An Educator's Guide to Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Inteventions and Supports. Jason E. Harlacher

Table 1.3: What SWPBIS Is and Is Not

SWPBIS Is …	SWPBIS Is Not …
A framework for decision making	A packaged program
A systemic and cultural change that is embedded throughout the school and culture	A scripted intervention or something that is added onto existing structures
Data driven	A rigid manual to follow
Preventative and responsive	A temporary solution
Inclusive of all students	Only about extrinsic rewards
A continuum of support using universal and targeted evidence-based practices	Just for students with chronic behavior issues

      Source: NTACPBIS, 2010.

Four Key Elements

      The principles behind SWPBIS may appear complex, but in practice, SWPBIS consists of four key elements: (1) outcomes, (2) practices, (3) systems, and (4) data (see figure 1.2; Sugai & Horner, 2006). These four elements provide a framework for organizing all of the pieces of SWPBIS and allow teams to think through the components they need to have a sustainable SWPBIS model. Outcomes are defined as the social, behavioral, and academic outcomes that school teams wish to achieve through the implementation of SWPBIS. Practices are the strategies and methods used to support students in displaying prosocial behavior, and the systems are processes and procedures put into place to support the staff in implementing those practices and gathering the necessary data (Sugai & Horner, 2006). Data are the clear pieces of information used to monitor implementation of the system, monitor its impact, and determine if the identified outcomes are achieved. As seen in figure 1.2, the outcomes should promote social competence and academic achievement. Staff then gather data to support decision making to determine the extent to which the students are reaching outcomes are effective, that the practices teachers implement to support students’ behavior in achieving the outcomes, and that the systems are in place to support staff with implementing the designated practices and gathering the necessary data to make decisions.

      Source: PBIS Center, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education, 2017.

Figure 1.2: Four key elements of SWPBIS.

      George Sugai, a professor at the University of Connecticut and leading researcher in SWPBIS, is credited with an analogy to help think about these elements. If you consider going on a vacation, the outcome is the destination. Sometimes we take trips to a faraway or new destination, and other times we take trips that are closer and more familiar. Practices can be related to the way we drive. Some of us are “Sunday” drivers who like to take our time along the way, making lots of stops and taking in all the scenery. Others are like delivery truck drivers who only stop when the service station is on the right side of the road because it is more efficient than crossing traffic to stop for services on the left side of the road. In our vacation analogy, systems can be thought of as the car we drive to our destination. A reliable mode of transportation versus a car that continually breaks down and needs service makes a huge difference in whether we are likely to arrive at the destination. The data make up the map or GPS information we use to get to the destination. It is important that the information we use to determine how to arrive at our vacation destination is accurate (updated with detours and construction information) to increase the precision of our decision making about which routes to take. Similarly, the more complex the route to the destination, the more data we are likely to need. These four key elements interact with each other and are the salient features that comprise the SWPBIS framework. When all four elements are in place within a school, teams can develop a sustainable SWPBIS framework (McIntosh, Horner, & Sugai, 2009; Sugai & Horner, 2006).

       Outcomes: Promoting Social Competence and Academic Achievement

      Prior to implementing SWPBIS, school teams will identify the specific and relevant outcomes that they want to achieve with implementation. Outcomes are the “academic and behavior targets that are endorsed and emphasized by students, families, and educators” (NTACPBIS, n.d.). As Robert Horner, George Sugai, Anne Todd, and Teri Lewis-Palmer (2005) described:

      Schools are expected to be safe environments where students learn the academic and social skills needed for life in our society. The basic goals of any system of schoolwide [PBIS] must be to provide the behavioral assistance needed to achieve those [outcomes]. (p. 365)

      To that end, school teams identify their desired outcomes and define those in measurable manners. All students, staff, and parents decide upon and value these outcomes (Sugai & Horner, 2006). One way to frame the outcomes is to consider them as goals of implementation; what do teams want SWPBIS to achieve?

      Schools will identify long- and short-term outcomes of using SWPBIS. Long-term outcomes are overarching and global outcomes that are often distal; they take months or years to achieve, such as improved academic performance or increased safety within the school. Short-term outcomes are more immediate and pressing goals, and they are typically reached within a few weeks or within the semester or quarter. For example, schools may identify a short-term outcome of reducing referrals among sixth-grade students or increasing attendance of students during the second semester. The outcomes can also be organized across tiers. For example, a Tier One outcome is to ensure that at least 80 percent of students have zero to one office referrals or that all Tier Two interventions are provided with at least 90 percent fidelity.

      As an example, a PBIS team at XYZ Elementary School implemented SWPBIS to improve the overall climate within its school and to decrease student problem behavior. During implementation, it identified a need to examine behavior during recess. The team wanted to decrease disrespectful behavior that occurred when students were lining up from recess to come inside. It set a goal to reduce office referrals by 50 percent over a two-month period. This reduction in office referrals was the outcome the team monitored to determine if they had been successful. The intervention involved special recess positive tickets that students got for lining up appropriately. Students took those tickets back to the classroom, and at the end of the week, the class with the most tickets for this behavior got an extra recess (and the teacher got an extra fifteen minutes to herself because extra recess was given during another recess period, so someone other than the classroom teacher was responsible for supervision). When the team reviewed the outcome of this intervention, it met the goal of reducing the office referrals by at least 50 percent. In addition, teachers and staff reported an increase in focused instruction and acknowledgment for lining up appropriately and respectfully transitioning in from recess. The classroom teachers also reported that the focus on appropriate behavior at recess reduced time spent responding to “tattling” and other inappropriate recess behaviors (students still being frustrated when they came into the classroom, and arguments extending into the classroom), resulting in shorter, more pleasant transitions and increased instructional time immediately following recess (Rodriguez, 2015).

      Identifying the outcomes that school teams wish to achieve provides an organizing framework to make decisions about the data schools will gather, the practices they use, and the systems they need to put into place. For example, if a school team identifies increases in attendance as a valued outcome, one would expect that school to examine data on attendance rates throughout the school year. When faced with decisions about which professional development to conduct, this school team would select trainings related to attendance and truancy rather than trainings unrelated to attendance. Although decisions about professional development