tier iii behavior supports: practices and systems research to practice chris borgmeier, phdsheldon...
TRANSCRIPT
Tier III Behavior Supports: Practices and Systems
Research to Practice
Chris Borgmeier, PhD Sheldon Loman, PhD
[email protected] [email protected]
Portland State University
UPDATED SLIDES @ www.pbisnetwork.org
Tier 3Students for whom:
Quick fixes & simpler solutions have Not worked
There is no single solution
Interventions must be tailored to match the individualized needs of student & context
Tier 3 Behavior SupportPractices
Function-Based Interventions & Support
Team Process
Functional Behavioral Assessment
Effective Behavioral Intervention
Implementation
Monitoring & Data Based Decision Making
Tier 1•SWPBS Tier I
Group Interventions•CICO•Skills groups
Group Interventions w/function-based modifications
Function-based Support
Comprehensive Supports
Tier II
Tier III
N = 2565 713 266 474
9% 19% 24% 18%
An Abridged History of FBA Spawned from substantial research on Functional
Analysis
Originating primarily from work with individuals with significant disabilities
Use of Experimental manipulation to ID function of bx
Functional Analysis was adapted into more feasible “Functional Behavior Assessment” for use in schools
(O’Neill et al., 1997)
Research has suggested the efficacy of use FBA to inform effective interventions in schools and across a range of student concerns and populations
Importantly students w/ EBD
Why FBA?The primary purpose of functional behavioral
assessment is to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of behavior support
Behavior support plans built from functional assessments are more effective
Didden et al., 1997 Newcomer & Lewis, 2004
Carr et al., 1999 Ingram, Lewis-Palmer & Sugai, 2006
Ellingson, et al., 2000; Filter & Horner, 2009
Filter & Horner, 2009
Ingram, Lewis-Palmer & Sugai, 2005
Newcomer & Lewis, 2004
Federal legislation mandated the use of FBA in schools over a decade ago (IDEA, 1997).
Despite gallant efforts, schools continue to struggle to use FBA in supporting students with behavior problems
Blood & Neel, 2007; Hawken, Vincent, & Schumann, 2008; Scott et al., 2005; Van Acker et al., 2005
The field has voiced concerns as to if schools are adequately equipped to conduct effective FBAs
Drasgow & Yell, 2001; Ervin et al., 2001; Sasso et al., 2001
FBA is used mainly as a reactionary approach. opportunity is lost to utilize FBA technology to develop
interventions that address minor behaviors that usually precede more serious problems.
FBA is restricted to set of procedures used by “experts” The rich supply of information from people with whom
the student interacts with the most is lost (Benazzi, Horner, & Good, 2006).
FBA is restricted to rigorous procedures that are unrealistic for public school settings. Disincentive for using FBA technology.
Cynicism as to the practicality of FBA .
FBA conceptualized as a proactive pre-referral routine that uses the most parsimonious procedures required to create an effective behavior support plan.
Given the time & resource constraints in schools, we must encourage schools to “work smarter” to develop capacity to implement technology to effectively support more students.
Use Practical FBA procedures to develop capacity within a school to utilize FBA technology.
Within Tier 3More different than alike
Individualizing Interventions
Tier 3 = a range of assessments & interventions
Informal FBA Match to Group Intervention
Practical FBA Behavior Support Plan
FBS/Functional Analysis Comprehensive BSP + Wraparound
supports
Match level of assessment & intervention to level of student complexity and need
Observations and add’l Observations
Multi-Disciplinary Assessment & Analysis
Formal F
BA
PBIS Individual Student Support
Universal School-Wide Assessment
School-Wide Prevention Systems
Intensive
Targeted
Referral Data & FACTS
Simple Student Interventions
Targeted Interventions
Complex Individualized Interventions
Team-Based Wraparound
Interventions
InterventionAsses
smen
t
Practic
al
FBA
No Assessment
Scaffold Implementation Build from your foundation
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Matching to Group Interventions based on Function
Identifying & Selecting group interventions based on Function
Build capacity for effective Function-Based Assessment
From simpler to more complex
Using Function-Based Assessment to Guide School-wide Intervention Planning
Middle School: Students w/ 2 + referrals
CICO
?
Adapting Interventions based on Function of Behavior
Use function to focus/expand existing interventions
Modify Check-In/ Check-Out for:
Escape Academic Tasks
Peer Attention
Efficient Intervention through planful transitions from Tier 2 to Tier 3
SWIS-CICO Report
Support Plan Change
Description
09/10/2008 CICO
09/19/2008 Brief FBA & modified CICO for Escape Acad Tasks
CICO
What NOW?
FBA = Avoid Academic Tasks (esp. if HW not completed)
Start w/ CICO – Academic focus
Tier 3 ChallengesIndividualization
Limited ResourcesTime, FTE
Efficiency
Requisite skills & Training
Implementation
Tier 3 Behavior Systems Features & Considerations
District
Organizing for Individual Student Supports
School
PBS Team
CICO Team Student Support TeamBuilding Specialist
District Beh. Specialist
SW-PBIS District Planning
Funding Visibility PolicyPoliticalSupport
Training CoachingBehavioral Expertise
Evaluation
LEADERSHIP TEAM(Coordination)
Local School/District Implementation Demonstrations
Funding Visibility PolicyPoliticalSupport
Training CoachingBehavioral Expertise
Evaluation
LEADERSHIP TEAM(Coordination)
Local School/District Implementation Demonstrations
PBIS Framework in Action TIER 3
Team-led Function Based Support
Monitoring & Revision
Student
Teachers
Peers Increased: Acad Achvmt Attendence
Reduced: -Disc Refer -Suspension -Expulsion -LRE
Feasible, Accurate Student Progress Data
Benchmarks of Adv Tiers
District Beh Specialist
Building Beh Specialists
(Who? – ID roles & Define responsibilities)
Commitment to serve most challenging students
SWIS-ISIS
PBIS Framework in Action
Building FBA CapacityTeachers
Staff
School
Specialist
District
Specialist
Behavior
Analysts
Informal
FBAX
Level I:
Practical FBAX X
Level II:
Complex FBAX X X
Level III:
Functional Analysis
X X X X
Done in school by typical teachers/ staff as part of
normal daily problem solving
Done by trained members of school setting, typically
involves interview(s), and brief observation
Done by behaviorally trained member of school or district, typically involves interview(s), and brief observationDone by trained behavior
analyst. Involves interviews, direct observation, and
systematic manipulation of conditions.
Tier 3Practices
Effective Function-Based Support
Team & Effective Process
FBA: ID Function
Develop Behavior Support Plan
Implementw/ fidelity
Monitor & Revise
Establish a Functional Team Knowledge about the individual
His/her behavior, interests, strengths, challenges, future
Knowledge about the context
Instructional goals, curriculum, social contingencies, schedule, physical setting.
Knowledge about behavioral technology
Elements of behavior/ Principles of behavior/ Intervention strategies
+ Active Administrator participation
Outcomes of a Functional Behavioral Assessment
Operationally defined problem behavior(s)
By response class
Identify routines in which the problem behavior is most and least likely to occur
Define the antecedent events (triggers; setting events) that predict when the problem behavior is most likely
Define the ONE consequence that contributes most to maintaining the problem behavior in that routine.
Summary Statement of findings.
Functional Behavioral Assessment Records Review
Routines Analysis
Interview
Observation
Contribute to development of a Summary Statement
Specificity is important
A = “Task too difficult” v. “worksheets w/ double digit multiplication totaling 99; any multiplication facts.”
C = “Escape from difficult task”
Using FBA to Design Effective Support: The Simple BSP
How can we prevent problem situations?
What should we teach as an alternative behavior?
How to increase reward of appropriate behavior?
How to minimize reward of problem behavior?
Are negative consequences for problem behavior needed?
Are safety routines needed?
What data to collect?
Are we doing the plan?
Is the plan working?
Leading a Team from FBA to BSP FBA is designed to guide selection of interventions with an
increased likelihood of success…. But for any intervention to be successful it must be IMPLEMENTED
The teaming process must account for contextual fit (Benazzi, Horner & Good, 2006).
What elements are feasible, acceptable, sustainable?
What is the smallest change that will produce the largest effect?
Contextual Fit:
The extent to which the people who will implement a behavior support plan find the elements of the plan
Consistent with their personal values
Consistent with the professional skills
Consistent with the resources available in the setting
Consistent with the available administrative support
Select #1 Ranked Answers to Insert into Summary
Have Teacher Rate the Statement
BEHAVIOR SUPPORTPLANNING
COMPETING PATHWAYS
Neutralize/eliminate
settingevents
Add relevant & remove irrelevanttriggers
Teach alternative
that is moreefficient
Add effective & & removeineffectivereinforcers
Identify the “Replacement” Behavior
An appropriate Replacement Behavior:
Serves the same function as the problem behavior
The replacement behavior is a member of the same response class as the problem behavior
Is as, or more efficient than the problem behavior
physical effort, schedule of reinforcement, time to reinforcement
Is socially acceptable
Which of the Following are Appropriate Replacement Behaviors?
Jason is nine and cries when asked to do difficult tasks. The crying is maintained by avoiding or escaping the tasks.
Possible Replacement Behaviors:
More rewards for doing tasks
Asking for a break from tasks
Asking to do something other than the tasks
Requesting adult attention
Asking to have soda after tasks are done
Which of the Following are Appropriate Replacement Behaviors?
Jason is nine and cries when asked to do difficult tasks. The crying is maintained by avoiding or escaping the tasks.
Possible Replacement Behaviors:
More rewards for doing tasks
Asking for a break from tasks
Asking to do something other than the tasks
Requesting adult attention
Asking to have soda after tasks are done
Which of the Following are Appropriate Replacement Behaviors?
Leslie is 12, has severe intellectual disabilities, does not use words, and hits her head. Head hitting is maintained by adult attention during work periods.
Which is the best Replacement Behavior
hide under her desk and be ignored
sign for “more” to another student
take completed work up to show the teacher
move to sit by another student
engage in stereotypies
Which of the Following are Appropriate Replacement Behaviors?
Leslie is 12, has severe intellectual disabilities, does not use words, and hits her head. Head hitting is maintained by adult attention during work periods.
Which is the best Replacement Behavior
hide under her desk and be ignored
sign for “more” to another student
take completed work up to show the teacher
move to sit by another student
engage in stereotypies
Monitor & Revise Plan implementation
Follow-up meetings
Meeting routines
Review task completion
Review Student Data
Student progress
Effective Data Systems required (SWIS-CICO & SWIS-ISIS)
Needs District Structures & Plan
Defining Roles & Responsibilities (Coaching & Systems)
District Behavior Specialist
Hiring District Beh Specialist w/ necessary skills & experience
Coordinate Roles & Responsibilities
Teaming Processes
SPSYs, Admins, Couns, SPED, Beh Spec, etc….
Needs District Structures & Plan
Effective PD plan focused on desired outcomes of Tier 3 FBA/BSP
Training Coaching Performance Assessment
Data Systems to facilitate teaming & decision making
School-wide Positive Behavioral Supports
80% of Students
Secondary Group
Supports10-15% of Students
Individualized Supports
5% of Students
District Behavior Specialist(s) responsible for 25 FBAs in school of 500
School Specialists with “flexible” roles conduct proactive Practical FBA to expand the scope of FBA, prevent intensive problem behaviors, & decrease reliance on District Specialist.
To determine if staff with flexible roles in schools (e.g., counselors, administrators) can be trained to conduct functional behavior assessments (FBA) for students with mild to moderate behavior problems (i.e., students with recurring problems that do not involve physical aggression or violent behaviors).
To determine the efficacy and acceptability of a “practical” training on FBA methods and tools with school personnel.
Is there a relationship between the Practical FBA training and valid summary statements generated from FBA conducted by school professionals?
1. Is there a change in school participant score on FBA knowledge Pre & Post Instruction?
2. Is the practical training & FBA process used efficient & socially valid for use in schools?
3. Are FBAs conducted by trained school personnel procedurally adequate?
4. Is there consistency between summary statements generated solely from FACTS interviews & Functional Analyses?
Phase 1- Practical FBA training on FBA tools & methods provided to 12 school professionals.
-Demographic Information and Pre- & Post-Tests of FBA knowledge provided before and after Practical FBA training.
Phase 2- Ten (10) trained school professionals conducted an FBA according to procedures they were taught for one student within their school.
-Interview results with staff, observations of the student, and a summary statement based upon these will be generated by each school professional.
Phase 3- Functional analyses conducted by researcher to test each participant’s hypothesis/summary statement
-The percentage agreement between the functional analyses and summary statements calculated to determine the efficacy
of the Practical FBA training .
12 School professionals with a flexible role (i.e., not directly responsible for instruction of students) in an elementary school (K-5)
7 Counselors/ 2 Special Educators / 2 Principals/ 1 V.P.
58% stated they had completed an FBA before the training
Average knowledge of behavioral theory= 3.4 out of 4 (extensive)
1. Participated in four 1-hour Practical FBA training sessions (over the course of 4 weeks)
2. Completed tests of FBA knowledge before and after the Practical FBA training program.
3. Completed a Practical FBA using the tools & procedures from training (Phase 2).
-FACTS interviews, ABC Observations, Summary Statement
4. Completed a Time Expended Log & Acceptability Rating Profile
Phase 1 & 2
Important to use to determine if participants have the requisite skills to conduct a Practical FBA
Questions address participant’s knowledge in:
FBA Process
4-term Contingency/ Summarizing Behavior
Operationally defining behavior
Identifying Antecedents, Consequences, Function, Setting Events
Using common interview tool (FACTS) to
identify routines & summarize behavior
Training Series
• 4 training sessions on conducting functional behavioral assessments (FBA) for students with mild to moderate behavioral problems in schools.
• The training series teaches participants to conduct interviews and observations in such a way as to precisely determine the relationship between student problem behavior and the context:– What the problem behaviors are.– When, Where, & Why a student’s problem behaviors occur.
• A summary of this information will help an individual student team develop effective behavioral supports that:
-prevent problem behaviors from occurring -teach alternative behaviors-& effectively respond when problem behaviors occur.
56
Practical FBA processD.A.S.H.
Define behavior in observable & measurable terms
Ask about behavior by interviewing staff & student-specify routines where & when behaviors occur-summarize where, when, & why behaviors occur
See the behavior-observe the behavior during routines specified-observe to verify summary from interviews
Hypothesize: a final summary of where, when & why behaviors occur 57
Session #1
Session #2
Session #3
Session #4
Objectives
Review
Activities
Checks for Understanding
Comments/
Questions
Tasks
Key Points
58
Practical FBA vs Comprehensive FBA
Practical FBA Comprehensive FBA
For: Students with mild to moderate problem behaviors (behaviors that are NOT dangerous or occurring in many settings)
Students with moderate to severe behavioral problems; may be dangerous and/or occurring in many settings
What: Relatively simple and efficient process to guide behavior support planning
Time-intensive process that also involves archival records review, family-centered planning, and collaboration with agencies outside of school
Conducted by whom: School-based personnel (e.g., teachers, counselors, administrators)
Professionals trained to conduct functional assessments with students with severe problem behaviors (e.g., school psychologists, behavior specialists) 59
Focus of this training series
Overview of the Practical FBA training series and introduces concepts, examples, and practice opportunities for participants to learn how to:
(a) Define behavior (WHAT),
(b) Identify events that predict WHEN & WHERE the specific behavior occurs
(c) Identify the function of behavior (WHY), and
(d) Construct functional behavioral summary statements
TASK: Find someone at their site whom they may conduct a practice interview with next week.
ABC’s of Understanding Why students engage in problem behavior:
Finding out the Pay-off or Function of Behavior
A= Antecedent(s). Find out the events that occur
right before the behavior. – Allows you to predict: Where (During routine)? & When (Trigger event)?
B=Behavior. Find out what is the observable problem behavior?
C=OutCome/ Consequence. Find out what happens after the behavior occurs? WHY?
A B C 61
Remember: Always start with the Behavior
1- Once you have defined the behaviors (the What)
2- & know the Where & When the behaviors occur #2 (Routine & Antecedents)
3- Then want to find out WHY (the outCome of the behavior…what happens right afterwards)
62
2Antecedent/Trigger:
When _____ happens….
1 Behavior:
the student does (what)__
3Consequence/OutCome
..because (why) ______
Defining Observable Problem Behaviors
• Definitions of behaviors need to be:– Observable: The behavior is an action that can be
seen.
– Measurable: The behavior can be counted or timed.
– Defined so clearly that a person unfamiliar with the student could recognize the behavior without any doubts! 63
Functions that behaviors serveProblemBehavior
Obtain/GetSomething
Escape/Avoid
Something
SocialTangible/Activity
Adult
Stimulation/Sensory
Peer
64
Create a Hypothesis Statement for Johnny’s Behavior
After interviewing Mr. Smith and conducting several observations of Johnny in the third grade classroom, the team determined that during less structured class time (free time, cooperative group art projects, etc.), Johnny tears up his paper and stomps his feet. After Johnny engages in this behavior his peers laugh at him.
Routine: During __(some routine e.g.: _______________
65
Antecedent/Trigger: “When ..”
Behavior: “Student does..”
Consequence/OutCome: “Because..”
Peers laugh at him
Therefore, the function of the behavior is to:
get/avoid Peer Attention
Less structured class time
Third grade classroom
Tears up paper & stomps feet
Review content from the first session
Instruction, modeling, and practice opportunities in conducting FACTS interviews with staff (modified from Borgmeier, 2005) and students.
Practice constructing behavioral summary statements from each interview.
TASK: Complete a practice FACTS interview with a staff member at school site.
Select #1 Ranked Answers to Insert into Summary
Have Teacher Rate the Statement
Review content from previous training sessions & practice interviews from week before
Instruction & practice opportunities (using videos) for participants to conduct ABC observations of students within routines identified as settings in which the problem behavior occurs most frequently (based upon the staff FACTS interviews).
Participants practice constructing summary statements based upon data from their observations to verify or modify summary statements derived from their FACTS interviews.
TASK: Complete a practice ABC observation at school site.
Review of concepts, skills from first three sessions.
Review practice ABC observations & summarizing results
Provide opportunities for participants to practice the skills that they have learned in conducting interviews, observations, and constructing behavioral summary statements;
Introduce the Competing Behavior Pathway and ideas for helping individual student support teams in designing function-based behavioral supports.
BEHAVIOR SUPPORTPLANNING
COMPETING PATHWAYS
Neutralize/eliminate
settingevents
Add relevant & remove irrelevanttriggers
Teach alternative
that is moreefficient
Add effective & & removeineffectivereinforcers
The school professionals were asked to utilize the practical tools/methods from Practical FBA training to develop a hypothesis (summary) statement of student problem behavior.
School professional participants completed:
Practical FBA
Interview with Staff, Observation, Summary of Behavior
Time Expended Log
Acceptability Rating Profile
10 elementary students identified for the study based on staff nomination for a functional behavioral assessment 8 Boys, 2 Girls from Grades K to 4th grade
Students were included based on the criteria that they were exhibiting problem behaviors within the school setting that were impeding their school progress, but were not dangerous to other students or school staff
Students were observed by school staff that have received the Practical FBA training to complete the Practical FBA process
Upon completion of the Practical FBA, Functional Analyses were conducted with each student to verify hypothesis of personnel.
Phase 2
Phase 3
Setting Event Antecedent Behavior Consequence
Teacher/Staff InterviewAcademic Failure in previous class that day
Difficult tasks, any word problems & most math operations
Work refusal, doodling, not follow directives, yells at teacher, disruptive
Avoid math task, doodling, work refusal, sent to office
ABC ObservationNegative relationship w/ teacher???
Teacher confrontation
Work refusal, doodling, yells at teacher, disruptive
Avoid teacher confrontation, avoid math task, to office
Final Summary of Behavior (move to Behavior Plan)Negative relationship w/ teacher & previous academic failure
1. Teacher confrontation
2. Math task
Work refusal, doodling, yells at teacher, disruptive
Avoid math task & teacher confrontation
Individualized according to the functional hypotheses developed by the school professionals.
The functional analyses for all students consist of at least three conditions: control, attention, and escape.
Control Condition: baseline condition in which student has consistently exhibited little or no problem behavior. Reinforcement should be freely available and no demands
placed on student
Attention Condition: will involve the contingent provision of attention following occurrence of the problem behavior.
Escape Condition: will examine the function of student behavior through the contingent removal of aversive tasks (e.g., difficult, long, or physically taxing tasks)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Cohort 1 Cohort 2 Cohort 3 Overall
96.78 96.4787
92.55
Pre
Post
N=12
Overall Pretest M= 39.50% (SD=18.82%)Overall Posttest M= 92.55% (SD=7.22%)
Results: Phase 1
99% Inter-rater Total Agreement on 25% of tests.
Skill/Knowledge Pre-Training Post-Training
FBA Process 0% (33% Partial) 92% (8% Partial)
4-Term Contingency/Summarize Behavior
17% (25% Partial) 94% (6% Partial)
Define Behavior 53% 96%
Identify Antecedent 33% 92%
Identify Consequence 42% 92%
Identify Function 46% 96%
Identify Setting Events 42% 100%
Forms: ID Routine 83% 100%
Forms: Summarize Behavior 0% (33% Partial) 67% (25% Partial)
N=12
Each participant rated their agreement or disagreement with statements concerning the training, tools, and process.
Likert Scale of 1 to 6:
1= Strongly Disagree
2= Disagree
3= Slightly Disagree
4= Slightly Agree
5= Agree
6= Strongly Agree
Acceptability Ratings Agree
Results: Phase 2
N=10
Scheduling FACTS interview with teachers Median= 5 min (Range= 2 to 90 min)
Conducting FACTS interview with teachers Median= 35 min (Range= 15 to 90 min)
Observing Student Behavior using ABC Forms Median= 33 min (Range= 10 to 108 min)
Completing Summary of Behavior Table Median= 15 minutes (Range= 5 to 30 min)
Entire Practical FBA process for 1 studentMedian= 95 minutes (Range= 65 to 275 min)
Number of School Days to Complete Practical FBAMedian= 11 days (Range= 2 to 39 days)
Results: Phase 2
An FBA Procedural Adequacy Checklist was used to rate each FBA on the following criteria:
Interviews were conducted with a staff member who worked with the student during routines where problem behavior occurred
Problem behavior was defined in observable and measurable terms
A routine was prioritized for direct observation
An antecedent event was defined as triggering the problem behavior
Only one maintaining function of the problem behavior was identified
83
100% of the FBAs conducted met all of these criteria. 100% Inter-rater Agreement
Results: Phase 2
9 out of 10 of the summary statements hypothesized by the FACTS interviews with teachers were verified by results of experimental functional analysis
The one FACTS summary statement that was not verified by FA actually resulted in further clarification from the direct observation.
The school participant decided to use the results from the direct observation which resulted in a function that was verified by experimental functional analysis.
Results: Phase 3
Student 1Hypothesis: Escape Math Work
1. Is Esc different than Control?
2. Is Esc different than Attn?
Participant 2Hypothesis: Access Adult Attention
All 10 of the FAs confirmed the Hypothesis Statements
Is there a relationship between the Practical FBA training and valid summary statements generated from FBA conducted by school professionals?
All 10 of the functional analyses conducted confirmed that personnel were able to accurately identify motivating operations & maintaining function of student behavior
Suggest that school personnel can conduct “valid” FBAs for students with mild to moderate behavioral problems.
Suggest the utility and acceptability of practical FBA training methods to train school personnel in schools to conduct FBA.
It may be possible to train school personnel within the constraints of professional development in schools.
Suggest the utility of the FACTS interview tool to guide FBAs, but direct observation is needed.
Use of Basic FBA v. Comprehensive FBA
Proactive, Parsimonious, Practical
Implications of direct observation validation
Ideas on how to organize personnel within a school/district to implement best practices
People think they know more than they really do
School personnel can learn quickly
School personnel can conduct FBAS that would guide behavioral interventions
Manual is available
District’s can develop capacity to use or hire someone to teach Practical FBA to school personnel
Designed to be used by someone well-versed in FBA and behavioral principles (e.g., behavior specialist, school psychologist) to train school personnel.
Has been used in a district in Oregon to train instructional assistants, teachers, and specialists from elementary, middle, and high schools (over 30 in attendance).
Since 1997 FBA has not been implemented widely in schools.Not due to lack of knowledge, but to practicality of use
References Benazzi, L., Horner, R., & Good, R. (2006). Effects of Behavior Support Team Composition on the Technical
Adequacy and Contextual Fit of Behavior Support Plans. Journal of Special Education, 40(3), 160-170.
Crone, D.A. & Horner, R.H. (2003). Building Positive Behavior Support Systems in Schools: Functional Behavioral Assessment. Guilford Press: New York.
Filter, K., & Horner, R. (2009). Function-Based Academic Interventions for Problem Behavior. Education and Treatment of Children, 32(1), 1-19.
Ingram, K., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Sugai, G. (2005). Function-Based Intervention Planning: Comparing the Effectiveness of FBA Function-Based and Non-Function-Based Intervention Plans. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 7(4), 224-236.
Scott, T., & Caron, D. (2005). Conceptualizing Functional Behavior Assessment as Prevention Practice within Positive Behavior Support Systems. Preventing School Failure, 50(1), 13.
Scott, T., & Kamps, D. (2007). The Future of Functional Behavioral Assessment in School Settings. Behavioral Disorders, 32(3), 146-157.
Scott, T., Liaupsin, C., Nelson, C., & McIntyre, J. (2005). Team-Based Functional Behavior Assessment as a Proactive Public School Process: A Descriptive Analysis of Current Barriers. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14(1), 57-71.
Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G. Heineman, M., Lewis, T. J., Nelson, C.M. Scott, T., Liaupsin, C., Sailor, W., Turnbull, A. P., Rutherford-Turnbull, H., Wickham, D., Wilcox, B., & Ruef, M. (2000). Applying positive behavior support and functional behavioral assessment in schools. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 2(3), 131-143.
Blood, E., & Neel, R. (2007). From FBA to Implementation: A Look at What Is Actually Being Delivered. Education and Treatment of Children, 30(4), 67-80.
Hawken, L., Vincent, C., & Schumann, J. (2008). Response to Intervention for Social Behavior: Challenges and Opportunities. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 16(4), 213-225.
Van Acker, R., Boreson, L., Gable, R., & Potterton, T. (2005). Are We on the Right Course? Lessons Learned about Current FBA/BIP Practices in Schools. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14(1), 35-56.
Yell, M., & Drasgow, E. (2001). Legal Requirements for Assessing Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 26(1), 5-17.
Ervin, R., Radford, P., Bertsch, K., Piper, A., Ehrhardt, K., & Poling, A. (2001). A Descriptive Analysis and Critique of the Empirical Literature on School-Based Functional Assessment. School Psychology Review, 30(2), 193-210.
O’Neill, R.E., Horner, R.H., Albin, R.W., Sprague, J.R., Storey, K., & Newton, J.S. (1997). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior: A practical handbook. (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Sasso, G. M., Conroy, M. A., Stichter, J. P., & Fox, J. F. (2001). Slowing down the bandwagon: The misapplication of functional assessment for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 26, 282-296.