UPDATE: This issue was amended and placed on Washington State PTA's short-term platform Oct. 20, 2012. It will be an association priority for the 2013 and 2014 state legislative sessions. Amended language is in red.
SUPPORTED ISSUE:The Washington State PTA shall initiate and/or support legislation or policies that:
- Promote and support implementation of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports (PBIS) or similar evidence-based programs, and discourage use of zero tolerance policies, open-ended expulsions and suspension policies that take students out of a productive learning environment.
- Require review of discipline policies in the state's "required action" audits and inclusion of school-wide PBIS or similar evidence-based programs in improvement plans for the state's persistently lowest performing schools.
- Require alternative education assignments for students suspended or expelled.
- Increase investment for technical assistance, training, and implementation of the PBIS model or similar evidence-based models of addressing behavioral problems in schools.
- Assist in the development and implementation of integrated data systems to inform strategies and trigger supports and research-based interventions, including social and emotional learning methods, for students and families.
WSPTA board: Do Pass
- Issue submitted by: Jennifer Talbot, Lewis & Clark Elementary PTA 11.5.15; Michelle Jobe, Lewis & Clark Elementary PTA 11.5.15; DeeDee Loberg, Greenacres Elementary PTSA 15.2.25; Anna Riggan, Lewis & Clark Elementary PTA 11.5.15; Dori Tate Ballou Jr. High PTA 5.7.85, Brooke Valentine, Kent Area PTA Council 9.7
Submitter statement for adoption:
Out-of-school suspension, zero-tolerance and expulsion remove students from the classroom and lead to an increased chance of dropping out of school. However, disruptive behavior in school is a significant concern for parents, teachers, and administrators. How do schools maintain discipline and safety for all students?
Positive Behavior Interventions & Support (PBIS) is a school-wide behavior model, culminating from 30 years of research. Why is PBIS so important for our children? Research shows that behavior and academics are linked. Schools using PBIS with fidelity have environments that are safer, less reactive and exclusionary; more engaging, preventative, and productive; improve supports for students whose behavior require more specialized assistance; maximize academic achievement for all students.
The universal elements of PBIS include: establishing clear positive expectations; teaching expected behaviors; providing positive feedback; intervening when appropriate; using data for on-going monitoring and evaluation.
The eleven National Technical Assistance Centers for PBIS work in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Education. Over 17,000 schools nationwide use PBIS; over 400 in Washington state. The U.S. Department of Education Strategic Plan for 2011-2014 exclusively acknowledges PBIS. The National PTA acknowledges PBIS in its Federal Policy recommendations. Many states have initiatives for assisting schools and district in PBIS implementation. It is time for the state of Washington to demonstrate more dedicated support of PBIS as an efficient and effective behavior management strategy for ALL children and a means to close the achievement gap, reduce suspensions and expulsions, and eliminate zero-tolerance or non-evidence based discipline policies.
Con arguments
There were no issues identified by the WSPTA Board. The legislative committee expressed support for ending zero tolerance policies and curbing expulsions and suspensions, but wanted to ensure discipline policies were district driven.
It should be noted PBIS is an approach, not a packaged curriculum, scripted intervention, or manualized strategy. Schools use their own data to establish expectations, goals and strategies to create and sustain positive learning climates. (FAQ:
http://www.pbis.org/pbis_faq.aspx )
Context and timeliness
Expulsions and suspensions have not been effective disciplinary measures and have contributed to the achievement gaps. Their overuse has especially hurt kids of color and special education students. Zero-tolerance policies have led to an increased reliance on suspensions and expulsions. At the same time, school climate is essential both for individual student success and whole-school turnaround. In the call to reform school discipline, advocates have embraced proactive approaches that establish school-wide behavior expectations, help teach them when necessary, and use data to understand where breakdowns are happening and identify intervention strategies.
ZERO TOLERANCE ISN’T WORKING
For at-risk students, the most consistently documented outcome of suspension and expulsion appears to be further suspension and expulsion. Punishing children by taking away instructional time can end up pushing them out of school. And in the case of open-ended expulsions, children have no guarantee they will receive an education from another institution.
According to a synopsis of research from the National Association of School Psychologists:
- Harsh punishment and zero tolerance policies have not been effective at either improving behavioral climate in schools, or preventing students with problem behaviors from entering the juvenile justice system.
- Three years after being excluded from school, almost 70 percent of these youth have been arrested.
The American Psychological Association recommends rethinking zero tolerance policies and looking at alternative disciplinary practices:
- “Despite a 20-year history of implementation, there are surprisingly few data that could directly test the assumptions of a zero tolerance approach to school discipline, and the data that are available tend to contradict those assumptions. Moreover, zero tolerance policies may negatively affect the relationship of education with juvenile justice and appear to conflict to some degree with current best knowledge concerning adolescent development.” (Excerpted from, “Are Zero Tolerance Policies Effective in the Schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations.” American Psychologist, December 2008. http://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/zero-tolerance.pdf)
SOMETHING BETTER
Schools need effective, proactive strategies. Positive Behavior Intervention & Supports is a framework that is research- and evidence-based -- backed up by 130 research publications between 1983 and 2009.
PBIS is a systems approach for schools desiring to maximize academic achievement and social-emotional growth for all students. PBIS utilizes a three-tiered approach with progressively increased levels of support for students who need them. The first tier of systems and supports focuses on the prevention of problem behavior and is delivered to the entire student body. The second and third tiers of systems and supports are designed to minimize the impact of problem behavior for at-risk students and to teach new and more appropriate behavioral skills. Tier 2 strategies are designed for small groups of students; 10 to 15 percent of students are expected to need this level of support. Tier 3 strategies are individualized and are expected to be needed for 1 to 5 percent of students.
Schools implementing PBIS create uniform behavioral expectations for all classrooms and building locations, develop systematic procedures for teaching and positively reinforcing expectations for students and staff, and utilize school teams that employ data-based decision-making to guide implementation (Sugai & Horner, 2002).
PBIS is acknowledged and supported by the U.S. Department of Education and the Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. Additionally, PBIS is the only behavior management framework specifically recommended in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
According to the synopsis from the National Association of School Psychologists:
- Schools that implement system-wide interventions also report increased time engaged in academic activities and improved academic performance.
- Schools that employ system-wide interventions for problem behavior prevention indicate reductions in office discipline referrals of 20-60 percent.
- Appropriately implemented positive behavior supports can lead to dramatic improvements that have long-term effects on the lifestyle, functional communication skills, and problem behavior in individuals with disabilities.
- A review of research on effectiveness of positive behavior supports showed that there was over a 90 percent reduction in problem behavior in over half of the studies; the problem behavior stopped completely in over 26 percent of the studies.
ESSENTIAL SUPPORT
Positive behavior supports create student-focused, safe environments conducive to learning – a key ingredient for successful student outcomes. A longitudinal study of school turnaround efforts in Chicago identified five essential supports. All had to be present for sustained success:
- School leadership
- Parent and community ties
- Professional capacity of the faculty
- School learning climate
- Instructional guidance
Schools with strong safety and order were two times more likely to improve in reading than schools weak on this measure. Schools that measured strong in all five supports were at least 10 times more likely than schools with just one or two strengths to achieve substantial gains in reading and math. A sustained weakness in just one of these areas undermined virtually all attempts at improving student learning. (SOURCE: Bryk, A., P.B. Sebring, E. Allensworth, and J.Q. Easton. Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/O/bo8212979.html )
For schools implementing PBIS strategies with fidelity, student instruction time is maximized. Effective use of classroom time has consistently been shown to have a strong effect on student achievement
- SOURCE: Marzano, R.J. (2000). A New Era of School Reform: Going Where the Research Takes Us. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
Conversely, zero tolerance, suspensions and expulsions can have devastating consequences for children. In addition to being ineffective as behavior management tools, they can alienate children who often most need support.
- Students can’t learn if they are removed from the classroom.
- When students are suspended or expelled, administrators are often sending that young person back into the environment that inspired their unfavorable behavior.
DISCIPLINE AS AN EQUITY ISSUE
African-American students, particularly males, are far more likely to be suspended or expelled from school than their peers. In the Civil Rights Data Collection sample, black students make up 18 percent of the students, but 35 percent of the students suspended once, and 39 percent of the students expelled. (SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, 2009-10 national survey;
http://ocrdata.ed.gov/ )
Students with disabilities are more likely than non-disabled students to be involved in the school disciplinary process. In a given year, about 1 in 10 students with disabilities receives multiple in-school suspensions with one percent being expelled. Students with emotional disturbances are significantly more likely to have been suspended or expelled in one school year or over their school careers than youth in all other disability categories. (SOURCE: Facts from NLTS2: School Behavior and Disciplinary of Youth With Disabilities, March 2006.. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
www.nlts2.org/fact_sheets/nlts2_fact_sheet_2006_03.pdf )
Washington State’s Office of the Education Ombudsman’s data on disciplinary cases handled in the 2011 fiscal year shows the same concerning pattern: 76 percent of the suspended/expelled students that OEO worked with were students of color as opposed to 24 percent white; 78 percent were male.
The OEO also saw a disturbing trend. The number of complaints regarding expulsions and suspensions handled by OEO grew by 9.3 percent in the 2010-2011 school year; 42 percent of those cases were expulsions. While the majority of students expelled were high school students, the youngest students expelled were 6 years old. (OEO 2010-11 Annual Report,
http://www.governor.wa.gov/oeo/reports/2011_12_at_a_glance.pdf )
Limiting when and why we suspend and expel, and providing alternative learning while a student is banned from class, will facilitate increased student achievement and graduation.
Why is it a PTA issue?
This PBIS proposal aligns with National PTA recommendations in the renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and having it on the platform would help WSPTA advocate for effective intervention efforts at low-performing schools.
This proposal aligns with WSPTA legislative principles:
- Public Education Policies and Funding: Re-defining basic education; Reducing the achievement gap; Alternative programs for all schools; Reduction of high school dropout rates
- Safe and Nurturing Environments for Children and Youth: Anti-bullying and anti-harassment; Safe and healthy schools
- Health and Well-being of Children and Youth: Effective prevention and intervention programs; Comprehensive juvenile justice programs that focus on prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation
This proposal aligns with WSPTA resolutions:
- 4.7 Public School Dropout Prevention/Retrieval
- 18.27 No Child Left Behind and the 1%
- 18.29 Equitable Educational Opportunities
- 19.3 Support for Children with Economic Disadvantages
Here are National PTA’s 2012 public policy recommendations that include PBIS:
- Require “school-parent compacts” to support school and family partnerships in the development of recommendations for student attendance, expectations and supports for student behaviors. Compacts must include rational disciplinary policies that include the implementation of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) or similar evidence-based approaches, and phase-out zero-tolerance policies and out-of-school suspension that contribute to the achievement gap.
- Increase investment for technical assistance, training, and implementation of the PBIS model of addressing behavioral problems in schools, making it an allowable use of funds under ESEA-NCLB.
- Require the inclusion of a classroom-based behavioral management plan that focuses on prevention during the development of every student’s IEP and 504b plan. Require that both general and special education teachers know how to respond to behavioral problems with positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS).
In addition to the issue submitters, organizations engaged on PBIS include:
- The National Technical Assistance Center on PBIS, a collaboration of the U.S. Department of Education and 11 Technical Assistance Centers across our nation. These Centers provide everything from training, program development, and technical assistance. PBIS has a large network of support available at national, state, and local levels.
- Northwest PBIS, http://www.pbisnetwork.org/
- The Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction is in the process of forming a State Advisory Committee in collaboration with NorthWest PBIS to develop a PBIS initiative
Organizations seeking to change discipline systems/limit suspensions and expulsions include:
- League of Education Voters
- Team Child
- Office of the Education Ombudsman
- ACLU Washington
- Seattle Young People’s Project
- El Centro do la Raza
- Community Center for Education Results
- OneAmerica
- Youth Undoing Institutionalized Racism
- Judge, attorneys, law enforcement
Fiscal Impact
Costs of PBIS implementation will vary by school district. Some districts have discovered that investing in PBIS infrastructure has saved the district money in the long run. As an example of budget considerations:
- “To properly sustain PBIS implementation, an LEA should budget: 1.0 FTE of PBIS coaching per 15 schools or 10,000 students (LEAs can train and re-position federally funded staff such as behavior interventionists and school psychologists to serve as PBS coaches); 0.5 FTE of coaching in targeted and individualized PBS interventions; 0.2 FTE of a district administrator’s time to coordinate the LEA’s PBIS efforts. Training costs vary by source and LEA size. Smaller LEAs can pool funds for training.”
Funding options could include: any portion of IDEA Recovery Funds; Professional Development Grants under Title II, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act; Schoolwide Programs under Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act; Early Intervening Services under IDEA; School Improvement under Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
To sustain PBIS efforts, funding options could include: IDEA Personnel Development Grants; IDEA Technical Assistance Grants; and IDEA Model Demonstration Grants; Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Grants; School Counseling Grants (to train school counselors in PBS) under Title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Resources
