to change practices that improve student
behavior outcomes.
Self-efficacy is a fundamental belief in one’s control over the events in their life
(Bandura, 1997). Specifically, individuals can control events in their lives. According to Bandura
(1997), it is self-efficacy, the belief that you can have mastery over your choices, social
modeling, social persuasion, and states of physiology. Furthermore, if site administrators believe
that their PBIS leadership actions positively impact the environment of the school site and the
positive behavior outcomes of the students, they will believe that they can affect the outcome of
a positive school culture.
Mood solutions. Site administrators feel positive about creating PBIS systems to support
teachers and coaches. The findings and results showed an asset in mood influence how to feel
positive about creating PBIS implementation systems to support staff. Clark and Estes (2008)
suggest positive emotional environments support motivation. Moreover, motivation is enhanced
with increased individual outcome expectancies and sense of control by avoiding competitive
structure (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). This would suggest that site administrators feel
positive about creating positive environments. Thus, it is recommended the organization
continue to foster positive motivational support to increase the site administrator’s desire to be

105
effective as they create systems to support teachers and coaches in positive emotion
environments.
The positive affect, or positive state of mood, includes task satisfaction, pride, and
enjoyment (Pekrun, 2011). Dembo and Eaton (2000) suggest teaching learners strategies to
manage their motivation, time, learning strategies, control their physical and social environment,
and monitor their performance. When learning is supported with positive expectancies for
success, the outcomes of the learning process are enhanced (Pajares, 2006). The more site
administrators feel being supported by the district administration, the more positive they will feel
about leading district initiatives such as the PBIS framework.
Attribution knowledge solutions. Site administrators attribute their success or failure in
the implementing PBIS to their own effort. The findings and results showed an asset in
attribution influence regarding how their belief that teachers and coaches are successful in the
PBIS implementation because of their administrative support. Anderman and Anderman (2012)
suggest site administrators' learning and motivation are enhanced and believe teachers and
coaches are successful in the PBIS implementation because of their administrative support.
Moreover, learning and motivation are enhanced when individuals attribute success or failures to
effort rather than ability (Anderman & Anderman, 2012). This suggests that site administrators
would benefit from belief that PBIS implementation success is due to their leadership efforts.
Thus, it is recommended the organization continue to foster supportive and caring community
support to increase the site administrators as they provide feedback that stresses the importance
of effort along with the potential self-control of learning strategies.
The theory of attribution focuses on the outcomes of events and whether people attribute
the outcomes to internal or external factors (Anderman & Anderman, 2012). Successes are

106
attributed to four factors: ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck (Anderman & Anderman, 2012).
These factors are causal dimensions of locus, stability, and controllability (Weiner, 2000).
According to Clark and Estes (2008), three motivational indexes, active choice, persistence and
mental effort, are needed to accomplish work. Site administrators use situational cues from their
social context to form their attributions, the speed and ease they complete a leadership task
(Anderman & Anderman, 2012). Site administrators make judgements about the expectancy and
value of their leadership during the implementation. These judgements combined with their
emotional reactions will motivate their future behavior during the implementation resulting in
increased motivation and goal attainment.
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. The organization domain has three subdomains: resources, policies,
processes, and procedures, and culture. The three assumed influences for the organization
domain were all determined to be high priorities for the success of a promising practice. Two of
the three assumed influences were found to be assets through the survey, interview, and
document analysis process. Each influence is deemed critical to the overall fidelity for program
sustainability in a promising practice. Table 23 lists the organization causes, priority, principle
and recommendations. Following the table, detailed discussions for each high priority cause and
recommendation and the literature supporting the recommendation are provided.

107
Table 23
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence
Asset
or
Need
Priority
High
Low
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Resources
Site administrators secure
resources and support for
the PBIS implementation.

Need

Yes

Effective change efforts
ensure that everyone has the
resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc.)
needed to do their job, and
that if there are resource
shortages, and then
resources are aligned with
organizational priorities
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Provide Site
administrators
opportunities to
prioritize what they
most need to
effectively do their
job.
Site administrators have
time to implement the PBIS
framework at their sites.

Asset Yes Effective change efforts
ensure that everyone has the
resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc.)
needed to do their job, and
that if there are resource
shortages, and then
resources are aligned with
organizational priorities
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Provide Site
administrators
opportunities to
prioritize what they
most need to
effectively do their
job.
Policies, Processes and
Procedures

Site administrators align
site PBIS policies,
processes, and procedures
to the district’s PBIS
policies, processes, and
procedures.
Asset

Yes Effective organization
ensures that organizational
messages, rewards, policies
and procedures that govern
the work of the organization
are aligned with or are
supportive of organizational
goals and values (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Provide Site
administrators with
policies and
procedures that
support their efforts
to fully align the site
policies to the
district PBIS
policies.

108
Table 23, continued
Assumed Organization
Influence
Asset
or
Need
Priority
High
Low
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Culture
There is a district culture of
commitment that supports
school sites with a common
multi-tiered system of
positive behavior support.
Asset

Yes Effective change efforts use
evidence-based solutions
and adapt them, where
necessary, to the
organization’s culture
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Provide site
administrators
evidence-based
solutions and adapt
them, where
necessary, to the
organization’s
culture of a common
multi-tiered system
of positive behavior
support.

Resources solutions. Site administrators secure resources and support for the PBIS
implementation. The findings and results showed an asset in resource solutions pertaining to how
Site administrators secure resources and support for the PBIS implementation. Clark and Estes
(2008) suggest effective change efforts ensure that everyone has the resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc.) needed to do their job and that, if there are resource shortages, then
resources are aligned with organizational priorities. Moreover, the authors recommend working
with one’s team to establish, from the beginning, what the priorities are, so that when hard
choices have to be made, the guidance is already in place (Clark & Estes, 2008). This would
suggest that it is necessary that site administrators continue to secure resources for the PBIS
implementation. Thus, it is recommended the organization continue to provide information to
Site administrators’ opportunities to prioritize what they most need to effectively do their job.
Resources must be organized with efficiency to encourage high quality instruction and
positive behavioral outcomes (Sugai & Horner, 2006). Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that
change efforts require people, time and resources. Furthermore, according to Clark and Estes

109
(2008) organizational goals are achieved with systems interacting with one another. Specifically,
these systems organize people, equipment, and materials to produce desired outcomes Site
administrators should identify the value streams that are the most influential in achieving the
goal outcome (Clark & Estes, 2008). Thus, schools should organize their resources, activities,
and initiatives in ways that efficiently produce high quality and sustained improvements and
positive change in student outcomes (Sugai & Horner, 2006).
Policies, processes, and procedures solutions. Site administrators align site PBIS
policies, processes, and procedures to the district’s policies, processes, and procedures. The
findings and results showed how site administrators align site PBIS policies, processes, and
procedures to the district’s PBIS policies, processes, and procedures. Clark and Estes (2008)
suggest effective organization ensures that organizational messages, rewards, policies and
procedures that govern the work of the organization are aligned with or are supportive of
organizational goals and values. Moreover, they recommend conducting an informal audit of
policies, procedures and messages to check for alignment or interference with goals. This would
suggest that site administrators must align site policy, process, and procedure alignment to the
district for coherence to effectively influence positive student behavior outcomes. Thus, it is
recommended the organization continue to provide information with policies, processes, and
procedures that support their efforts to fully align the site policies to the district.
Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that organizational goals, policies, or procedures must
align with organizational culture. The organization should know exactly what the goals that need
to be accomplished. Specifically, policies should strive to minimize inequitable practices and set
forth procedures for progress monitoring and continuous improvement with data and outcomes
(PBIS, 2015). According to Skiba and Knesting (2001), district and school policy alignment

110
efforts are recommended to reduce inequity. District policy makers can address many factors
contributing to inequity through policies, processes and procedures (PBIS, 2015). Furthermore, it
is essential that site administrators ensure that their site policies, processes, and procedures are in
alignment so that the district’s goals can be met at the site level.
Cultural model solutions. The findings and results showed an asset in the cultural model
how the district culture of commitment that supports school sites with a common multi-tiered
system of positive behavior support. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest effective change efforts use
evidence-based solutions and adapt them, where necessary, to the organization’s culture.
Moreover, they articulate how any evidence-based change effort is being adapted for the
organization (Clark & Estes, 2008). This would suggest that it is critical to the school sites that
the district’s culture of commitment to supporting positive behavior systems for all students.
Thus, it is recommended the organization continue to provide training on evidence-based
solutions and adapt them, where necessary, to the organization’s culture of a common multi-
tiered system of positive behavior support.
Culture is a way to describe the core values, goals, beliefs, emotions, and processes
learned in work environments (Clark & Estes, 2008). School culture has a critical impact on the
morale of the faculty and staff, and as such, maintaining a culture of collaboration is essential in
maintaining the collective efforts of all to achieve the organizational goals. One suggestion to
improve culture is by meeting with individuals for feedback (Clark & Estes, 2008). Developing a
shared vision, setting collective goals, and allowing individuals to have independent voices are
ways to promote a culture of collaboration (Marzano et al., 2005).

111
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The VUSD, in partnership with parents and community, provides a well-rounded,
challenging, and quality educational program that develops character and integrity. Students are
equipped and empowered through academic opportunities, career, and technical experiences, and
whole-student supports needed for college and career success. A service culture of operational
excellence, collaboration, and continuous improvement empowers all to flourish with trust and
pride.
There are two goals for the site administrators. The first goal is to provide the resources
needed to ensure the PBIS framework is fully implemented. The second is to align their
organizational behavior, processes, and procedures with the district office leadership to secure
support and recognition of teachers in the implementation of PBIS. Specifically, the
implementation of the PBIS framework with high fidelity is foundational to the school climate
and culture transformation. Moreover, the positive behavior student outcomes of the PBIS
framework implementation at school sites lead to the district’s mission and goal, to provide
students a world-class educational system that ensures every student excels in academic and
career pathways to sustain personal growth and contribute to society.
To improve school climate in VUSD, it is recommended that site administrators who lead
the PBIS framework initiative implement an action plan to drive performance, saving their
valuable limited resources. Moreover, the expectation is to show that organizations can do it
themselves, improve the program, maximize learning and demonstrate the value of training
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Furthermore, the concurrent case studies of Gerrans (2020)
and Madrigal (2020) noted the necessity for collegiality among all the stakeholders to promote

112
and sustain practices and performances of the PBIS framework through fostering a positive
school culture with a focus on positive behavior outcomes for all students.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
This study will utilize the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016) to design an implementation and evaluation plan for the program recommended to the
stakeholders. The model includes four separate levels of approach: Level 1 Reaction; Level 2
Learning; Level 3 Behavior; and Level 4 Results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The new
model reverses the order of planning the evaluation, placing Level 4 Results as the first area of
implementation and evaluation, followed by the remaining three levels. The new model is
supported by Clark and Estes (2008) and is considered the best and almost universally used
performance evaluation system since the original design in the 1950s.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), the degree to which the desired
outcome has been reached through proper training is measured. The outcome is the positive
answer to the general question of whether what has occurred at the end of the program is what
the organization is in existence to do, deliver, or contribute. The Level 4 Result is the rationale
for doing training. It is essential to connect the training to the outcome or the training is
meaningless. The Level 4 Results measure learning outcomes: “Results are the degree to which
targeted outcomes occur as a result of the training and the support and the accountability
package” (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The achievement of the results comes from
identifying the leading indicators of change or the short-term observations and measurements
that can be determined to create positive impacts on the desired results. These leading indicators

113
are directly related to the identified critical behaviors in providing important data connecting the
training to what is important to the organization.
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), effective training provides confidence
along with the application. As VUSD continues to be committed to positive student outcomes
through the full implementation and fidelity of the PBIS framework, site administrators are
committed to lead this initiative through securing resources for program implementation.
Specifically, the leading indicators will inform the site administrators using walkthrough and
SWIS assessment data that suggest whether the staff is implementing the PBIS framework with
fidelity. For example, site administrators will use formative assessments to improve the
implementation by making data based decisions to drive performance. A data system will be put
into place to build on existing systems while adding components over time to determine what
data will help answer the behavior questions (e.g., existing data, current data collection and new
data). Therefore, the formative data should indicate a positive impact towards student behavior
outcomes contributing to key organizational results, a positive reduction in daily office referrals,
suspensions, and expulsions (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 24 shows the outcomes,
metrics, and methods for external and internal outcomes.

114
Table 24
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Decreased annual
suspensions and expulsions
at each school site
Number of suspensions for the
school year
Reporting annually to the state
and posted publicly on the
California Dashboard
Increased school climate
score
Scores on Healthy Kids Survey Healthy Kids Survey
Increased positive parent
perspective
Number of positive parent
responses
HKS parent survey
Increased positive perception
by the school board of the
district implementation of
the district plan
Number of school board mentions
indicating positive perceptions
Taped meeting for public;
agenda meeting minutes
Increased communication to
the constituents of the
community to know how
well the schools are doing
Number of media mentions Social media outlets
District agency
Internal Outcomes
Decrease suspensions Number of suspensions School, district & state data
Decrease in office daily
referrals
Number of ODRs Office of Equity & Inclusions
Increased number of students
being referred to the multi-
tiered system of support (i.e.,
Tier 2 and Tier 3).
Number of referrals to MTSS Cycle of Inquiry & Data
Analysis
Increased recognition within
each school
Number of awards Site data
Increased number of schools
that participate in PBIS
Number of schools PBIS Readiness Scale
Increase in PBIS internal
recognition awards
Number of awards Site administration

115
Table 24, continued
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
Internal Outcomes
Increase in school level
positive mentions
Number of positive mentions Site administration
School board mentions of the
outcomes for the schools by
recognizing the reduction of
disciplinary measures
Number of individual school
recognitions
School Board Recognitions
Increased district level
mentions of the individual
schools in their newsletters
Number of mentions in the district
newsletters
District newsletters

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The Level 3: Behaviors are the measures that indicate what the
participants have learned by what they are applying to the work once they are back on the job
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This level includes the critical behaviors, the required drivers,
and the on-the-job training.
Critical behaviors are identified and defined as specific actions will impact the desired
results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The two key critical behaviors identified were that site
administrators must be able to demonstrate the actions required to achieve the performance
goals. First, site administrators provide the resources needed to ensure the PBIS framework is
fully implemented with fidelity. Secondly, site administrators align their organizational, policies,
processes, and procedures with the district office leadership to secure support of the PBIS
framework.
Site administrators demonstrate securing resources by adoption of the budget items on the
site LCAP, School Plan for Student Achievement budget. In addition, site administrators
demonstrate the site and district goals and actions alignment through final adoption on the site

116
LCAP, School Plan for Student Achievement goals and actions. Table 25 lists the specific
metrics, methods, and timing for evaluation for the stated critical behaviors.
Table 25
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
Administrators
provide the resources
needed to ensure the
PBIS framework is
implemented with
fidelity.
Alignment of site
budgets to the PBIS
implementation goals
and actions.
Stakeholder meetings to
discuss and adopt
implementation needs.

Monthly and
Annually
Administrators align
their organizational
behavior, processes,
and procedures with
the district office
leadership to secure
resources.
Alignment of budget
to support PBIS
implementation.
Stakeholder meeting to
discuss and adopt budget
actions and goals.
Monthly

Required drivers. Required drivers are the operations and schemes to reinforce,
encourage, reward, and monitor the critical behavior performance (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). Organizations must identify these drivers in order to hold the participants accountable for
outcomes.
In order for the site administrators to achieve the desired outcomes, the motivational and
organizational influences are critical. The motivational influences include valuing the
implementation of the PBIS framework, having the confidence they know how and when to
implement the PBIS framework with fidelity, feeling positive about implementing the PBIS
framework, and attributing their success or failure in implementing the PBIS framework to their
own effort. The organizational influences include addressing the necessary resources to fully

117
support the PBIS framework, alignment school policies, processes, and procedures and, lastly,
having a culture of commitment to support a multi-tiered positive behavior system of support.
Table 26 lists the specific methods and timing that support the critical behaviors of
administrators as they implement PBIS with fidelity.
Table 26
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Provide annual PBIS
Leadership training to new
administrators.
New administrator orientation
training.
1
Provide job aid/organizational
graphic organizer for PBIS
information.
At the beginning of the year
(Awarded recipients posted on
the school website and front
office awards trophy case).
2
Encouraging
Provide district administrator
mentor to site administrator
for PBIS implementation
support and positive feedback.
On-going 1
Provide mentorship in
recognition innovation
development to site
administrators.
On-going 2

118
Table 26, continued
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Rewarding
Recognize individual site
administrators who
demonstrate effective PBIS
implementation leadership.
Annually 1
Public recognition of Staff for
PBIS implementation and
rendering greater value.
Monthly 2

Monitoring
District PBIS administrator
observes and monitors site
administrators on a monthly
basis and provides
constructive feedback, success
stories and spotlight staff.
Monthly 1,2
Site administrators solicit
feedback from staff on self-
reported value and self-
efficacy.
Monthly 1,2
Site administrators include in
staff bulletin, the walkthrough
focus on how to perform more
effectively
Ongoing 1,2

Organizational support. In order for the critical behaviors to be supported,
organizations must identify the drivers necessary to reinforce, encourage, reward, and monitor.
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), what is monitored will be the largest indicator
of initiative success. The critical behaviors must be reinforced during the training with
accountability and support systems. Specifically, this will occur by scheduling the Valley County

119
Office of Education, PBIS training team for professional development. Each PBIS team will be
responsible for selecting County Office of Education tiered training dates and aligning the
training with the site’s professional development dates. The sites will monitor and maintain their
new knowledge and skill set by scheduling the monthly grade level vertical articulation and
monthly grade level teacher classroom walkthroughs to enhance their own performance through
accountability and self-efficacy.
Level 2: Learning
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) describe learning as how much the participants learn
the skills, knowledge, and attitudes during the professional development. The new model also
includes confidence and commitment in the program to help close the learning and behavior gap
for those who fail to use the knowledge and skills. Learning is characterized by the statements of
“I can do it,” factual knowledge; “I can do it right now,” procedural skills; “I believe it will be
worthwhile,” attitude; “I think I can do it,” confidence; and “I will do it on the job,” commitment
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Learning goals. The following learning goals are the results of an evaluation of a
potential promising practice study. Specifically the goals are based on the identified KMO
recommendations identified in the knowledge and motivation tables. When the proposed
recommendations or solutions are achieved, site administrators will
● Describe the components of PBIS. (Factual)
● Explain the guiding principles of implementing the PBIS framework. (Conceptual)
● Apply the strategies to monitor progress of PBIS implementation at a site using a
checklist (Procedural)
● Self-reflect on the PBIS framework implementation data. (Metacognitive)

120
● Value the PBIS program support the district office leaders provide to site administrators.
(Value)
● Have confidence in creating PBIS goals to improve student behavior outcomes. (Self-
Efficacy)
● Feel positive about creating PBIS implementation systems to support teachers and
coaches. (Mood)
● Attribute success in the PBIS implementation is because of their own effort. (Attribution)
In addition, the administrators have the goals of
● Secure resources and support for the PBIS implementation. (Resources)
● Align site PBIS policies, processes, and procedures to the district’s PBIS policies,
processes, and procedures. (Policies, Processes, and Procedures)
● Culture of commitment that supports sites with a common multi-tiered system of positive
behavior support. (Culture)
Program. Using a team approach, co-authors Gerrans (2020) and Madrigal (2020),
equally contributed to the concept of The SOS Program, a program focused on attaining
initiative fidelity and sustainability. The SOS Program design is based on empirically validated
best practices that support the gap analysis framework (Clark & Estes, 2008). The overarching
goal of The SOS Program is to establish a foundation of consistency providing measures for data
collection to ensure operations are done with cohesion within the organization. Once the SOS
Program has been established, districts will see the value in committing to a plan for continuous
improvement.
Darling-Hammond et al., (2017) suggest professional development has a greater chance
of transformation if teachers engage in learning focused on content. The SOS Program is

121
proposed to be four 1-day professional development-training sessions. The professional
development day provides participants with multiple breakout sessions focusing on how to
positively affect student outcomes through self-selection of human performance research
sessions. The program provides districts with a best practices approach to the gap analysis to
improve their school culture.
The gap analysis session will be focused on the human causes behind the performance
gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008). Participants will learn that the first step in this process is to identify
both the cause and the type of performance gap, knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational barriers, preventing the site from reaching their goals and outcomes. The program
provides guidance and training on human performance theory. According to Clark and Estes
(2008), motivation gets us going, keeps us moving, and tells us how much effort is needed to
accomplish the goal. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest there exists a strong correlation between a
lack of motivation (active choice, persistence, and mental effort) and performance failure.
Motivation training may lead to an increase in persistence and mental effort towards
accomplishing your outcome.
Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) suggest adults should choose their learning based on
interest. The opening general session will focus on how human performance theory impacts
learners. This general session addresses the importance and utility value of the work or learning,
and how it can help, learners develop positive values (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). Following
the “why” this work is important, and the consultants will provide an overview of the Clark and
Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework. The guiding principle of this overview is to point out how
effective change begins by addressing motivation influencers. Identifying the influencers ensures
the group knows why it needs to change and then it addresses organizational barriers and then

122
knowledge and skill needs (Clark & Estes, 2008). This session’s focus will develop participants’
factual and conceptual knowledge of PBIS implementation as it relates to the individual school
sites.
The general session will be followed by two breakout sessions. Each site team will be
able to self-select professional development sessions to meet their needs based on their
performance gap. The administrator session focuses on the research in the area of self-efficacy,
which is a fundamental belief in one’s ability to control the experience of events in one’s life
(Bandura, 1997). According to Bandura (1997), one can strengthen or change self-efficacy
through mastery experiences, social modeling, social persuasion, and adjusting the individual’s
states of physiology. Moreover, if site administrators believe that their PBIS leadership actions
positively affect the environment of the school site and the positive behavior outcomes of the
students, they will believe that they can affect the outcome of a positive school culture.
Another breakout session will address motivation. According to Clark and Estes (2008),
there is a distinction between knowledge and motivation. The researchers’ defined knowledge as
knowing what to do based on life experiences and motivation as the choice to start on a task,
persistence in continuing the task, and the application of mental effort to complete the task
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Deciding to start on a goal is referred to as an active choice. Active
choice (Clark & Estes, 2008) is intentionally taking steps towards achieving a goal even when
the learner does not create the goal. It is the learner stepping out of the planning phase into the
implementation phase.
Professional development models with gains in student learning provide learners time to
self-reflect on their current practice (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). After the breakout sessions,
the participants will attend workshops by site groups. During this session, site data will be

123
analyzed to initiate the creation of an action plan and a checklist for next steps. This part of the
professional development is critical if there is going to be sustainability of the program. This
session would allow all stakeholders to work together to determine site priorities and instill
social responsibility within the organization.
The professional development day will end with another whole group session that will
provide participants’ time to debrief the thinking process upon completion of the day is learning
tasks (Baker, 2006). The program encourages individuals to connect new knowledge to prior
knowledge to construct meaning, as this process should be individualized according to site needs
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Everyone will be asked to write a quick description of what they
learned and how they will apply it.

124

Figure 6. The SOS professional development.

125
Evaluation of the components of learning. In order to meet performance goals, site
administrators must possess the appropriate knowledge, skills and motivation to apply the new
knowledge. Specifically, it is important to evaluate knowledge, skills and levels of motivation
during and after the program implementation. Additionally, conceptual and procedural
knowledge should be evaluated. Table 27 lists the evaluation methods and timing for each
learning.
Table 27
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge check During SOS program
Collaborative work to create PBIS visual
representation
During SOS program
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Observations using a checklist created by PBIS
site administrators to identify PBIS guiding
principles.
During SOS program
Trainer feedback from observations Timely during the SOS program
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Discussion about the value of the program with
site administrators and PD trainers.
During SOS program
Question and Answer with sites within VUSD. During SOS program
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Discussion in small groups regarding concerns,
barriers, etc.
During SOS program
Question and Answer with sites within VUSD During SOS program

126
Table 27, continued
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Action plan of how they will implement what
was learned during PD
During SOS program and immediately at the
end of the session.
Self-evaluation of what was learned during PD Right before the close of the SOS program.

Level 1: Reaction
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), Level 1: Reaction refers to how the
participants feel in regards to the training event. The training should be engaging, positive, and
relative to the job. This level gauges how favorable and relevant the training is to the participant.
The leaders of the training should be able to determine rather quickly, how relevant the learning
is and whether the actual instruction is effective. The goal of Level 1: Reactions is to determine
the level of effectiveness of the training program and the instructor (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). Table 28 lists the methods or tools used to determine the participant reactions to learning
and the timing for the method or tools.
Table 28
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Active participation in training, individually or
in group work
During the training
Attendance During the training
Course evaluation During the training

127
Table 28, continued
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Relevance
Monitor group sessions for approval or
difficulty
During training session
Check-ins with specific questions related to
participant
During training session
Post-training anonymous survey During the program session
Customer Satisfaction
Check-ins during training to monitor level of
positive engagement
During training session: mid-session, late
session
Comment Sheet During the program
Anonymous survey During the program

Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. Purposeful evaluations are
critical at Level One and Level Two. These evaluations provide meaningful feedback regarding
the training quality, extent of learning, and skill development. After the learning event, Level
Two pre-tests and posttests collect the feedback from peers; discuss any issues that arise, report
progress and how site administrators will implement what they have learned. The blended
method utilizes immediate as well as delayed participant evaluation tools to assess the program
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level 1-Reaction and Level 2-Learning are the program
levels of focus for the evaluation during the immediate period.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. It is critical to use the
delayed approach for learning checks post training. If learners were not implementing the skills
acquired with the training, the indication would be that learning was not sufficient and

128
consideration to repeat training should be entertained. If learners are implementing with limited
skill, the training should be revisited, and a refresher is indicated to further imbed the knowledge.
If learners are implementing with skill and success, the training was successful and the goals are
being met. The use of the delayed tools will give information to the coach and administration,
and communication with the program associates will inform the training for later sessions.
Data Analysis and Reporting
As schools continue to fully implement the PBIS framework with fidelity, Team SOS
will provide continuous monitoring of the evaluation process with interim program data in a
timely and easy to understand format (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Specifically, a monthly
school climate dashboard that will display the data of current level of implementation fidelity.
The dashboard will display office daily referrals, suspensions for discretionary offenses, and
discretionary expulsions. The disaggregation of disciplinary data will enable grade level teams to
focus on action decisions that need to be made to address student behavior along with decisions
to adjust the MTSS framework that is in current use. Site administrators along with the PBIS
leadership team and staff will monitor this data.
At the end of the year, each school site will report to the LCAP stakeholders meeting
regarding their site progress on school climate goals. Team SOS will provide guidance and
assistance to the school sites as they create their LCAP School Climate presentation. Each school
site will be able to proudly report the most positive performance data through a multimedia
presentation platform, which will captivate the stakeholders as the team, demonstrates their
expertise and value in changing school culture (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).

129

Figure 7. SOS Dashboard

Summary of the Implementation and Evaluation
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) is a roadmap for
implementation of solutions for this study as well as understanding a subsequent evaluation
following implementation in order to progress monitor and improve outcomes of the program.
The Kirkpatrick framework suggests starting with program outcomes, analytics support ongoing
progress monitoring. The New World Kirkpatrick Model has been used to create organization
performance improvement by making a paradigm shift to starting with the solution instead of a
problem.
Limitations and Delimitations
There were several limitations to this study. The focus of this study was to understand the
KMO influences that lead to a promising practice in the area of PBIS implementation at VUSD.
The first limitation of this study is the size of VUSD and cultural nuances present in the
organization may have contributed to the results of this study. The disposition of the survey and
interview population may have impacted the results. As such, results and finding from this
research study may not be scalable for all organizations and should not be viewed as a one-size-
fits-all model.

ODR SUSPENSIONS Expulsions

130
The second limitation of the study is the researcher’s position. Although the researcher is
not directly employed at the research site or school district, the researcher does hold a district
administrator position. In addition, the researcher is a former employee of the research school
district and held positions as a former site administrator. Lichtman (2014) suggests being explicit
about the researcher’s role and their relationship to those being studied.
Delimitations are defined as constructs, factors or variables were purposefully left out of
the study and as a result can impact the external validity of the findings (Ellis & Levy, 2009).
The delimitation of the study was the research was confined to seven schools within one school
district. The district identified seven schools as having established promising practices for the
implementation of PBIS. The problem of practice was limited to the assets of the program. The
population of the study for the researcher consisted of site administrators within the seven
schools. Therefore, generalization of findings may be hindered when applied to other educational
organizations.
Recommendations for Future Research
The present study is an initial effort to understand district-wide KMO promising practices
in order to design and implement a comprehensive evaluation system that will monitor and
ensure fidelity of PBIS framework. Specifically, the findings of this study did affirm VUSD
schools as a promising practice model, there are implications that may influence future research
to provide a broad and in depth study to maximize positive behavior outcomes for all students.
Moreover, given the nuances listed in the limitations of the study, future research should include
a larger sampling of site administrators within the population of administrators who participate in
the PBIS implementation cohort. Hence, data gathered from a wider scope of administrators may
inform research, resulting in increased model scalability.

131
Conclusion
This study examined the KMO influences that make the VUSD a potential model of
promising practices in the implementation of PBIS framework. Furthermore, surveys, interviews,
and document analysis determined KMO influences to be assets or needs. Specifically, out of the
12 influences, site administrators presented a need in the assumed attribution influence and the
assumed resources influence. Moreover, the New World Kirkpatrick Model informed the
implementation and evaluation plan of this study (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) that focused
on the KMO resources found in Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework. Thus, the
results and findings of this study substantiate that VUSD’s PBIS site administrators effectively
promote a positive school culture with positive student behavior outcomes.

132
REFERENCES
Accrediting Commission for Schools, Western Association of Schools and Colleges. (2019).
Definition of and function of WASC in accordance with PBIS. https://www.ascwasc.org/
Algozzine, B., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Barrett, S., Dickey, S. R., Eber, L., & Tobin, T. (2010).
Evaluation blueprint for school-wide positive behavior support. National Technical
Assistance Center on Positive Behavior Interventions and Support.
Alkin, M. C., & Vo, A. T. (2018). Evaluation essentials: From A to Z (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works. Jossey-Bass.
American Psychological Association. (2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the
schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. American Psychologist, 63(9),
852–862.
Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2014). Classroom motivation (2nd ed.). Pearson
Education.
Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing (1st
ed.). Longman.
Bal, A. (2016). From intervention to innovation: A cultural-historical approach to the
racialization of school discipline. Springer Science & Business Media Dordrecht., 47(4),
409–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-016-9280-z
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Information Age
Bhakta, B. (2019). The implementation of a multi-tiered system of support at downtown Unified
School District: An analysis of teacher needs. University of Southern California.

133
Biag, M. (2016). A descriptive analysis of school connectedness: The views of school personnel.
Urban Education, 51(1), 32–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085914539772
Blum, R., & Libbey, H. (2004). Executive summary. The Journal of School Health, 74(7), 231–
232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08278.x
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Research for education: An introduction to theories and
methods. Allyn & Bacon.
Bonney, C. R., & Sternberg, R. J. (2017). Learning to think critically. In Mayer, R. E. &
Alexander, P. A. (Eds.) Handbook of research on learning and instruction (2nd ed.)
Routledge.
Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving
thinking, learning, and creativity. Freeman.
Brown-Chidsey, R., & Bickford, R. (2016). Practical handbook of multi-tiered systems of
support: building academic and behavioral success in schools. The Guilford Press.
California Department of Education. (2018). Using the dashboard.
https://www.caschooldashboard.org/reports/ca/2018
California Department of Education. (2019a). 2017-2018 expulsion rates.
https://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisExpRateLevels
California Department of Education. (2019b). 2017-2018 suspension rates.
https://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisSuspRateLevels
California Department of Education. (2019c). Relevant statistical data pertaining to PBIS
implementation. http://www.cde.ca.gov/

134
Carr, E. G., Dunlap, G., Horner, R. H., Koegel, R. L., Turnbull, A. P., Sailor, W., . . . Fox, L.
(2002). Positive behavior support: Evolution of an applied science. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 4(1), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/109830070200400102
Catalano, R., Oesterle, S., Fleming, C., & Hawkins, J. (2004). The importance of bonding to
school for healthy development: Findings from the social development research group.
The Journal of School Health, 74(7), 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-
1561.2004.tb08281.x
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. CEP Press.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153
Cressey, J. M., Whitcomb, S. A., McGilvray-Rivet, S. J., Morrison, R. J., & Shander-Reynolds,
K. J. (2018). Handling PBIS with care: Scaling up to school-wide implementation. ASCA
Professional School Counseling, 18(1), 90–99.
https://doi.org/10.5330/prsc.18.1.g1307kql2457q668
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches / John W. Creswell (4th ed.). SAGE.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional
development. Learning Policy Institute.
Dembo, M. H., & Eaton, M. J. (2000). Self-regulation of academic learning in middle-level
schools. The Elementary School Journal, 100(5), 473–490.
https://doi.org/10.1086/499651

135
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2009). Social cognitive theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/
Deno, S. L. (2013). Problem-solving assessment. In R. Brown-Chidsey & K. Andren (Eds.),
Assessment for intervention: A problem-solving approach (2nd ed., pp. 10–38). Guilford
Press.
Dufour, R. & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning community at work: Best practices for
enhancing student achievement. Solution Tree.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. http://www.education.
com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Education Policy Center at American Institutes for Research. (n.d.). Ten steps to make RTI work
in your schools. Author. https://www.air.org/sites/default/files/downloads/report/10-
RTI.pdf
Ellis, T., & Levy, Y., 2009. Towards a guide for novice researchers on research methodology:
Review and proposed methods. The Journal of Issues in Informing Science &
Information Technology, 6, 323–337.
Ennis, C. R., Cho Blair, K.-S., & George, H. P. (2016). An evaluation of group contingency
interventions: The role of teacher preference. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,
18(1), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715577663
Fink, A. (2017). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. SAGE.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5

136
Gerrans, K. (2020). Promoting a positive school culture from three perspectives: A promising
practices study from the teacher perspective [Unpublished doctoral dissertation].
University of Southern California.
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.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09357621
Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. SAGE.
Hershfeldt, P., Pell, K., Sechrest, R., Pas, E., & Bradshaw, C. (2012). Lessons learned coaching
teachers in behavior management: The PBIS “plus” coaching model. Journal of
Educational & Psychological Consultation, 22(4), 280–299.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2012.731293
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for
schoolwide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptional Children, 42(8), 1–14.
Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2015). School-wide PBIS: An example of applied behavior analysis
implemented at a scale of social importance. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8(1), 80–85.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-015-0045-4
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Horner H. F. (2000). A school-wide approach to school discipline.
The School Administrator, 57(2), 20–23.
Kirkpatrick, J.D., & Kirkpatrick, W.K. (2016). Four levels of training evaluation. ATD Press.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212-218.

137
Leseure, M. J., Bauer, J., Birdi, K., Neely, A., & Denyer, D. (2004). Adoption of promising
practices: A systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 5-6(3-4), 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-8545.2004.00102.x
Lichtman, M. (2014). Qualitative research for the social sciences. SAGE
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781544307756
Madrigal, C. (2020). Promoting a positive school culture from three perspectives: A promising
practice study from the PBIS coach perspective [Unpublished doctoral dissertation].
University of Southern California.
March, A., Castillo, J., Batsche, G., & Kincaid, D. (2016). Relationship between systems
coaching and problem-solving implementation fidelity in a response-to-intervention
model. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 32(2), 147–177.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2016.1165326
Marzano, R., Water, T. & McNulty B. (2005). School leadership that works. ASCD.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Mayer, R. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson Education.
McCormick, M. (2019, January 28). Building toward “all means all” with MTSS: One district’s
approach to helping students. Education California, 49(15), 1.
McIntosh, K., & Goodman, S. (2016). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support : blending RTI
and PBIS. Guilford Press.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook. SAGE.

138
Mitchell, M. M., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2013). Examining classroom influences on student
perceptions of school climate: The role of classroom management and exclusionary
discipline strategies. Journal of School Psychology, 51(5), 599–610.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2013.05.005
National Academy Foundation. (2019). Homepage. https://naf.org/naf-network/distinguished-
academies
Navarro, J.R. (2019). What is unconscious bias? https://diversity.ucsf.edu/resources/
unconscious-bias
Netzel, D. M., & Eber, L. (2003). Shifting from reactive to proactive discipline in an urban
school district: A change of focus through PBIS implementation. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 5(2), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007030050020201
Noguera, P.A. (1995). Preventing and producing violence: A critical analysis of responses to
school violence. Harvard Educational Review, 65(2), 189.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-
efficacy-theory/
Patton, M. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Barchfeld, P., Perry, R. P., & Elsevier, B. V. (2011).
Measuring emotions in students’ learning and performance: The achievement emotions
questionnaire (AEQ). Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), pp. 36–48.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports. (2018a). Defining PBIS. https://www.pbis.org/

139
Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports. (2018b). PBIS and MTSS connections.
https://pbis.org/school/mtss
Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports. (2018c). PBIS in the classroom.
https://www.pbis.org/school/pbis-in-the-classroom
Regan, K., & Michaud, K. M. (2011). Best practices to support student behavior. Beyond
Behavior, 20(2), 40–47.
Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Stormont, M. (2013). Classroom-level positive behavior
supports in schools implementing SW-PBIS: Identifying areas for enhancement. Journal
of Positive Behavior Interventions, 15(1), 39–50.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300712459079
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. Teachers College Press.
Safran, S. P., & Oswald, K. (2003). Positive behavior supports: Can schools reshape disciplinary
practices? Exceptional Children, 69(3), 361–373.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290306900307
Salisbury, C. L., & McGregor, G. (2002). The administrative climate and context of inclusive
elementary schools. Exceptional Children, 68(2), 259–274.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290206800207
Schnorr, C. I. (2013). Effects of multilevel support on first-grade teachers’ use of research-based
strategies during beginning reading instruction [Unpublished doctoral dissertation].
University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory.
http://www.education.com/referene/article/information-proessing-thoery/

140
Skiba, R., & Knesting, K. (2001). Zero tolerance, zero evidence: An analysis of school
disciplinary practice. New Directions for Youth Development, 2001(92), 17–43.
https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.23320019204
Skiba, R., & Peterson, R. (2000). School discipline at a crossroads: From zero tolerance to early
response. Exceptional Children, 66(3), 335–346.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290006600305
Skiba, R., & Peterson, R. (1999). The dark side of zero tolerance: Can punishment lead to safe
schools? Violence and Victims, 17, 57–72.
Stormont, M., & Reinke, W. (2012). Using coaching to support classroom-level adoption and use
of interventions within school-wide positive behavioral interventions and support
systems. Beyond Behavior, 21(2), 11–19.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide
positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 245–259.
http://search.proquest.com/docview/219656206/
Sugai, G., & Simonsen, B. (2012). Positive behavior interventions and supports: History,
defining features, and misconceptions. The Center for PBIS & Center for Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports.
Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., Heinemann, M., Lewis, T. J., Nelson, C. M., Ruef, M.
(2000). Applying positive behavioral support and functional behavioral assessment in
schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2(3), 131–143.
https://doi.org/10.1177/109830070000200302
Tincani, M. (2007). Moving forward: Positive behavior support and applied behavior analysis.
The Behavior Analyst Today, 8(4), 492–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0100635

141
U.S. Department of Education. (2014). Rethinking school discipline, Remarks of the U.S.
Secretary of Education Arne Duncan at the Release of the Joint DOJ-ED School
Discipline Guidance Package. ed.gov/news/speeches/rethinking-school-discipline
U. S. Department of Education. (2019). History of the IDEA. https://www.ed.gov/news/
speeches/rethinking-school-discipline
Usher, E., & Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical review of the
literature and future directions. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 751–796.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308321456
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In M. Cole, V. John-
Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher
psychological processes (M. Lopez Morillas, Trans.). (pp. 79–91). Harvard University
Press.
Weiner, B. (2000). Attributional thoughts about consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer
research, 27(3), 382-387.
Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental
perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49–78.
Wilson, D. (2004). The interface of school climate and school connectedness and relationships
with aggression and victimization. The Journal of School Health, 74(7), 293–299.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08286.x

142
APPENDIX A
SUSPENSION RATE COMPARISON OVER SIX YEARS

Table 29
CA Department of Education Student Discipline 2011-2012 & 2012–2013 SUSPENSION RATE
2011 –2012 2012 –2013
Home Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspensions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Suspended
Suspension
Rate
Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspension
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Suspended
Suspension
Rate
A (TK-6) 1,053 25 18 1.70% 1,073 14 12 1.10%
B (K-6) 331 6 4 1.20% 434 28 14 3.20%
C (K-8) 793 78 50 6.30% 788 22 22 2.80%
D (7-8) 762 51 37 4.90% 715 44 27 3.80%
E (7-12) 442 166 77 17.40% 514 140 85 16.50%
F (9-12) 1,758 101 91 5.20% 1,763 172 125 7.10%
G (TK-8) 1,024 222 104 10.20% 1,058 63 40 3.80%
GMM Unified 29,538 7,815 3,036 10.30% 28,946 4,278 2,154 7.40%
County 1,489,937 118,741 66,872 4.50% 1,461,569 95,306 53,221 3.60%
Statewide 5,890,875 685,810 352,429 6.00% 5,883,277 585,534 314,381 5.30%
https://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisSuspRateLevels

143
Table 30
CA Department of Education Student Discipline 2013–2014 & 2014–2015 SUSPENSION RATE
2013 –2014 2014 –2015
Home Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspensions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Suspended
Suspension
Rate
Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspension
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Suspended
Suspension
Rate
A (TK-6) 1,046 17 11 1.10% 1,081 14 14 1.30%
B (K-6) 454 8 8 1.80% 451 10 3 0.70%
C (K-8) 825 28 25 3.00% 771 35 27 3.50%
D (7-8) 682 40 32 4.70% 784 53 37 4.70%
E (7-12) 564 116 79 14.00% 505 94 51 10.10%
F (9-12) 1,540 70 53 3.40% 1,445 93 77 5.30%
G (TK-8) 1,003 41 34 3.40% 959 5 4 0.40%
GMM Unified 27,701 3,110 1,567 5.70% 26,651 1,969 1,196 4.50%
County 1,429,816 69,207 41,102 2.90% 1,406,430 48,210 31,452 2.20%
Statewide 5,889,266 480,879 265,233 4.50% 5,866,526 400,515 230,755 3.90%
https://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisSuspRateLevels

144
Table 31
CA Department of Education Student Discipline 2015–2016 & 2016–2017 SUSPENSION RATE
2015 –2016 2016 –2017
Home Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspensions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Suspended
Suspension
Rate
Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspension
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Suspended
Suspension
Rate
A (TK-6) 1,010 21 15 1.50% 988 14 12 1.20%
B (K-6) 430 13 11 2.60% 411 21 19 4.60%
C (K-8) 726 13 8 1.10% 710 9 8 1.10%
D (7-8) 753 47 31 4.10% 740 23 20 2.70%
E (7-12) 461 37 29 6.30% 449 34 26 5.80%
F (9-12) 1,479 35 32 2.20% 1,466 124 90 6.10%
G (TK-8) 1,033 13 11 1.10% 1,040 25 23 2.20%
GMM Unified 25,968 1,279 836 3.20% 25,543 1,578 978 3.80%
County 1,377,866 46,761 30,553 2.20% 1,354,445 44,951 29,796 2.20%
Statewide 5,829,934 377,855 222,245 3.80% 5,793,578 363,084 220,856 3.80%
https://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisSuspRateLevels

145
Table 32
CA Department of Education Student Discipline 2017–2018 SUSPENSION RATE
2017 –2018 2018 –2019
Home Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspensions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Suspended
Suspension
Rate
Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspensions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Suspended
Suspension
Rate
A (TK-6) 934 10 10 1.10% 897 14 8 0.90%
B (K-6) 333 8 6 1.80% 314 7 7 2.20%
C (K-8) 729 5 4 0.50% 722 8 6 0.80%
D (7-8) 722 11 10 1.40% 674 21 20 3.00%
E (7-12) 475 47 37 7.80% 483 49 27 5.60%
F (9-12) 1,333 87 65 4.90% 1,239 54 46 3.70%
G (TK-8) 1,023 55 42 4.10% 993 38 24 2.40%
GMM Unified 24,649 1,323 885 3.60% 24,047 1,661 926 3.90%
County 1,325,348 42,131 27,881 2.10% 1,295,622 41,589 26,707 2.10%
Statewide 5,748,545 343,813 210,691 3.70% 5,678,140 335,677 206,391 3.60%
https://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisSuspRateLevels

146
APPENDIX B
EXPULSION RATE COMPARISON OVER SIX YEARS
Table 33 CA Department of Education Student Discipline 2011–2012 & 2012–2013 EXPULSION
RATE
2011 –2012 2012 –2013
Home Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Expulsions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Expelled
Expulsion
Rate
Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Expulsions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Expelled
Expulsion
Rate
A (TK-6) 1,053 0 0 0.00% 1,073 0 0 0.00%
B (K-6) 331 0 0 0.00% 434 0 0 0.00%
C (K-8) 793 2 2 0.25% 788 0 0 0.00%
D (7-8) 762 6 5 0.66% 715 0 0 0.00%
E (7-12) 442 19 17 3.85% 514 1 1 0.19%
F (9-12) 1,758 26 23 1.31% 1,763 0 0 0.00%
G (TK-8) 1,024 7 7 0.68% 1,058 0 0 0.00%
GMM Unified 29,538 263 242 0.82% 28,946 16 16 0.06%
County 1,489,937 1,068 1,043 0.07% 1,461,569 547 535 0.04%
Statewide 5,890,875 9,539 9,335 0.16% 5,883,277 8,327 8,037 0.14%
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisExpRateLevels

147
Table 34
CA Department of Education Student Discipline 2013–2014 & 2014–2015 EXPULSION RATE
2013 –2014 2014 –2015
Home Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Expulsions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Expelled
Expulsion
Rate
Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Expulsions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Expelled
Expulsion
Rate
A (TK-6) 1,046 0 0 0.00% 1,081 0 0 0.00%
B (K-6) 454 0 0 0.00% 451 0 0 0.00%
C (K-8) 825 0 0 0.00% 771 0 0 0.00%
D (7-8) 682 0 0 0.00% 784 1 1 0.13%
E (7-12) 564 1 1 0.18% 505 0 0 0.00%
F (9-12) 1,540 0 0 0.00% 1,445 0 0 0.00%
G (TK-8) 1,003 0 0 0.00% 959 0 0 0.00%
GMM Unified 27,701 7 7 0.03% 26,651 9 9 0.03%
County 1,429,816 689 685 0.05% 1,406,430 540 538 0.04%
Statewide 5,889,266 6,519 6,407 0.11% 5,866,526 5,597 5,532 0.09%
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisExpRateLevels

148
Table 35
CA Department of Education Student Discipline 2015–2016 & 2016–2017 EXPULSION RATE
2015 –2016 2016 –2017
Home Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Expulsions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Expelled
Expulsion
Rate
Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Expulsions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Expelled
Expulsion
Rate
A (TK-6) 1,010 0 0 0.00% 988 0 0 0.00%
B (K-6) 430 0 0 0.00% 411 0 0 0.00%
C (K-8) 726 0 0 0.00% 710 0 0 0.00%
D (7-8) 753 0 0 0.00% 740 0 0 0.00%
E (7-12) 461 0 0 0.00% 449 0 0 0.00%
F (9-12) 1,479 1 1 0.07% 1,466 0 0 0.00%
G (TK-8) 1,033 0 0 0.00% 1,040 0 0 0.00%
GMM Unified 25,968 2 2 0.01% 25,543 9 9 0.04%
County 1,377,866 544 543 0.04% 1,354,4
45
488 488 0.04%
Statewide 5,829,934 5,575 5,510 0.09% 5,793,5
78
5,456 5,412 0.09%
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisExpRateLevels

149
Table 36
CA Department of Education Student Discipline 2017–2018 EXPULSION RATE
2017 –2018 2018 –2019
Home Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Expulsions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Expelled
Expulsion
Rate
Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Expulsions
Unduplicated
Count of
Students
Expelled
Expulsion
Rate
A (TK-6) 934 0 0 0.00% 897 0 0 0.00%
B (K-6) 333 0 0 0.00% 314 0 0 0.00%
C (K-8) 729 0 0 0.00% 722 0 0 0.00%
D (7-8) 722 0 0 0.00% 674 0 0 0.00%
E (7-12) 475 0 0 0.00% 483 0 0 0.00%
F (9-12) 1,333 0 0 0.00% 1,239 0 0 0.00%
G (TK-8) 1,023 0 0 0.00% 993 0 0 0.00%
Unified 24,649 13 13 0.05% 24,047 4 4 0.02%
County 1,325,348 399 398 0.03% 1,295,622 407 401 0.03%
Statewide 5,748,545 5,180 5,138 0.09% 5,678,140 5,002 4,958 0.09%
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqCensus/DisExpRateLevels

150
APPENDIX C
ETHNICITIES OF STUDENTS IN PARTICIPATING SCHOOLS

Race/
Ethnicity
GMM
2018–19

Total %
GMM

Total %
A (TK-6)
Total %
B (K-6)
Total %
C (K-8)
Total %
D (7-8)
Total %
E (7-12)

Total %
F (9-12)
Total %
G (TK-8)
African
American
903 4.0% 4.20% 6.10% 1.60% 6.90% 4.30% 9.20% 2.10%
American
Indian
42 0.2% 0.10% X 0.30% 0.50% X 0.10% 0.30%
Asian 784 3.5% 2.60% 10.90% 1.00% 7.70% 0.90% 1.50% 3.20%
Filipino 261 1.2% 0.10% 5.10% 1.60% 3.70% 1.10% 0.60% 0.40%
Hispanic 19,494 86.7% 91.00% 63.5% 93.10% 71.80% 88.60% 84.60% 92.30%
2 or More
Races
220 1.0% X 4.40% 0.30% 2.50% 1.60% 1.10% 0.30%
Pacific
Islander
31 0.1% X X 0.30% 0.30% 0.20% X 0.10%
White 651 2.9% 1.90% 9.20% 1.60% 6.50% 2.00% 2.50% 1.00%

151
APPENDIX D
DEMOGRAPHICS AT PARTICIPATING SCHOOLS

Student
Group
GMM
(2018-19)
GMM
by %
Total %
A (TK-6)
Total %
B (K-6)
Total %
C (K-8)
Total %
D (7-8)
Total %
E (7-12)

Total %
F (9-12)
Total %
G (TK-8)
English
Learners
5,252 23.40% 31.70% 9.20% 17.70% 8.00% 19.10% 19.30% 32.30%
Foster Youth 238 1.10% 0.60% X 0.30% 0.20% 0.70% 1.20% 0.80%
Homeless 2,620 11.70% 13.80% 6.50% 12.00% 6.50% 15.70% 12.10% 11.30%
SES
Disadvantaged
20,240 90.10% 94.40% 72.70% 89.30% 77.20% 93.909% 92.50% 96.40%
Students with
Disabilities
2,431 10.80% 10.20% 10.90% 6.90% 12.60% 9.40% 12.80% 11.90%

152
APPENDIX E
SURVEY PROTOCOL
Survey Protocol
Introductions
Hello. My name is Lisa. I am a doctoral candidate from the University of Southern California. I
am here to learn about the implementation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports
(PBIS) in your school district. Thank you for taking the time to speak with me today.

Explanation of the Survey Purpose
The survey will ask you questions about your knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences related to fully implementing PBIS with fidelity at your school site. Some questions
are on a Likert scale, strongly disagree to strongly agree, while others check one or all that apply,
and a few short-answer responses.

Explanation of Confidentiality
All information will remain confidential and will be used to complete a dissertation co-authored
by myself and two others. We will maintain your confidentiality and not disclose your identity
to anyone at any time.

Method of Survey Delivery
You will be sent a survey through Qualtrics
XM
. Your email address and name will not appear in
the form for me to see. Upon completion of the survey, you will be directed to an additional page
to participate voluntarily in a follow-up survey. You will only be contacted should you choose to
participate in the interview aspect.

Dissertation Survey/Administrator
Q1 What are the four components of PBIS? (Check all that apply.)
▢ outcomes, data, systems, practices
▢ goals, data, support, review
▢ progress, monitoring, support, outcomes, review

153
▢ data, analyze, monitor, evaluate
Q2 What are the district PBIS implementation goals? (Check all that apply.)
▢ reducing suspensions and expulsions
▢ using data analysis to determine fidelity implementation
▢ providing students with a multi-tiered system of supports
▢ providing equitable discipline outcomes for all students
Q3 Multiple choice. Complete the sentence. After collecting data, I...
o share the results with coaches and the PBIS leadership team.
o analyze the data to make sure that everyone is on the same page and then share the results
with administrators.
o provide protocols to use the data analysis in the cycle of inquiry.
Q4 On a scale of 1-5 (1-low and 5-high) to what degree do you value the PBIS program support
district office leaders provide to site administrators?
o 1-low
o 2
o 3
o 4

154
o 5-high
Q5 When thinking about defining PBIS goals how do you rate your confidence in doing the
following right now.
1 (low) 2 3 4 5 (high)
setting
specific
targeted goals
o o o o o
aligning the
targeted goal
budget to
goal actions
o o o o o
allocating
personnel to
implement
the targeted
goal
o o o o o
analyzing the
benchmark
data
o o o o o

Q6 On a scale of 1-5 (1-low and 5-high) how do you rate the following statement: Teachers and
coaches are successful in implementing the PBIS framework because of my administrative
support.
o 1-low
o 2

155
o 3
o 4
o 5-high
Q7 On a scale of 1-5 (1-low and 5-high) how do you rate the following statement: I feel positive
about supporting teachers and coaches with the implementation of PBIS.
o 1-low
o 2
o 3
o 4
o 5-high
Q8 Using the scale provided rate the following statements:
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Agree
I have access
to district
funding to
fully support
staff PBIS
professional
development.
o o o o o

156
I have access
to district
funding to
fully support
PBIS data
analysis.
o o o o o
I have access
to district
funding to
fully support
PBIS
personnel
positions.
o o o o o
I have time to
plan for the
PBIS
initiative.
o o o o o
I have time to
monitor the
goals for the
PBIS
initiative.
o o o o o
I have time to
evaluate the
effectiveness
of PBIS
strategies.
o o o o o
I have time to
evaluate the
effectiveness
of PBIS
professional
development.
o o o o o

157

Q9 Using the scale provided rate the following statements:
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Agree
I am confident
in aligning my
site PBIS goals
with the
district's Local
Control and
Accountability
Plan (LCAP):
School
Climate goal.
o o o o o
I am confident
in aligning my
site PBIS goal
actions with
the district's
Local Control
and
Accountability
Plan (LCAP):
School
Climate plan
actions.
o o o o o
I am confident
in aligning my
site budget
allocation with
the district's
Local Control
and
Accountability
Plan (LCAP):
School
o o o o o

158
Climate
budget.

159
APPENDIX F
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Interview Protocol
Introductions
Hello. My name is Lisa. I am a doctoral candidate from the University of Southern California. I
am here to learn about the implementation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports
(PBIS) in your school district. Thank you for taking the time to speak with me today.

Explanation of the Interview Purpose
During this interview you will be asked to tell me about your knowledge and skills, motivation,
and organizational influences related to fully implementing PBIS with fidelity at your school
site. There are no correct answers.

Explanation of Confidentiality
All information will remain confidential and will be used to complete a dissertation co-authored
by myself and two others. We will maintain your confidentiality and not disclose your identity
to anyone at any time.

Request to Record
During the interview, I would like to focus on your responses as well as listen to the interview at
a later time to capture what you shared. May I use my phone (or other device as chosen by each
individual researcher) to record the conversation? I will only share this interview with my co-
authors and we will delete the recording as soon as we have transcribed what we said here.

Freedom Not to Respond
You may stop the interview at any time during the conversation or skip a question if you prefer
not to answer.

Interview Timeframe and Logistics
The interview will take approximately 30 minutes to complete.

Please remember you may stop me at any time during the interview with questions, thoughts, or
concerns you may have. Thank you again for your time. Let us begin.

160
As such, two questions guided this study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that contribute to
teachers, coaches, and administrators’ successful implementation of the PBIS to
create a positive school culture in the Valley Unified School District?
2. What recommendations in the area of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
resources may be appropriate for other schools attempting to promote a positive
school culture through the implementation of PBIS?

Questions
First, I would like to begin with some questions to learn more about your knowledge of PBIS.

Knowledge Influences
1. Describe your school’s use of the PBIS components.
2. Describe the district’s expectations for data analysis and progress monitoring of the PBIS data.

Conceptual
1. Describe the guiding principles of the PBIS framework.

Procedural
1. Describe how you evaluate the PBIS framework components

Metacognitive
1. Tell me how you self-reflect on the PBIS implementation evaluation data.

Now, I would like to shift our conversation to talk more about the goals and progress of the
program.

Motivation Influences
Value
1. Tell me why you value partnering with the District PBIS leaders.

Self-Efficacy
1. Tell me why you are confident in creating systems to improve student behavior outcomes

Mood
1. Describe your feelings about the systems of support you created.

Attribution

161
1. Tell the PBIS about the reasons you believe attribute to the successful PBIS
implementation at your site.

Next, I would like to ask you about some technical questions about the program.

Organizational Influences
Resources
1. Tell me why you secure support and resources for the PBIS implementation.

2. Tell me how you have time to implement PBIS at your site.

Policies, processes, and procedures
1. Tell me why PBIS policy alignment between the school site and the district office is
important to you.

Culture
1. Tell me why the district’s culture of commitment is important to the PBIS
implementation at your site.

As I am about to conclude, I have a final question to ask you.

Wrap-Up
Is there anything I did not ask you that you would like to add?

Closing
Thank you for your time and insight today. Do you have any questions?

162
APPENDIX G
INFORMED CONSENT/INFORMATION SHEET
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy, Los Angeles CA, 90089

Informed Consent/Information Sheet
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy, Los Angeles CA, 90089

A PROMISING PRACTICES STUDY OF PBIS
You are invited to participate in a research study. Research studies include only people who
voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this study. You should
ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This study aims to
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This study aims to identify the components of a promising practice in the area of PBIS through
survey, interview, and document analysis as identified by three individual researchers with the
populations of teachers, PBIS coaches, and PBIS administrators.
Participant INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you are asked to
Participant INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you are asked to complete a short survey and be interviewed
by one of the three researchers.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
There are no payments or compensation for participation in this study.

CONFIDENTIALITY
There is no identifiable information obtained in connection with this study. Your name, address or
other identifiable information will not be collected.

CONFIDENTIALITY On May 25, 2020, a Minneapolis Police Officer murdered George Floyd, an
African american man during an arrest. The officer used his knee to kneel upon Mr. Floyd’s neck for eight
minutes and forty-six seconds as Mr. Floyd begged for his life. The tragic and horrific murder of George
Floyd lead to the subsequent nationwide protests against police brutality, systematic racism and the renewed
outcry that “Black Lives Matter”. The mission of the USC Rossier School of Education is to prepare leaders
to achieve educational equity through practice, research and policy. We work to improve learning
opportunities and outcomes in urban settings and to address disparities that affect historically marginalized
groups (USC, 2020). As educators we must dismantle systems of oppression and systemic racism not with

163
hopes and wishes but through advocacy and policy transformation. Specifically, our silence is an act of
complicity that can no longer be tolerated. Moreover, educators must be committed to implementing
systems that discipline students with equity and cultural responsibility. Lastly, a positive school climate
must be a shared mission that is valued and sustained by all stakeholders.

There are no identifiable information components obtained in connection with this study. Your
name, address or other identifiable information will not be collected unless you specifically agree
to provide such information. At the close of the interview, any and all of this information will be
securely deleted.

164
Required Language:
The members of the research team, the funding agency and the University of Southern
California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews
and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information is used. (Remove this statement if the data are anonymous)

The members of the research team, the funding agency, and the University of Southern California’s
Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and
monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information components are used.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
The Principal Investigator is Katie Gerrans, gerrans@usc.edu, (408) 687–9233.
Carmen Madrigal, cmadriga@usc.edu, (951) 333-1453.
Lisa Minami-Lin, minamili@usc.edu, (909) 229-5582.

The Faculty Advisors are Dr. Kenneth Yates, kennetay@usc.edu, (310) 963-0946 and Dr. Briana
Hinga, hinga@rossier.usc.edu, ( ). The outside committee member is Dr. Katherine Morillo-
Shone, Kathrine.Morillo-Shone@pomona.k12.ca.us, (909) 397-4800 x23830.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu

165
APPENDIX H
RECRUITMENT LETTER
Hello,

My name is ______________. I am currently enrolled in the Rossier School of Education at the
University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles, CA. I am in the process of conducting
research as one of the requirements for a doctoral degree in Education (Ed.D). I am seeking your
input through the survey and interview process. I am studying the PBIS promising practice
currently going on at your institution. You have been positively identified to participate in this
effort.

This data collected through these processes will be used to better understand the knowledge,
motivation and organizational indices that impact faculty and students within the identified
schools in your district. This data will be correlated with the data collected by the county and
state of California in the area of suspensions and expulsions.

For the survey, you will receive a link to the Google survey via your school email. If you are
unable to access the survey via Google, you will be sent the survey via Survey Monkey or a like
delivery system. The survey contains ( ) questions. This should take you no more than 15
minutes to complete. Once sent, the survey will remain open until February 29, 2020.

Additionally, I would appreciate it if I could schedule a subsequent interview between the dates
of xx/xx/xxxx and xx/xx/xxxx. Interviews will be scheduled for 30 minutes. Please reply to this
email with a date and time that will work for you within the stated time frame.

Results of surveys and interviews will be used for the purposes of the dissertation study, “A
Promising Practice Study of PBIS,” using the Gap Analysis Framework. All information
presented in this project will not include any identifiable information with the concluding
dissertation writing.

If you have any questions or would like to be removed from future communications regarding
this study, please reply to this email accordingly.

Thank you for taking the time to participate in this effort to examine Promising Practices at your
school.

Respectfully,

Name

166
APPENDIX I
IMMEDIATE EVALUATIONS (LEVEL 1 AND LEVEL 2)

Professional Development Date: Topic:
Directions: Thank you for attending today’s professional development. To help ensure the
quality of future professional development training, please respond to the following items.
Additional feedback space or topic suggestions for future professional development is at the
conclusion of the survey items. These feedback forms are anonymous.

Item 1: I was satisfied with the location, start time and duration of the training.

Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Item 2: The presentation information had value.
Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Item 3: The training pacing was sufficient.

Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Item 4: The information presented has given me confidence to use the new skills.

Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

167
Disagree
Item 5: The materials provided will help me understand how to use the new skills.

Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Item 6: I feel positive that I am able to share the information I learned today with my team.
Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Item 7: I believe that the information I learned today is worthwhile.
Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Item 8: I believe that the information I learned today is relevant.

Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Item 9: I believe the skills I learned today can be applied in my classroom.
Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

168
Item 10: I plan to use my new skills with my students.

Circle your response:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Additional Feedback: In the space provided please, provide any additional feedback about today’s
training.

169
APPENDIX J
DELAYED EVALUATION TOOLS
Level 1, 2, 3, and 4 Delayed for a period after the program implementation

Survey 90 Days After the PD

Evaluation

Item
Likert Scale
1-Strongly Disagree to 5-
Strongly Agree
L1: Reaction What I learned in the PD has been very
valuable when I coach teachers.
1 2 3 4 5
L1: Reaction What I learned in the PD has been very
valuable as I lead teachers in the process
of analyzing data and creating action
plans.
1 2 3 4 5
L2: Learning I was able to coach teachers more
effectively after the PD than before.
1 2 3 4 5
L2: Learning I was able to create action plans using
data more fully after the PD than before
the PD.
1 2 3 4 5
L3: Behavior My peers and I use the handouts from the
PD to effectively coach teachers and
support students.
1 2 3 4 5
L4: Results I am able to coach teachers effectively. 1 2 3 4 5
L4: Results I am able to analyze data effectively. 1 2 3 4 5
L4: Results I am able to create action plans
effectively.
1 2 3 4 5

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Adapting the Gap Analysis problem-solving framework (Clark & Estes, 2008: Rueda, 2011), this study examined the promising practices for promoting a positive school culture through the full implementation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) with fidelity in one school district. The overall study consisted of three concurrent studies that included teacher (Gerrans, 2020) and PBIS coaches and team, (Madrigal, 2020) of seven school within one district. This study focuses on the role of the site administrators. The purpose of this study was to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organization (KMO) factors that contribute to the promising practices of the PBIS framework implementation. This study used mixed methods to collect survey data from 11 administrators, interview data from two administrators, and district documents to determine (KMO) influences that contribute to implementing PBIS as promising practices. The findings show that school climate is improving. According to the data, site administrators possess the knowledge and the motivation to support this initiative. In the area of organization, the site administrators agreed they have time to implement this initiative. However, it appears that the site administrators need more resources. Based on the findings, recommendations are made for a comprehensive PBIS professional development to include all three stakeholders to strengthen continuity, commitment and consistency. This study, along with the concurrent studies, revealed how stakeholders can systematically apply the Gap Analysis promising practices model to promote a positive school culture through the full implementation of the PBIS framework with fidelity.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Promoting a positive school culture from three perspectives: a promising practices study from the perspective of PBIS coaches and team members

PDF

Positive behavior intervention support plan: a gap analysis

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Establishing a systematic evaluation of positive behavioral interventions and supports to improve implementation and accountability approaches using a gap analysis framework

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Improving foundational reading skills growth in middle school: a promising practices study

PDF

Increasing student persistence at a community college from an administration perspective

PDF

The role of positive behavior systems in reducing exclusionary school discipline

PDF

Winning the organizational leadership game through engagement: a gap analysis

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for marginalized students using the college-going culture: a promising practices study

PDF

An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: School site leadership factors

PDF

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

PDF

The re-identification of male Latino and African-American learners in the alternative high school setting: promise practice case study

PDF

Promising practices: promoting and sustaining a college-going culture

PDF

An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: central office leadership factors

Asset Metadata

Creator Minami-Lin, Lisa Chiemi (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 08/01/2020

Defense Date 06/25/2020

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

Tag gap analysis,OAI-PMH Harvest,positive behavior interventions and supports,school culture: PBIS,school discipline

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Yates, Kenneth (committee chair), Hinga, Briana (committee member), Shone, Kathrine (committee member)

Creator Email Ashnickmom@gmail.com,minamili@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-355138

Unique identifier UC11666370

Identifier etd-MinamiLinL-8849.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-355138 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-MinamiLinL-8849.pdf

Dmrecord 355138

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Minami-Lin, Lisa Chiemi

Type texts

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

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

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

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