Implementation Science and Systematic Practice versus Pseudoscience, Menu-Driven Frameworks, and “Convenience Store” Implementation
Dear Colleagues,
Introduction
For 30 years or more, “School Discipline” and “Classroom Management” have been cited as among the most consistently pressing “problems” in schools across the country. Indeed, when significantly or persistently inappropriate student behavior disrupts other students’ opportunities to learn, the classroom climate, and school safety, something must be done.
And, in most districts and schools, something is being done.
But . . . are the right things being done? And . . . are the right outcomes being targeted?
This Blog message will discuss:
- The school discipline and classroom management “problems” that many schools are trying to address across the country, and the goals and outcomes that they use to choose their “solutions.” But we will synthesize these problems into the social, emotional, and behavioral self-management elements needed to resolve these problems—and reconceptualize the needed goals, outcomes, and interventions into a school improvement context.
- Some of the approaches that schools and districts are using to “solve” these problems, their limitations, and why they will not fully solve the identified “problems”—and actually could make them worse. Here, we will discuss the “selection criteria” that schools and districts should use to avoid adopting approaches based on pseudoscience, ineffective menu-driven frameworks, and “research” that either is poorly done or inappropriately applied.
- How most of the approaches that could work, are not working. This is because most of these approaches concentrate on only one or two of the five interdependent and scientifically-based components that are prerequisite to school discipline and classroom management success.
The Goals of School Discipline and Classroom Management
The Current Goal of Many Schools
Many schools and districts have one primary goal relative to school discipline and classroom management:
To decrease or eliminate (disproportionate) Office Discipline Referrals (ODRs), Suspensions, Expulsions, and Alternative School Placements.
The biggest problem with this goal is that:
All of these disciplinary decisions/actions are subjective in nature, and thus, are unreliable relative to tracking the effectiveness of a school discipline program.
For example, when confronted with the same student’s mild or “low level” misbehavior, some teachers will ignore it (so they don’t reinforce it with attention); others will use a corrective response; others will respond with a consequence; and still others will immediately send it to the office.
For mild misbehavior, science-to-practice would suggest either of the first two responses. Thus, the Office Discipline Referrals (ODRs) that result from the latter teachers are both pedagogically inappropriate, and they artificially inflate a school’s ODR data.
More specifically: If a school had five novice teachers with weak classroom management skills (because of poor or non-existent university training—which is the norm), and they made 15 inappropriate ODRs (as above) during the same year, the school’s ODR count would be inaccurately inflated by 75 ODRs.
If these 75 ODRs were the majority of the school’s ODR count for the year, then the ODR outcome data would be more representative of these teachers’ inappropriate referrals, and less reflective of the efficacy of the school’s overall discipline program.
Relatedly: We know that some teachers (inappropriately) send students from minority backgrounds and with disabilities, respectively, to the Office for mild levels of misbehavior, while they “discipline” the Caucasian students who exhibit the same misbehavior in their classrooms.
This practice is one of the root causes of disproportionality across our country.
Critically, when this occurs, the District-level solution is NOT to initiate policies that forbid Office Discipline Referrals at certain grade levels.
The solution is to implement a comprehensive, scientifically-based schoolwide discipline system (see below) and to train and support all teachers and staff in its implementation.
[See my earlier BLOG on this subject: From One Extreme to the Other: Changing School Policy from “Zero Tolerance” to “Total Tolerance will not Work. . . Decreasing Disproportionate Discipline Referrals and Suspensions Requires Changing Student and Staff Behavior]
Some additional problems occur when the primary School Discipline and Classroom Management goal for a school or district focuses on decreasing ODRs and other disciplinary decisions and actions.
- One problem is the reactive nature of goal.
Rather than focus on proactively teaching students appropriate interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional control and coping skills, the goal suggests that we (a) wait for inappropriate behavior to occur; (b) respond to it with an administrative action; and (c) expect that this action will eliminate inappropriate behavior in the future.
Said a different way: “The absence of prevention often increases the necessity of intervention.”
- A second problem is that—implicit in the goal’s “definition of success”—is a belief that when ODRs are decreasing or at low levels, students’ classroom behavior is appropriate.
Indeed, just because ODRs are decreasing over time in a school, this does not necessarily mean that students are behaving appropriately in their classrooms. In fact, it may simply mean that their inappropriate classroom behavior is annoying or disruptive, but below the “threshold” or severity that warrants an ODR.
Said a different way: “The absence of inappropriate behavior for an ODR does not necessarily represent the presence of appropriate behavior in the classroom.”
A third problem with the goal above is the potential to view all student misbehavior as disciplinary in nature.
Indeed, some students’ “discipline problems” actually reflect social, emotional, or behavioral challenges that are medically-, situationally-, or disability-related. Moreover, these challenges cannot be changed through disciplinary actions. Critically, these students need strategic or intensive intervention in order to address their needs.
Said a different way: “There are differences between ‘Discipline Problems’ and ‘Behavioral Problems.’ The former respond to disciplinary actions, while the latter require and respond to intervention.”
The Needed Goals for ALL Schools
Instead of the single goal above, we recommend that schools and districts systemically embed their School Discipline and Classroom Management goals into their effective “school and schooling” goals.
In fact, based on Project ACHIEVE’s evidence-based (through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) multi-tiered Positive Behavioral Support System, and our 30+ years of implementation in thousands of schools across the country (www.projectachieve.net), we suggest the following goals:
- High levels of academic engagement and academic achievement for all students.
- High levels of effective interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional control and coping skills by all students (and staff).
- High levels of critical thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving skills by all students (and staff).
- High levels of teacher confidence—relative to instruction, classroom management, and in helping students with academic or behavior problems.
- Consistently effective instruction and classroom management across all teachers/instructional support staff.
- Low levels of classroom discipline problems, discipline problems that need to involve the Principal, or discipline problems that require student suspensions or expulsions.
- High levels of parent and community support and involvement in student self-management.
Together, these seven goals alleviate the concerns with the single discipline-focused goal typically embraced by most schools and districts (as above). Moreover, these goals reflect the many factors that converge to help schools become positive, safe, and proactive—relative to school discipline and classroom management. Finally, these goals illuminate the interdependency between a school’s academic and social, emotional, and behavioral programs.
But embedded in these goals—if it were required—is the one goal that schools and districts should adopt if they must identify a single goal in the school discipline and classroom management area.
This goal (#3 above) is:
To teach, prompt, and reinforce students for high levels of effective, developmentally-appropriate interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional control and coping skills—so that social, emotional, and behavioral interactions are positive, and “problems” are prevented.
School Discipline and Classroom Management Approaches: Effective and Ineffective
The Current Approaches Used by Many Schools
In surveying the school discipline and classroom management approaches that are most-used around the country, four trends emerge:
- Some schools adopt approaches to address social or societal characteristics or gaps that are present or needed in their community (e.g., Cultural Competence and Proficiency; Disproportionality; Poverty Awareness and Response programs)
- Some schools adopt approaches to address student-specific characteristics or problems that are present in their school (e.g., School Attendance and Truancy; Teasing and Bullying Prevention Programs; Trauma Sensitive Schools; Restorative Justice)
- Some schools adopt approaches to improve students’ social, emotional, or behavioral awareness and skills (e.g., Character Education; Mindfulness; 21st Century Skill programs; Social Skill instruction programs)
- Some schools adopt frameworks where schools can select different components, strategies, activities, or actions to address their goals (e.g., School Safety and Climate, Social Emotional Learning—SEL; Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports—PBIS)
The biggest problems with some or all of these approaches include:
- They focus on behavioral deficits, and not (also) on students’ social, emotional, and behavioral awareness, skills, competence, and self-management as their primary outcomes
- Their strategies or approaches do not have the necessary scientific, psychological foundations, and/or they do not integrate all five of the interdependent, evidence-based components that facilitate student self-management
- They do not correctly translate their (valid) science into effective evidence-based practices that have been appropriately and objectively field-tested in a wide variety of representative, randomly-selected, and controlled settings, situations, and circumstances
- They have not been independently evaluated using objective multi-assessment, multi-setting, multi-trait, multi-respondent tools and approaches
- They are based on frameworks that compile an assortment of different components, strategies, activities, or actions; and they “allow” schools or districts to self-select those approaches that they want or think will address their needs.
This renders any cross-school or district evaluations meaningless (as you are typically comparing “apples and oranges”), and it increases the risk that the approaches selected will not work and might make the problem worse.
Clearly, some of the research that has validated certain strategies, interventions, programs, or models is sound, is applied to the correct school or district situations or problems, and is implemented and evaluated with intensity and integrity.
But. . . some of the research—as described in the “Biggest Problems” list above—is NOT sound, or is not appropriately applied.
Indeed, some of the “research” was done (a) by convenience; (b) with small, non-representative, and non-random samples; (c) without comparisons to matched “control groups;” and (d) in scientifically unsound ways. Moreover, some of the “research” was not independently, objectively, or “blindly” reviewed (as when someone publishes their work in a “refereed” professional journal) by three or more experts in the field.
When research is not sound, it is usually because:
- The “researchers” are more interested in “marketing, influence, fame, or fortune” and their “research” really doesn’t even qualify as legitimate research [this “science” is pseudoscience]
- The researchers are simply not knowledgeable or skilled in conducting sound research [this science ranges from clumsy to inept] The researchers do not have the resources to conduct the complexity or sophisticated level of the research needed [this science is ranges from ill-advised to well-intended]
- When research is not appropriately applied, it is usually because:
- The researchers have interpreted (or recommend the use of) their results in ways that go well beyond the intent of their original research, or the people, problems, or parameters involved in that research
- The researchers have confused or represented correlational results as causal results, and implementing schools or districts have accepted the (false) belief that, for example, “research has proven that this program will directly and exclusively solve this problem”
- The implementing schools or districts do not have the skills or capacity to independently evaluate the research, and they mistakenly (or wishfully) conclude that, for example, a specific program will work “with our students, in our settings, with our staff and resources, given our current problems and desired outcomes”—even though that program has never been tested or validated under those circumstances
The Needed Science for ALL Schools
If the primary goal of school discipline and classroom management is to teach, prompt, and reinforce students’ social, emotional, and behavioral self-management, there is a clear and demonstrated scientific psychological foundation. This foundation involves five interdependent components that are organized along a multi-tiered continuum.
The components (see figure below) that “anchor” the underlying science of social, emotional, and behavioral self-management are:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Positive Behavioral Expectations and Skills Instruction
- Student Motivation and Accountability
- Consistency
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
While I have discussed these components in past Blogs, so that readers do not have to “jump back” to these Blogs, I will briefly describe the five components below.
Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
Effective schools work consciously, planfully, and on an on-going basis to develop, reinforce, and sustain positive and productive relationships so that their cross-school and in-classroom climates mirror these relationships.
Critically, however, these relationships include the following: Students to Students, Students to Staff, Staff to Staff, Students to Parents, and Staff to Parents.
And functionally, they involve training and reinforcement. For example, students need to learn the social and interactional skills that build positive relationships with others, and the peer group must “buy into” the process.
Similarly, teachers need to recognize the importance of committing to effective communication, collaboration, and collegial consultation. But, they also need to have the skills to accomplish these. . . in good times and bad.
All of this generalizes to self-management. When students have good social, emotional, and behavioral self-management skills, they rarely demonstrate them in negative, aversive, or toxic environments.
When they don’t have these skills, the absence of positive relationships and school/classroom climates often impede the instruction, their learning, or their motivation to learn.
Positive Behavioral Expectations and Skills Instruction
Students—from preschool through high school—need to know the explicit social, emotional, and behavioral expectations in the classrooms and across the common areas of the school. These expectations need to be communicated in a prosocial way as “what they need to do,” rather than in a negative, deficit-focused way as “what they do not need to do.”
Indeed, teachers and administrators have more success teaching students to (a) walk down the hallway, rather than do not run; (b) raise your hand and wait to be called on, rather than don’t blurt out answers; (c) accept a consequence, rather than don’t roll your eyes and give me attitude.
In addition, these expectations need to be behaviorally specific—that is, we need to describe exactly what we want the students to do (e.g., in the hallways, bathrooms, cafeteria, and on the bus).
Moreover, it is not instructionally helpful to talk in constructs—telling students that they need to be “Respectful, Responsible, Polite, Safe, and Trustworthy.” This is because each of these constructs involve a wide range of behaviors. At the elementary school level, students really do not functionally or behaviorally understand these higher-ordered thinking constructs. At the secondary level, students may interpret these constructs (and their many inherent behaviors) differently than staff.
And it is the behaviors that we need to teach . . . so that students can fully demonstrate the global constructs that we want.
In the final analysis, however: You can’t teach a behavioral construct. You need to teach the behaviors that are represented within each construct that you want your students to demonstrate.
Thus, beyond specifying the social, emotional, and behavioral expectations in a school or classroom, these social, emotional, and behavioral skills must be taught as part of classroom management.
In fact, these skills are taught the same way that we teach a football team their offensive or defensive schemes and plays, an orchestra its music and movements, a drama club and actors a play’s scenes and lines, or a student who to break-down and learn a specific academic task.
And, the teaching methodology that needs to be used involved social learning theory. Explicitly, we need to teach the skills and their steps, to demonstrate them, to give students opportunities to practice them and receive feedback, and then to help students to apply their new skills to “real-world” situations.
Relative to self-management and this component, we need to communicate our social, emotional, and behavioral expectations to students, and then teach them to perform them—in different settings, with different people, in different contexts, and under different conditions of emotionality. Functionally, this means that our schools need to consciously and explicitly set aside time for social skills instruction, and then embed the application of this instruction into their classrooms and group activities, and (for example) cooperative and project-based instruction.
Student Motivation and Accountability
For the skill instruction described above to “work,” students need to be held accountable for demonstrating positive and effective social, emotional, and behavioral skills. But to accomplish this, students need to be motivated (eventually, self-motivated) to perform these skills.
Motivation is based on two component parts: Incentives and Consequences. But critically, these incentives and consequences must be meaningful and powerful to the students (not just to the adults in a school).
Too often, schools create “motivational programs” for students that involve incentives and consequences that the students couldn’t care less about. Thus, it looks good “on paper,” but it holds no weight in actuality—from the students’ perspectives.
At other times, schools forget that they need to recognize, engage, and activate the peer group in a motivational program. This is because, at times, the peer group actually is undermining a positive behavioral program by negatively reinforcing specific students (on the playground, after school, on social media). These students then “behave” appropriately only when they are interacting one-on-one with adults (i.e., in the absence of the “negative” peer group), and they behave inappropriately with adults in the presence of the peer group—to avoid later (on the playground, after school, etc.) peer disapproval, rejection, or aggression.
On a functional level, both incentives and consequences result in positive and prosocial behavior. The incentives motivate students toward the expected behaviors, and the consequences motivate students away from the inappropriate behaviors (and, again, toward the expected ones).
But critically, educators need to understand that you can only create motivating conditions. That is, we can’t force students to meet the social, emotional, and behavioral expectations. Indeed, when we force students to do anything, we are managing their behavior, not facilitating self-management. And while we must do some adult management to get to student self-management. . . if we only manage students’ behavior, then they will not (know how to) self-manage when the adults are not present.
Ultimately, relative to this component, the goal is self-motivation and self-accountability. When this occurs, we have a high probability of comprehensive student self-management.
Consistency
Consistency is a process. It would be great if we could “download” it into all students and staff. . . or put it in their annual flu shots. . . but that’s not going to happen.
Consistency needs to be “grown” experientially over time and, even then, it needs to be sustained in an ongoing way. It is grown through effective strategic planning with explicit implementation plans, good communication and collaboration, sound implementation and evaluation, and consensus-building coupled with constructive feedback and change.
It’s not easy. . . but it is necessary for school success.
But relative to school discipline, classroom management, and student self-management, consistency must occur all four of the other interdependent components.
That is, in order to be successful, staff (and students) need to (a) demonstrate consistent prosocial relationships and interactions—resulting in consistently positive and productive school and classroom environments; (b) communicate consistent behavioral expectations, while consistently teaching and practicing them; (c) use consistent incentives and consequences, while holding student consistently accountable for their appropriate behavior; and then (d) apply all of these components consistently across all of the settings, circumstances, and peer groups in the school.
Moreover, consistency occurs when staff are consistent (a) with individual students, (b) across different students, (c) within their grade levels or instructional teams, (d) across time, (e) across settings, and (f) across situations and circumstances.
Critically, when staff are inconsistent, students feel that they are treated unfairly, they sometimes behave differently for different staff or in different settings, they can become manipulative—pitting one staff person against another, and they often emotionally react—some students getting angry with the inconsistency, and others simply withdrawing because they feel powerless to change it.
Said a different way: Inconsistency undercuts student accountability, and you don’t get the consistent social, emotional, or behavioral self-management that you want in class or across the school.
A football coach, orchestra conductor, drama director, or classroom teacher (academically) would never teach, practice, or reinforce their “skills” inconsistently. Neither should those responsible for the social, emotional, and behavioral program (which necessarily involves everyone) in a school.
Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
The last component of the school discipline, classroom management, and student self-management model focuses on the application of the previous four components to all of the settings, situations, circumstances, and peer/adult interactions in the school.
Relative to the first area, it is important to understand that the common areas of a school are more complex and dynamic than the classroom settings. Indeed, in the hallways, bathrooms, buses, cafeteria, and on the playground (or playing fields), there typically are more multi-aged or cross-grade students, more and varied social interactions, more space or fewer physical limitations, fewer staff and supervisors, and different social demands.
As such, the positive student social, emotional, and behavioral interactions that may occur more easily in the classroom often are more taxed in the common school areas.
Accordingly, students need to be taught how to demonstrate their interpersonal, social problem solving, conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional coping skills in each common school area. Moreover, the training needs to be tailored to the social demands and expectations of these settings.
Relative to the latter area, and as above, it is important to understand that the peer group is often a more dominant social and emotional “force” than the adults in a school. As such, the school’s approaches to student self-management must be consciously generalized and applied (relative to climate, relationships, expectations, skill instruction, motivation, and accountability) to help prevent peer-to-peer teasing, taunting, bullying, harassment, hazing, and physical aggression.
This is done by involving the different peer groups in a school in group “prevention and early response” training, and motivating them—across the entire school—to take the lead relative to prosocial interactions.
Truly, the more the peer group can be trained, motivated, and reinforced to do “the heavy prosocial lifting,” the more successful the staff and the school will be relative to positive school climate and consistently safe schools. And, the more successful students will be relative to social, emotional, and behavioral self-management.
Applying the Five Scientific Components to Commonly-Used School Discipline Approaches in Schools
Earlier in this Blog, we identified a number of commonly-used discipline approaches that are used in some schools:
- Cultural Competence and Proficiency
- Disproportionality
- Poverty Awareness and Response
- School Attendance and Truancy
- Teasing and Bullying Prevention Programs
- Trauma Sensitive Schools
- Restorative Justice
- Character Education
- Mindfulness
- 21st Century Skill programs
- Social Skill instruction programs
- School Safety and Climate
- Social-Emotional Learning (SEL)
- Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS)
Below, I am going to briefly (a) summarize the research foundation for each approach; (b) identify which of the five interdependent scientific components described above each approach covers (assuming it has a sound research foundation); and (c) cite (with date and title) previous Blogs where the approach has been discussed.
Cultural Competence and Proficiency
Summary of Research Foundation: This is a broad area with different programs, strategies, and perspectives. The research used to support any program in this area needs to be independently evaluated. Even if the research validates the programs, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether the program can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
Disproportionality
Summary of Research Foundation: This is a broad area with different programs, strategies, and perspectives. The research used to support any program in this area needs to be independently evaluated. Even if the research validates the programs, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether the program can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Student Motivation and Accountability
- Consistency
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
Previous Blogs
November 13, 2016: Beating Kids in Schools: How Corporal Punishment Reinforces Bias, Violence, Trauma, Poor Social Problem-Solving, and the Fallacy of Intervention. . . The Alternative? Eliminate Corporal Punishment by Preventing its Need, and Implementing Interventions that Actually Change Student Behavior
August 20, 2016: From One Extreme to the Other: Changing School Policy from “Zero Tolerance” to “Total Tolerance” Will Not Work. . . Decreasing Disproportionate Discipline Referrals and Suspensions Requires Changing Student and Staff Behavior
June 21, 2015: School Disproportionality and the Charleston Murders: Systemic Change vs. State Statutes
September 21, 2014: Minneapolis Superintendent Bans Most Suspensions for their Youngest Students: What Districts Need to do Instead of Suspending (Young) Students
September 6, 2014: New Superintendents’ Survey: Suspensions Do NOT Change Behavior— What does?
June 8, 2014: New National Report Discusses Ways to Improve School Learning Conditions for Students and Staff. . . and How to Break the "School to Prison" Link for Behaviorally Challenging Students
April 6, 2014: Preschoolers Most Suspended Age Group: New Report and What It Means for You
March 9, 2014: Approaches to Eliminate Disproportionality: New Study Reinforces State-wide Student Discipline Inequities
December 15, 2013: The National Council on Teacher Quality and The New York Times: Teacher Training Programs NOT Preparing New Teachers in Classroom Management, and Zero Tolerance Procedures for School Discipline Do not Work
Poverty Awareness and Response
Summary of Research Foundation: This is a broad area with different programs, strategies, and perspectives. The research used to support any program in this area needs to be independently evaluated. Even if the research validates the programs, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether the program can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Student Motivation and Accountability
School Attendance and Truancy
Summary of Research Foundation: This is a broad area with different programs, strategies, and perspectives. The research used to support any program in this area needs to be independently evaluated. Even if the research validates the programs, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether the program can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Student Motivation and Accountability
Previous Blogs
June 12, 2016: How to Improve your Chronically Absent Students' Attendance. . . During the Summer
Teasing and Bullying Prevention Programs
Summary of Research Foundation: This is a broad area with different programs, strategies, and perspectives. The research used to support any program in this area needs to be independently evaluated. Even if the research validates the programs, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether the program can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
There ARE a small number of programs in this area that have been identified as evidence-based model programs. At the same time, there are many programs that do not have an appropriate research foundation here.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Positive Behavioral Expectations but usually NOT Skills Instruction
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
Previous Blogs
February 19, 2017: Federal and State Policies ARE NOT Eliminating Teasing and Bullying in Our Schools: Teasing and Bullying is Harming our Students Psychologically and Academically—Here’s How to Change this Epidemic through Behavioral Science and Evidence-based Practices
Trauma Sensitive Schools
Summary of Research Foundation: This is a broad area with different programs, strategies, and perspectives. The research used to support any program in this area needs to be independently evaluated. Even if the research validates the programs, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether the program can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
There are a number of the well-researched and well-established cognitive, behavioral, and emotional psychological interventions available to address significantly-involved students in this area. In contrast, few—if any—of the “nationally-touted ‘packaged programs’” have been validated.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Behavioral Expectations and Skills Instruction
- Student Motivation and Accountability
Previous Blogs
October 11, 2014: Another Federal Push… What’s the Deal with Trauma Sensitive Schools?
July 22, 2014: Student Mental Health and Wellness: What the New RWJ Foundation Report Means for You
Restorative Justice
Summary of Research Foundation: This is largely a strategy that has been implemented in the context of different programs attempting to decrease disproportionate ODRs, and suspensions and expulsions. While extant research (largely focused on “positive practice and/or restitutional overcorrect” interventions) is available to support this strategy’s underlying principles, the contemporary use of this strategy has not been well-researched in its own right.
In addition, some individuals and organizations have “packaged” this strategy within a broader school- or district-wide disciplinary process. However, to date, high-quality, objective, and generalizable research has not been reported on the efficacy of these programs.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Student Motivation and Accountability
Previous Blogs
March 15, 2015: Restorative Practices and Reducing Suspensions: The Numbers Just Don’t Add Up
Character Education
Summary of Research Foundation: There are a great many “character education” programs on the market. The research and efficacy of the vast majority of them is either non-existent or of poor quality. Moreover, most character education programs focus more on increasing students’ awareness of different character traits or behaviors than on actually teaching specific behaviors in a scientifically-sound way. Even if “research” appears to validate a particular program, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether the research is sound, and whether the program can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
There ARE a few programs in this area that have been identified as evidence-based. At the same time, there are many character education programs (including some touted by the national organizations in this area) that do not have an appropriate research foundation.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Positive Behavioral Expectations but usually NOT Skills Instruction
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
Previous Blogs
November 27, 2016: When Character Education Programs Do Not Work: Creating “Awareness” Does NOT CHANGE “Behavior” . . . TEACHING Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Skills Requires Behavioral Instruction
May 30, 2016: The Difference between Social Stories and Social Skills Training? A BIG Difference!
Mindfulness
Summary of Research Foundation: This area has recently become a media and marketing juggernaut—even though agreed-upon “definitions” of what constitutes “mindfulness” are missing. And while (a) some groups have “packaged” specific “mindfulness programs,” (b) testimonials “validating” these programs seem to be publicized frequently (mostly in local newspapers whose stories are then picked up on social media), and (c) a number of large school districts (according to these stories) have begun implementing these “programs,” definitive research is lacking.
In many respects, a “media bandwagon effect” appears to be occurring, there are concerns that these techniques and/or programs have not been fully validated (and that we are “experimenting” on the students involved), and some researchers believe that the reported “successes” cannot be causally explained by the techniques and/or programs.
Beyond the media frenzy. . . to date, much of the mindfulness research that has been published in professional journals is either in unrefereed journals (that is, the research has not been blindly and objectively reviewed by experts in the field), or is of poor quality.
All of this puts the schools and districts considering mindfulness strategies or programs “on notice” that they are responsible for vetting and validating these programs before they are introduced into their classrooms. While increasing students’ social, emotional, and behavioral awareness is an important component of self-management, we do not need “mindfulness programs” to “get the job done.”
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Positive Behavioral Expectations usually in the context of Emotional Control Skills
Previous Blogs
February 13, 2016: Reviewing Mindfulness and Other Mind-Related Programs (Part II). More Bandwagons that Need to be Derailed?
January 30, 2016: Reviewing Mindfulness and Other Mind-Related Programs: Have We Just Lost our Minds? (Part I). Why Schools Sometimes Waste their Time and (Staff) Resources on Fads with Poor Research and Unrealistic Results.
21st Century Skill programs
Summary of Research Foundation: The term “21st Century Skills” came out of a national report that identified the academic, social-emotional, and vocational skills needed by future high school graduates (and beyond) in order to compete in 21st Century job market. Thus, while there is a separate research foundation for many of the social, emotional, and behavioral skills cited, no research has truly validated the synthesis of skills cited in the report.
Thus, to the degree that anyone has packaged these skills into a curriculum or program, any research used to support said curriculum or program needs to be independently evaluated. Even if the research validates the approaches, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether they can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Behavioral Expectations and Skills Instruction
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
Previous Blogs
July 8, 2015: The Unfulfilled Promise of Education: Students' Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Skills
Social Skill instruction programs
Summary of Research Foundation: While there are literally hundreds of social skills curricula and programs available “on the market,” there are very few programs that are evidence-based—for example, through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and its National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices (NREPP). Some of these programs are stand-alone programs; others (like the Stop & Think Social Skills Program) have been embedded in broader school discipline systems that are then integrated into school improvement programs (like Project ACHIEVE).
Regardless, evidence-based programs have substantial supporting research, but they have been implemented in many settings, their outcomes have been compared with non-involved control or comparison groups, and their results have been objectively evaluated by experts in the field.
Schools and districts interested in implementing social, emotional, and behavioral skill instruction programs should begin by evaluating the current status of their students, and their desired outcomes. They then should review the evidence-based social skills programs available to determine whether a good match exists. They also should consider other research-based programs—if their research foundations are sound, and if they match well to their students, settings, and goals.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Positive Behavioral Expectations and Skills Instruction
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
Previous Blogs
July 9, 2016: Teaching Students Self-Management Skills: If We Want Them to Behave, We Need to Teach Them to Behave
September 19, 2015: Why Students Don't Behave? Because We are not Teaching Them the Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Skills that They Need
School Safety and Climate
Summary of Research Foundation: This is a broad area with different programs, strategies, and perspectives. The research used to support any program in this area needs to be independently evaluated. Even if the research validates the programs, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether the program can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Positive Behavioral Expectations and Skills Instruction
- Student Motivation and Accountability
- Consistency
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
Previous Blogs
May 15, 2016: Student Engagement (Down), Teacher Satisfaction (Down), School Safety and Academic Expectations (Down)-- How Do We Raise Up our Students and Schools to Success?
November 1, 2015: Research to Practice: How do Teachers Influence Students' Classroom Self-Management? New Report says that Positive Classroom Climates and Relationships Most Influence Student Motivation
August 3, 2014: Implementing the U.S. Department of Education's School Safety Report: Resources to Prepare your School at the Policy, Procedure, and Practice Levels
June 22, 2014: The 2013 U.S. School Crime Report Just Released by the US Departments of Education and Justice: Making Schools Safer during the Summer, so They are Safe in the Fall
March 1, 2014: Implementing the U.S. Department of Education's New School Discipline Policies: A Three-Year Positive Behavioral Support Implementation Blueprint
January 26, 2014: New Brown University Study: 90,000 Students per Year Suffer "Intentional" Injuries at School between 2001 and 2008….Resources to Help Schools and Districts Prevent Student Violence, Assaults, and Aggression
January 12, 2014: U.S. Department of Education Report: "Guiding Principles: A Resource Guide for Improving School Climate and Discipline"
Social-Emotional Learning (SEL)
Summary of Research Foundation: While this framework is generally attributed to CASEL (the Collaborative for Social Emotional Learning), other groups have similarly used “SEL” to describe their approaches. Regardless, SEL is a framework and, as such, it consists of a number of different programs, strategies, and interventions—all focused on teaching students specific social, emotional, and behavioral skills.
As a framework, schools and districts are encouraged to choose those strategies to accomplish their goals and, thus, it is difficult to attribute any successes to any common set of approaches. This makes it difficult to validate or even replicate the SEL framework—no one knows exactly why it works in different settings.
As such, the research used to support any program that calls itself an “SEL” program needs to be independently evaluated—as do the individual strategies and interventions that are in the SEL framework. Even if the research validates a particular SEL program, strategy, or intervention, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether they can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Positive Behavioral Expectations and Skills Instruction
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS)
Summary of Research Foundation: While this framework is generally attributed to the National PBIS Technical Assistance Center (at the Universities of Oregon and Connecticut), other groups have similarly used “PBIS” to describe their approaches. Regardless, PBIS is a framework and, as such, it consists of a number of different programs, strategies, and interventions—all focused on providing “positive behavioral interventions and supports” to different levels of students.
As a framework, schools and districts are encouraged to choose those strategies to accomplish their different “PBIS” goals and, thus, it is difficult to attribute any successes to any common set of approaches. This makes it difficult to validate or even replicate the PBIS framework—no one knows exactly why it works in different settings. In fact, a national report published in 2013 documented these same concerns and others.
Given all of this, the research used to support any program that calls itself a “PBIS” program needs to be independently evaluated—as do the individual strategies and interventions that are in the PBIS framework (although a number of them have clear validating research). Even if the research validates a particular PBIS program, strategy, or intervention, schools and districts still need to objectively determine whether they can be effectively used with their specific students, staff, and schools.
Scientific Components Covered: To a large degree, programs in this area only cover the following of the five interdependent components:
- Positive Relationships and School/Classroom Climate
- Positive Behavioral Expectations and Skills Instruction
- Student Motivation and Accountability
- Consistency
- Implementation and Application Across All Settings and All Peer Groups
Previous Blogs
September 25, 2016: U.S. Department of Education Reminds Educators about Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports for Students with Disabilities: But. . . Watch Out for Their Recommendations and References
July 24, 2016: Rethinking School Improvement and Success, Staff Development and Accountability, and Students' Academic and Behavioral Proficiency: Using ESEA/ESSA’s New Flexibility to Replace the U.S. Department of Education’s Ineffective NCLB Initiatives
March 4, 2016: The New ESEA/ESSA: Discontinuing the U.S. Department of Education's School Turn-Around, and Multi-tiered Academic (RtI) and Behavioral (PBIS) System of Support (MTSS) Frameworks
Summary
I hope that this discussion has been useful to you.
Please understand that I am not trying to be critical of the different school discipline and classroom management programs, strategies, and approaches that are available.
At the same time, I AM providing a critique of these approaches, because it is critical that we implement programs in our schools that have the highest probability of success.
Said a different way: We cannot play “Intervention Roulette” in our schools and districts with our children and adolescents. That is, we cannot identify or define what we think are the problems, brainstorm or “phone-a-friend” to get some suggestions, and then implement interventions that have a low probability of success.
We must use a data-based, functional assessment, problem-solving process.
Moreover, as part of this process, we need to critically review the quality, quantity, relevance, and applicability of a program’s research; and make informed, strategic, data-based decisions on the resources and training needed for implementation, and the probability for sustained success.
Only then can we be certain that we are ready to implement services, supports, strategies, programs, and interventions that have the highest probability of implementing effective school discipline, classroom management, and student self-management approaches.
Blogs Supporting the Five Scientific Components
Relative to validating and applying the five scientific components of school discipline, classroom management, and student self-management above, a number of previous Blogs have provided supporting documentation.
These Blogs include the following:
May 14, 2017: The Endrew F. Decision Re-Defines a “Free Appropriate Public Education" (FAPE) for Students with Disabilities: A Multi-Tiered School Discipline, Classroom Management, and Student Self-Management Model to Guide Your FAPE (and even Disproportionality) Decisions (Part III)
January 7, 2017: Education Week Series on RtI Highlights Kentucky/Appalachian Mountain Grant Site’s Successful School Discipline Program: An Overview of the Scientific Components Behind this Success, and a Free Implementation Guide for Those Who Want to Follow
August 7, 2016: Effective School Discipline, Classroom Management, and Student Self-Management: The Five Components that Every School Needs. . . Reflections on a National Survey of Administrators and Teachers
August 22, 2015: New National Education Association (NEA) Policy Brief Highlights Project ACHIEVE's Positive Behavioral Support System (PBSS) as an Evidence-based Model for School Discipline, Classroom Management, and Student Self-Management
November 22, 2014: Academically Struggling and Behaviorally Challenging Students: Your Doctor Wouldn’t Practice this Way
Additional research and practice support in this area can be found in my recent Corwin Press book:
In fact, if you are interested in this book, I am happy to provide the 100+ page Study Guide to this book FOR FREE.
All you have to do is to e-mail me ( knoffprojectachieve@earthlink.net ), and request the Guide.
Meanwhile, I always look forward to your comments. . . whether on-line or via e-mail.
If I can help you in any of the multi-tiered areas discussed in this message, I am always happy to provide a free one-hour consultation conference call to help you clarify your needs and directions on behalf of your students.
As your school year winds down (or has already ended), please accept my best wishes for a safe, restful, and fun summer !!!
Best,
Howie
