Program-wide Positive Behavior Support for Young ChildrenApril, 2006
Glen Dunlap
University of South Florida Timothy J. Lewis
University of Missouri Amy McCart
University of Kansas
The past decade has witnessed growing concern regarding the implications of serious challenging behaviors exhibited by young children (e.g., Knitzer, 2002; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2001). It has become widely understood that persistent challenging behaviors in early childhood are associated with subsequent problems in socialization, school adjustment, and academic performance, and that these problems can continue to affect adaptation in adolescence and adulthood (e.g., Campbell, 1995; Dodge, 1993; Reid, 1993). The basic message is that challenging behaviors should be addressed when children are young because problems that are not resolved by the mid-point of elementary school often become exceedingly resistant to change (e.g., Walker, Ramsey, & Gresham, 2003).
As a result, increasing efforts have been undertaken to address young children's challenging behaviors (Conroy, Dunlap, Clarke, & Alter, 2005; Powell, Dunlap, & Fox, 2006). The vast majority of these intervention efforts, however, have been undertaken reactively, well after patterns of challenging behaviors emerged. In early childhood settings, interventions are often provided at the level of the individual child or, occasionally, for targeted groups of children at high risk for challenging behavior (Joseph & Strain, 2003; Powell et al., 2006). While these interventions can be effective, they tend to be relatively expensive and difficult to deploy for the increasing numbers of young children who are identified as being at-risk for challenging behaviors (cf. Qi & Kaiser, 2003). What is needed is a systemic, proactive approach that seeks to prevent challenging behaviors from developing, while comprehensively addressing the needs of all children on the continuum of risk for challenging behaviors (Fox, Dunlap, Hemmeter, Joseph, & Strain, 2003).
The approach known as School-wide Positive Behavior Support (SW-PBS; Sugai et al., 2000) provides a well-developed model of prevention that can be adapted to fit settings that serve young children. Because the fit is not perfect, we (and other authors) have chosen to refer to the approach as Program-wide Positive Behavior Support (PW-PBS) (Fox, Jack, & Broyles, 2005; Stormont, Lewis, & Beckner, 2005). In the remainder of this article, we describe the key elements of PW-PBS and discuss some adaptations from SW-PBS that have been made in order to address the characteristics of young children and the settings in which they are served. We also discuss some directions that would benefit the further establishment of PW-PBS and, more generally, the entire enterprise of preventing challenging behaviors and promoting the desirable social-emotional development of young children.
Core Features of PW-PBS
Program-wide Positive Behavior Support (PW-PBS) is derived from School-wide Positive Behavior Support (SW-PBS) and, as such, the core features are essentially the same. The approach is based on a hierarchical model of prevention (Sugai et al., 2000; Walker et al., 1996), with primary, secondary, and tertiary levels of intervention. Primary, or universal, strategies apply to all children in the program, and it is expected that these strategies will be sufficient to guide the majority of children toward a socially-adaptive developmental trajectory, and away from the path of challenging behaviors (Fox et al., 2003). For those children with higher levels of risk, PW-PBS includes procedures of secondary prevention, which are generally provided in small group settings and focus on the development of social skills, emotional literacy, and problem solving techniques (Joseph & Strain, 2003). When children have needs that transcend the secondary level, intensive and individualized interventions are provided. These tertiary-level strategies require a functional behavioral assessment and assessment-based interventions, and typically involve the participation of a well-trained behavior specialist or consultant. In this article, we focus on the universal strategies of PW-PBS, though we emphasize that the secondary and tertiary components are also essential elements of the full program-based continuum of behavior support.
The principal elements of SW-PBS have been described in numerous articles (e.g., Sugai et al., 2000) and web sites (e.g., www.pbis.org), and these elements are paralleled in PW-PBS. However, there are important distinctions between SW-PBS for elementary and secondary schools and PW-PBS. These distinctions are owed to the significant differences in young children's intellectual, social and emotional development and needs, and to differences between public school (K-12) settings and the programs that provide early education and child care for young children. These latter settings include a variety of program formulations including Head Start centers, subsidized and corporate child care, and public school pre-K, and all of these vary in terms of the resources they have available, their personnel, and the level of autonomy owned by individual classrooms. These distinctions must be considered in the description and implementation of the core elements of PW-PBS.
In the following, we offer a brief description of the core elements with an emphasis on accommodations needed for young children in the context of PW-PBS. More extended treatment of these features is available in other sources (e.g., Stormont et al., 2005). Establishing a Team. Leadership teams
are the driving force behind both school-wide and program-wide PBS
efforts. With input from all staff, teams determine which features they
will target first, how progress will be monitored, what the behavioral
expectations will be, when and how to teach the behavior expectations,
and the type of data that will be used to inform decisions. In early
childhood programs, teams often need to be larger than in SW-PBS
because the formulations of classroom arrangements are often more
diverse, there may be different administrators and decision-makers in
charge of different aspects of the programs, there may be a variety of
related program personnel that should be involved, and it may be even
more vital to include ample family input at all levels of the process.
Particularly important members may be administrators and individuals
with expertise in behavior analysis and behavior support strategies. As
in all functional team-based functions, it is important to establish
clear delineation of roles, to maintain efficient agendas and record
keeping, and to meet on a regular and frequent basis (at least once per
month).
Define Expectations for Children's Behavior. One of
the first tasks for the PBS team is to establish behavioral
expectations. With older children, there are often approximately five
school-wide expectations that define the school's behavioral
guidelines. For early childhood programs it is important to select a
smaller number due to developmental differences. It is also important
to make sure the expectations include words that children can
understand. One early childhood program adopted the following three
behavior expectations: "Be Safe, Be Kind, and Be Responsible." These
expectations were selected because the first two were words that were
already in the children's vocabularies, and the third ("responsible")
was part of the expectations for the school district's support system,
to which the children would soon be transitioning (Stormont et al.,
2005. In another PW-PBS example, established in a large Head Start
program in Kansas, the expectations were: "We use walking feet," "We
take turns," and "We use soft touch" (Fox et al., 2005). When
expectations are established, they are posted throughout the program
using pictures and icons, often with a catchy theme designed to attract
children's attention.
Teach Children to Respond to Expectations.
Determination of behavioral expectations is followed by clear plans for
teaching children to understand and comply with the expectations in the
full range of settings within the program (e.g., classroom, hallway,
bathroom, playground). Programs often develop schedules or matrices for
teaching the expectations in natural routines across the day, and these
schedules are often accompanied by strategies and activities that can
be used to teach the expectations. Expectations can be taught with a
range of strategies that include modeling, practice, role playing, and
feedback in context, and a variety of materials can be used to help the
teaching process (e.g., books, games, puppets, social stories).
Fortunately, most early childhood programs place an emphasis on
teaching social skills, and most early childhood educators recognize
that opportunities to teach and support appropriate behavior exist
throughout the day (e.g., Bricker, Pretti-Frontczak, & McComas,
1998).
Acknowledge Children's Positive Behavior. When
behavior expectations are taught, it is extremely important to
acknowledge when these behaviors are occurring in the context of the
children's regular routines. Early childhood professionals should
illustrate the specific behaviors that exemplify the expectations in
context so that the expectations become anchored to familiar words and
behavior. Highlighting the occurrence of exemplars in context serves
the purpose of teaching the expectations and supporting the use of the
expectations through positive acknowledgement of the behavior. For many
children, this acknowledgement serves as a positive reinforcer of their
behavior and will increase the likelihood that they will engage in the
behavior again (Maag, 2001). Acknowledgement of desired behaviors is
such a vital feature of PW-PBS that often the leadership team needs to
arrange special monitoring strategies to help prompt staff to "catch
the children being good" with a high enough frequency.
Acknowledgement of children's response to behavior expectations must
be provided at a level appropriate for the developmental age of the
children. For example, token systems that are effective with older
children may not work with young children given their cognitive levels.
Acknowledgment typically needs to be more immediate, more descriptive
and more concrete. Highly specific verbal feedback is usually
effective. Other approaches for acknowledging positive social behavior
are useful, including group celebrations and enthusiastic home notes
that the children can help prepare.
Use Data to Drive Decisions.
During the PBS team meetings, decisions need to be made regarding the
types of data to collect to monitor program-wide efforts. Many early
childhood programs keep records on referrals for mental health
consultation, evaluations for special education, and requests for
technical assistance for classroom and/or behavior management. While
these sources can be useful in gauging some effects of PW-PBS, the data
are generally not sensitive enough to permit decision making regarding
universal PW-PBS strategies. Elementary and secondary schools generally
have an office referral data collection system already in place when
they begin the PBS process, and these data have been demonstrated to be
very informative and can be used to focus intervention supports on
specific classrooms, settings, and individual students (Irvin, Tobin,
Sprague, Sugai, & Vincent, 2004; Sugai, Sprague, Horner, &
Walker, 2000). However, young children are usually not sent to an
office when they engage in challenging behavior, and challenging
behavior is a more relative term with younger children. Most early
childhood programs do not have a program-wide format for collecting
data, and behavioral information is often not reported to a central
location. As a result, teams seeking to develop PW-PBS may spend a good
deal of time determining what behaviors should be documented, what
setting conditions should be noted, where the behavioral reports should
be sent, and how the reports should be monitored and used in team
decision making. In response to this need, some programs around the
country have developed behavior incident forms (e.g, Stormont et al.,
2005) or behavior incident reports (e.g., Hemmeter, Fox, Jack, Broyles,
& Doubet, 2005) for use in early childhood settings. These forms
document occurrences of targeted challenging behaviors, and note the
type of problem behavior, the setting in which it occurred, the type of
activity and any other potential triggers to the behavior, the people
involved in the activity and the consequences (if any) that were
provided following the behavioral incident. These forms have been field
tested and have been found to be reasonably efficient data recording
strategies for programs invested in PW-PBS.
Providing Supports for Children with or At-Risk of Serious Challenging Behaviors.
While the universal strategies of PW-PBS can reduce the majority of
challenging behaviors, they will not be sufficient for children with
high levels of risk factors or children who already display intensive
or chronic patterns of challenging behavior. For these children,
targeted group interventions at the secondary level (e.g., Joseph &
Strain, 2003) or individualized, assessment-based and intensive
interventions at the tertiary level are required (Powell et al., 2006).
Data from behavior incident forms can help teams determine which
children and classrooms need support and what supports are appropriate.
Discussion of interventions at these levels is beyond the scope of this
article, however there are a number of sources where detailed
guidelines are available (e.g. www.challengingbehavior.org).
Summary
Until recently, challenging behaviors of young children in early
childhood settings have been addressed largely at the individual level,
through mental health and behavioral consultation, or in small groups
targeting the social-emotional development of at-risk children. The
emergence of school-wide PBS, along with a growing appreciation of the
need to prevent children from adverse developmental trajectories
(Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000), have generated new consideration of
systemic, proactive approaches within programs of early education and
child care. Program-wide positive behavior support (PW-PBS) is the
systems approach that uses preventive intervention strategies derived
from school-wide PBS and applies them with suitable modifications in
early childhood settings.
In this article, we have provided
a brief and cursory overview of PW-PBS and have noted how some
conspicuous features of the approach are adapted to fit the needs of
young children and early childhood settings. Some of the obvious
distinctions include the developmental ages of young children, the
general absence of "school-wide" data collection and disciplinary
procedures, and the considerable diversity of program formulations and
funding streams that exist at the early childhood and pre-K level.
Still, adaptations are possible and early efforts are beginning to
demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of PW-PBS in a variety of
settings and circumstances (e.g., Fox & Little, 2000; Fox et al.,
2005; Stormont et al., 2005).
While PW-PBS offers exciting
possibilities for the further development of early childhood programs,
there is much that to be learned. We need to initiate more program
offerings and collect detailed evaluation data in the range of settings
to which the approach pertains, and we need to create and validate
additional assessment instruments in order that programs can engage in
self-assessment processes. In short, in order to progress optimally so
that the approach is of value to the thousands of early childhood
settings in need of improvement, PW-PBS needs to engage in many of the
same iterative processes that SW-PBS has gone through in the past
decade. In addition, however, it will be vitally important for program
developers to explore the value of applying system-wide, proactive
intervention strategies for the numerous early childhood service
offerings that are not defined by specific settings or centers. For
instance, most programs for infants and toddlers are family-centered
and home-based, and funded by Part C of IDEA, early Head Start or other
entities (Powell, Fixsen, Dunlap, Fox, & Smith, in press). Exciting
and tremendously important opportunities exist for program developers,
policy makers, and researchers concerned with incorporating prevention
and positive behavior support perspectives into the systems affecting
the full range of early childhood programs, from infancy through
entrance and participation in the K-12 school system.
References
Bricker, D., Pretti-Frontczak, K., & McComas, N. (1998). An activity-based approach to early intervention. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Campbell, S. B. (1995). Behavior problems in preschool children: A review of recent research. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 36(1), 113-149.
Conroy, M.A., Dunlap, G., Clarke, S., & Alter, P.J. (2005). A
descriptive analysis of positive behavioral intervention research with
young children with challenging behavior. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 25, 157-166.
Fox, L. Dunlap, G., Hemmeter, M. L., Joseph, G., & Strain, P.
(2003). The teaching pyramid: A model for supporting social competence
and preventing challenging behavior in young children. Young Children, 58(4), 48-52. Fox, L., Jack, S., & Broyles, L. (2005).
Program-wide positive behavior support: Supporting young children's
social-emotional development and addressing challenging behaviors.
Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental
Health Institute.
Fox, L. & Little, N. (2001). Starting early: School-wide behavior support in a community preschool. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 3, 251-254.
Gilliam, W. S. (2005). Prekindergarteners left behind: Expulsion rates in state prekindergarten systems. Retrieved July 20, 2005, from http://www.fcd-us.org/PDFs/NationalPreKExpulsionPaper03.02_new.pdf.
Hemmeter, M.L., Fox, L., Jack, S., Broyles, L., & Doubet, S. (2005). Behavior incident report form. Unpublished document. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University.
Irvin, L.K., Tobin, T.J., Sprague, J.R., Sugai, G., & Vincent,
C.G. (2004). Validity of office discipline referral measures as indices
of school-wide behavioral status and effects of school-wide behavioral
interventions. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 131-147.
Joseph, G. J., & Strain, P. S. (2003). Comprehensive
evidence-based social-emotional curricula for young children: An
analysis of efficacious adoption potential. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 23, 65-76.
Knitzer, J. (2002). Promoting Social and Emotional Readiness for School: Toward a Policy Agenda. Set for success: Building a strong foundation for school readiness based on the social-emotional development of young Children. Kansas City, MO: The Kaufman Early Education Exchange.
Lewis, T. J. & Sugai, G. (1999). Effective behavior support: A systems approach to proactive school-wide management. Focus on Exceptional Children, 31, 24-47.
Maag, J. W. (2001). Rewarded by punishment: Reflections on the disuse of positive reinforcement in education. Exceptional Children, 67, 173-186.
Powell, D., Dunlap, G., & Fox, L. (2006). Prevention and
intervention for the challenging behaviors of toddlers and
preschoolers. Infants and Young Children, 19, 25-35.
Powell, D., Fixsen, D., Dunlap, G., Smith, B., & Fox, L. (in
press). A synthesis of knowledge relevant to service utilization and
delivery for young children with challenging behavior. Journal of Early Intervention.
Qi, C. H., & Kaiser, A. P. (2003). Behavior problems of
preschool children from low-income families: Review of the literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 23(4), 188-216.
Shonkoff, J.P., & Phillips, D.A. (Eds.) (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Stormont, M., Lewis, T.J., & Bckner, R. (2005). Positive
behavior support systems: Applying key features in preschool settings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37 (July/August), 42-49.
Stormont, M., Lewis, T.J., & Smith, S.C. (2005). Behavior
support strategies in eaerly childhood settings: Teachers' importance
and feasibility ratings. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 7, 131-139.
Sugai, G., Horner, R.H., Dunlap, G., Hieneman, M., Lewis, T.J.,
Nelson, C.M., Scott, T., Liaupsin, C., Sailor, W., Turnbull, A.P.,
Turnbull, H.R. III, Wickham, D., Ruef, M., & Wilcox, B. (2000).
Applying positive behavior support and functional behavioral assessment
in schools, Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2, 131-143.
Sugai, G., Sprague, J.R., Horner, R.H., & Walker, H.M. (2000).
PRevinting school violence: The use of office discipline referrals to
assess and monitor school-wide discipline interventions. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, 94-101.
Walker, H.M., Horner, R.H., Sugai, G., Bullis, M., Sprague, J.R.,
Bricker, D., & Kaufman, M. (1996). Integrated approaches to
preventing antisocial behavior patterns among school-age children and
youth. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 193-256.
Walker, H. M., Ramsey, E., & Gresham, F. M. (2003). Antisocial behavior in school: Evidence-based practices (2nd ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
All content of this newsletter and the website are the property of
the Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavior Support.
Duplication without express written consent by authors is strictly
prohibited. For any questions please contact: Laura Riffel
|