EFFECTIVENESS OF SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL SUPPORTS

Measuring the effectiveness of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Supports

Measuring the effectiveness of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Supports

Introduction

Nothing has monopolized the public education scene lately more than the constant haranguing over No Child Left Behind (NCLB). NCLB, the 2002 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, is designed to close the achievement gap that exists between groups of students in American schools. This mission is an important one and serves to underscore teaching - or helping students to acquire and master academic skills - as a primary purpose of schools.

Meeting the demands of NCLB, for many schools, means re-evaluating and revising longstanding instructional practices to create accommodations for students at risk for academic failure. Standard practice in schools today, as a result of the NCLB legislation, often includes increased classroom time devoted to testing, greater emphasis on the adoption of empirically-supported curricula and the amount of content covered, and, particularly for urban schools, large-group after school tutorial sessions.

Despite the emphasis on academic achievement, however, it is interesting to note that it is not one of the primary concerns of most Americans. The 36th annual Gallup Poll, as it has for the past several years, cites lack of discipline, along with lack of financial support, as one of the top two concerns of the public with regard to the schools, while the use of drugs as well as fighting and violence round out the top five (Rose & Gallup, 2004). The situation is not likely to improve soon. Schools are enrolling an increasing number of troubled children. Problems, evident even during the preschool years, occur as early as kindergarten and continue into the primary grades (Gilliam, 2005; Walker, Ramsey, & Gresham, 2003/04). By the time these students are in middle school they are wreaking havoc in the classroom as well as in non-classroom settings within the school. Many of these students are disruptive and defiant to the point of being aggressive.

Antisocial Behavior

Aggression, delinquency and violence are all strongly linked dimensions of a pattern of behavior generically referred to as “antisocial.” Broadly defined, this pattern of behavior is the opposite of prosocial and suggests a willingness to commit rule infractions, defiance of adult authority, and violation of the norms and mores of society (Kazdin, 1995). Associated behaviors include those considered mildly disturbing such as noncompliance, talking back and temper tantrums to those considered more serious and disruptive to the environment such as threatening others, physically harming others, destroying property and even sexual assault. Evidence suggests that this is a pattern of behavior that may be on the rise in more technologically advanced societies.

The pattern of behavior considered antisocial does not necessarily portend a formal, clinical diagnosis. However, children with chronic and welldeveloped repertoires of antisocial behavior may be diagnosed with conduct disorder, a debilitating condition for which there are no evidence-based treatments demonstrated to be effective over a long period of time. There are, however, interventions that have shown promise over a shorter period, typically up ...