Positive Behavior Support Plan

Bryan Moon
Spring 2016

Student Background
The student being studied for this Positive Behavior Support Plan is Taras. Taras is a 13year-old boy at Perry Hall Middle School in the Functional Academic Learning Supports (FALS)
program. Taras is an English Language Learner from the Ukraine. Taras currently lives with his
mother who is also an English Language Learner who emigrated from the Ukraine. Taras has
moved back to the Ukraine in 2006 after attending Pre-K in BCPS and back to the United States
in April 2015. Taras was then transferred from Pine Grove Middle to Perry Hall Middle School
at the beginning of the 2015/2016 school year. Taras disability is Down syndrome, which lends
to many behavior issues with Taras during the school day.
Definition of Specific Behavior
Taras has problems with blowing air from his mouth at people or objects. This behavior
has an impact on the learning or other students if Taras is blowing on fellow students. His
behavior also takes away valuable instruction time due to the teacher having to stop instruction
to tell Taras to stop blowing air. Taras at times can become extremely stubborn when told to stop
blowing and then can become a bigger distraction to students because he can then yell incoherent
words (these words are a mixture of nonsense words, Ukrainian and English) and refuse to work
or participate in a lesson. His refusal can then take more time from other students and instruction.
At times within minutes and in some extra cases seconds Taras will start blowing air after he was
told to stop. Taras blows air gently out of his mouth towards objects or others and he can
forcefully move his toward the object or person while forcefully blowing air out of his mouth.
Taras does have the tendency to blow frequently within the 50 minutes class period. There is no
indication of what determines the number of times Taras will blow air out of his mouth.

Literature Review
Source 1
Clayton Cook, S. Crews, Diana Wright, G. Mayer, Bruce Gale, Bonnie Kraemer, Frank
Gresham . Establishing and Evaluating the Substantive Adequacy of Positive Behavioral Support
Plans. Journal of Behavioral Education, Volume 16, Number 3 (September 2007), pp. 191-206,
http://ejournals.ebsco.com.proxytu.researchport.umd.edu/direct.asp?ArticleID=4348862E55276469AC59
Positive behavior support plans were evaluated in this study. This study was to determine
how valid and effective positive behavior support plans (PBSP) are. Several different PBSPs
were evaluated as well as the staff that wrote and implemented these plans. Several of the groups
had been formally trained on PBSPs and other areas related to behavior. Another group in the
study did not have the same formal training and those plans were evaluated too. After data was
collected on the plans and analyzed several findings were derived. The teachers that were
formally trained in behavior had more effective and better PBSPs. Teachers who had limited or
no training did not have as effective PBSPs. The study recommended that formal training is
needed for all special educators that are responsible for writing PBSPs.
Source 2
Natasha Medley, Steven Little, Angeleque Akin-Little . Comparing Individual Behavior
Plans from Schools With and Without Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support: A Preliminary
Study. Journal of Behavioral Education, Volume 17, Number 1 (March 2008), pp. 93-110,
http://ejournals.ebsco.com.proxytu.researchport.umd.edu/direct.asp?ArticleID=472A9BE9B5090C10F78D

In a particular school district several schools were used to collect data on school wide
positive behavior supports (SWPBS) versus individual behavior support plans and see which
plan is more effective. This study was the first of its kind as no other studies have been
performed comparing the two plans. Several of the schools used in this study had no SWPBS or
training in positive behavior support plans (PBSP). Staff had to undergo an in-depth training on
PBSP and SWPBS. Staff had to train on these plans in order to effectively study whether these
plans were effective or not. Data was collected on student behavior with or with PBSP in effect.
After all data was collected and analyzed the study concluded that schools with SWPBS did have
less behavior problems with students. Schools without SWPBS had more negative behavior from
students and could benefit from SWPBS. The schools that had SWPBS had positive correlations
with instituting SWPBS but more data was needed in order to prove their effectiveness. Many of
the SWPBS that were evaluated were not deemed quality programs.
Source 3
Jared Warren, Hank Bohanon-Edmonson, Ann Turnbull, Wayne Sailor, Donna Wickham,
Peter Griggs, Shelly Beech . School-wide Positive Behavior Support: Addressing Behavior
Problems that Impede Student Learning. Educational Psychology Review, Volume 18, Number 2
(June 2006), pp. 187-198, http://ejournals.ebsco.com.proxytu.researchport.umd.edu/direct.asp?ArticleID=4EFB94C724DA16EA7F50
Problem behaviors with students in a special education setting can easily be applied to an
entire school, including students in a general education setting. Positive Behavior Supports
(PBS) can be applied in all types of schools, urban, rural and inner city. The majority of schools
that have had PBS students have been middle class suburban schools that do not have high rates
of behavior problems. In order to determine if PBS can be used in all settings, especially in a

school where behavior problems are at a high rate and among a vast diverse student body, the
school that was studied was an inner city school in the Midwest. The study followed students and
staff for two years and collected data about the effectiveness in PBS implemented school wide.
After the study was completed researchers found that in order to PBS to work in schools a well
established and maintained relationship needs to happen between administration and all school
staff with a clear line of communication. All school staff needs to be properly trained in PBS and
know when to use them and how to use them with all students. In order to reduce student
behavior issues other strategies need to be used in tandem with PBS.
Source 4
George Sugai, Robert Horner . The Evolution of Discipline Practices: School-Wide
Positive Behavior Supports. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, Volume 24, Numbers 1-2
(September 2002), pp. 23-50, http://ejournals.ebsco.com.proxytu.researchport.umd.edu/direct.asp?ArticleID=WCQ2KCNUXKNNW0J7937W
The nature of student behavior in schools and how school staff handles behaviors has
changed dramatically in the last 20 years. Bullying has become a hot topic within the last 5-10
years and how to prevent/stop bullying from occurring. In order to combat bullying student
behavior must be seen as a preventative behavior. Positive behavior supports (PBS) are able to
be used school wide and with problem students to limit issues with student behavior. Schools
that use a preventative method incorporating PBS have statistically had lower issues of student
behavior versus other schools that adopt rigid reactive methods to student behavior.
Source 5
Kate Algozzine, Bob Algozzine . Classroom Instructional Ecology and School-Wide
Positive Behavior Support. Journal of Applied School Psychology, Volume 24, Number 1

(September 2007), pp. 29-47, http://ejournals.ebsco.com.proxytu.researchport.umd.edu/direct.asp?ArticleID=4C2B9F7DDC43CD036D9B

Schools that have a lack of discipline tend to have higher instances of student behavior
issues. A popular solution to reducing or eliminating student behavior used to be and in some
schools is to remove the student from the classroom. This method does not benefit the student
and prevents the student from learning and valuable instruction time. A study was performed
between two schools with classrooms that had positive behavior support programs versus
classrooms that did not use positive behavior supports. The students that participated in this
study were in special education and diagnosed with emotional behavioral disorder. The school
that had its participate in extensive training in the implementation of PBS had significantly less
issues with student behavior versus the school that did not use PBS.
Baseline Data Collection
In the initial weeks of starting my internship I grew fond on working with Taras. I had
noticed that he had some behavior issues. Several of his behaviors were the immediate result
from having Down syndrome, yet some of them were a result of having bad behavior. I wanted
to be able to get more information on Taras in order to better understand him and where he
comes from. Unfortunately Taras file contained very little information. Taras attended Pre-K for
several months on the BCPS system before moving back to Ukraine and recently moved back
from Ukraine in April 2015. Taras had an IEP from his previous elementary school Pine Grove
Elementary that was created in April 2015. Since Taras was re-entering the BCPS system, he
was formally assessed and a new IEP was written.
From the several bad behaviors that Taras would regularly exhibit I was able to choose
one behavior to collect data on and attempt to correct. I chose to collect data when Taras is

blowing out of mouth. I plan to collect data on Taras during all periods except lunch (I have to be
able to eat lunch and have a planning period) and afternoon special. I really want to see the
connections between the targeted behavior, any methods of instruction and or relationships with
staff. Due to the middle school schedule at Perry Hall Middle being a rotating A or B day I
decided to follow Taras for four days to see if his targeted behavior occurred in a particular
special or not.
Taras is in Mrs. Messiers homeroom every morning from 807 until roughly 830. During
that time Taras is responsible for writing his name and date on a morning progress sheet that all
FALS students are responsible for. Then Taras has normally one or two morning work activities
to complete. When Taras is done with his morning work Taras can sometimes be idle with no
work to do or he is given paper and allowed to draw until the morning announcements come on.
For about ten minutes of homeroom Taras aide takes a group of students to the cafeteria for
breakfast. This was usually when his targeted behavior would occur. Taras was idle with no
work to complete and was not engaged with drawing. During period one is normally reading
group where Taras goes over to Ms. Johnsons class. In reading class Taras does not normally
have many behavior issues. Even with his reading level being below grade level and difficulty
being an ELL, Taras tries hard in reading class. When he had issues the targeted behavior
resulted from transitions, whether waiting to go to Ms. Johnsons class or switching activities.
On A days Taras has gym in the morning for period 2 and in the afternoon he has tech.
ed. for period 10. On B days Taras has art for period 2 and music for period 10. The week started
out with an A day which meant Taras had gym period 2. On March 14 Taras did not exhibit the
targeted behavior due to Taras being very engaged in the activities the adapted gym teacher had
planned, however when he had gym on March 16 there was a chunk of idle time during gym

when Taras exhibited the targeted behavior. On B days when Taras has art class the targeted
behavior increased. This had to do with a large amount of debris on the art tables directly in front
of Taras. Taras would blow at the table during idle time when directions were being given or
Taras aide had already assisted him with the given activity for the day. This occurred both on
March 15 and March 17 during art. Period 3/4 and period 6/7 are the classes before and after
lunch. These classes are open for any planning; on occasion they can be used for math, computer
lab, cooking lessons, field trips and recycle. March 14 a cooking lesson was planned during
period , because of the nature of cooking lessons in the FALS program, there is some idle time
in-between directions being given and participating in the lesson. March 15 the FALS program
went to the Maryland Science Center during the middle of the day. However I was able to follow
Taras around during the trip and observed the targeted behavior when Taras was not engaged in
an exhibit. March 16 the entire FALS program, which consists of two classes, went to the school
library to research states in the USA. Taras was engaged the entire time during this period and
did not exhibit the targeted behavior. Period 8/9 is usually reserved for math class. Taras is very
engaged during this class as math is one of his stronger skills and he becomes very excited to
perform well during math class. March 14 and 15 Taras exhibited the targeted behavior only
several times, this was usually due to waiting for his turn to participate in the lesson at the
Promethean board. March 16 was a very unusual day. Period 6/7 and 8/9 both classes of the
FALS program were in Mrs. Messiers room presenting on the states they researched earlier in
the day. With 17 students presentations took almost two hours to complete. During this time
Taras exhibited the targeted behavior a combined total of 94 times. This was very unusual for
Taras. Thursdays are not normally the days for recycle, however Ms. B and myself had to attend
a job fair and would be out the next day. Mrs. Messier decided to do recycle this day. Taras

exhibited the targeted behavior more than usual, this was due to idle time waiting to get recycle
from the classes in different hallways and if there was debris on the cart or on the ground. The
last period of the day is scheduled for activity time where students are allowed to play games that
require the use of social skills. The only time Taras exhibited the targeted behavior was after he
was packed up for the day waiting to leave for the bus, this was entirely cause because Taras was
sitting idle not engaged in an activity.

Initial Data Collection

# of targeted behavior

70
60
50
40

14-Mar

30

15-Mar

20
10
0

16-Mar
17-Mar

Hypothesis of Functional Intention

During the time I spent collecting data for Taras I was able to come to a conclusion about
why Taras had decided to blow air out of his mouth. I was able to devise that there are two main
reasons for his behavior. The main reason Taras blows air is because he is not engaged in
instruction and is sitting idle at his seat. Taras does not have any activities to engage him on a
frequent basis mainly during times of and close to times of transition whether a transition to a
new activity in class or transition to different classes. He also blows air for attention. When Taras
blows air on other students and objects Taras receives negative attention from the teacher. This at

times can cause his behavior to become more frequent and thus make the attention more
frequent.
Replacement Behavior
The replacement behavior that Taras should be exhibiting is putting his hand on his
mouth when told to stop blowing by a staff member and he then stops blowing immediately. By
having Taras putting his hand on his mouth is making himself aware that he is blowing air out of
his mouth and therefore self-aware of his own behavior. Taras will learn the replacement
behavior by Mrs. Messier (FALS Teacher), Mrs. Pat (his Additional Adult Assistant or AAA)
and myself. For the first two to three days of implementation will be spent on teaching Taras to
put his hand on his mouth when he is told by a staff member to stop blowing. If more time is
needed to teach the replacement behavior a day will be added until Taras is displaying the
replacement behavior appropriately and independently. Each time Taras is blowing and is told to
stop by the staff member, the staff member is going to explicitly say, Taras stop blowing, put
your hand on your mouth Taras. If you continue to blow you will not get (pizza or PBS Kids;
depending upon what time of day it is). If Taras continues to blow after initially being told to
stop the staff member will say this, Taras do you want (pizza or PBS Kids)? If you do put your
hand on your mouth and stop blowing. The replacement behavior will be taught in conjunction
with one of the positive behavior supports that is outlined in the next section. The staff members
that are responsible for maintaining the replacement behavior are as follows: Mrs. Pat (AAA),
Mrs. Messier (FALS Teacher), Mrs. Jamie (AAA) and myself.
Positive Behavior Supports
In order to help Taras learn the replacement behavior and keep the replacement behavior
as a permanent behavior, three positive behavior supports will be implemented. These supports

will be used by all of the staff members involved with Taras instruction. The focus on positive
behavior supports will be placed on a token economy. Taras has an intense motivation for pizza
and the website PBS Kids. Prior to collecting data on Taras the staff have used Taras eating pizza
for lunch and playing on the website PBS Kids as motivation for Taras to stop negative behavior.
I noticed this when observing Taras during instruction at the beginning of internship. Taras will
be required to carry a binder to every class that he attends. This binder is double sided. On one
side of the binder is the morning tangible object, pizza. Taras has three classes before lunch. In
the morning Taras will earn three Velcro pizzas towards his morning tangible object. In the
Afternoon, on the opposite side of his binder, Taras will be working for his afternoon tangible
object, PBS Kids computer time. Taras will earn three Velcro computers. On each side are two
reminders (a face blowing air with the no symbol crossing the face out). These reminders will be
used for Taras to look at during class to remind him to not blow, and used by staff when telling
Taras to not blow.
Taras has three classes after lunch before afternoon activity time where he would earn
time on the computer. For each class Taras has the opportunity to earn a token towards pizza and
computer time. Each token economy can be earned with three pizzas or three computers. Once
Taras has earned three pizzas or computers, he will then earn the reward for that half of the day.
Taras will have two chances per class period to continue to re-earn the pizza or computer time
for that class. If an adult has to tell him more than twice to stop blowing, then Taras will not earn
a pizza or computer for that class and therefore will not receive pizza or computer for that day.
Taras also will benefit from proximity control, preferential seating and reduced
distraction to the student and other students. At times Taras can become extremely stubborn due
to his disability. Therefore without an adult in proximity of Taras he would continue the targeted

behavior. By having an adult with him whether the special educator, general educator or his
instructional assistant, Taras will less frequently demonstrate the targeted behavior. Preferential
seating and reduced distractions to the student or others students are extremely beneficial to
Taras learning. Other students who pay attention to Taras during instruction have caused Taras
to exhibit the targeted behavior more frequently. Taras is also more inclined if sitting near a
student to exhibit the targeted behavior on his classmate, if Taras is seated away from these
students during instruction the targeted behavior will be exhibited less or cease.

Implementation Data Collection and Visual Representation

Week 1 Implementation
9
8
# of Warnings

7
6
5

21-Mar

22-Mar

23-Mar

24-Mar

1
0

# of times targeted behavior

exhibited

Week 1 Implementation
35
30
25
20

21-Mar

15

22-Mar

10
5
0

23-Mar
24-Mar

# of times targeted behavior exhibited

Week 2 Implementation
25
20
4-Apr

15

5-Apr
10

6-Apr
7-Apr

8-Apr
0

Week 2 Implementation
9
8
3 of Warnings

7
6
5
4

4-Apr
5-Apr

6-Apr

7-Apr

8-Apr

# of times targeted behavior exhibited

Week 3 Implementation
35
30
25
11-Apr

20

12-Apr

15

13-Apr

10

14-Apr

15-Apr

Week 3 Implementation
14

# of Warnings

12
10
8
6
4
2
0

11-Apr
12-Apr
13-Apr
14-Apr
15-Apr

Overall Data Summary and Interpretation

Taras had a very unique situation regarding behavior. Down syndrome can make Taras at
times extremely stubborn and cause him to become non-compliant. This was very apparent
during the beginning of implementation and after school was closed for a week for spring break.
Taras had just recently come back to the United States from the Ukraine and from the way he
behaved I was able to formulate that his behavior problems have not been addressed in the past.
Taras has never had an authority figure give him real consequences for his behavior. From
conversations with Mrs. Messier about Taras, I was able to discover that his mother indulges and
pampers him at home. Implementation occurred over spring break with a 6 school day gap, 10
days overall for a total of 14 school days. This was Taras first time with a token economy
system. The first two to three days were tough to teach Taras how the token economy worked
and how to use the replacement behavior. Taras did not earn a reward at lunch or in the afternoon
until the third day of implementation, where Taras only earned his afternoon reward.
The following day Taras was able to earn his morning reward but lost his afternoon
reward due to not listening to the 2 warnings given by staff and continuing to exhibit the targeted
behavior. I also wanted to change my approach to Taras and wanted to keep him engaged as
much as possible to limit the targeted behavior. During homeroom Taras was responsible for
getting the classroom ready for announcements by turning off the class lights and was allowed to
dance during the opening music for announcements. I really relied on Taras aid for help when I
was not in the class with Taras, specifically morning/afternoon specials and reading class. This
was due to the increased teaching responsibilities I was given as my internship progressed. The
second week of implementation went surprisingly smooth despite being off for spring break and
Taras only having a week of implementation. Taras was able to earn his morning reward the

Monday back from spring break but was unable to earn his afternoon reward due to receiving 5
warnings during period 6/7. Wednesday and Thursday of that week were absolutely terrible for
Taras. Taras was behaving fine and listening to warnings up until period on Wednesday where
he received 4 warnings. Taras was able to recover after lunch but during period 8/9 Taras
exhibited the targeted behavior multiple times and disregarded warnings. After his afternoon
reward was taken away Taras behaved and finished the rest of the day fine. Thursday was very
similar except Taras had problems in music class where he would not listen to Mrs. Pat to stop
blowing. Friday was a three-hour early dismissal and despite a change in schedule Taras was
able to earn his morning reward, but due to the early dismissal, an afternoon reward was not
given. The last week of implementation was by far the best week that Taras has had with his
behavior during my time at Perry Hall. Taras was able to earn his morning and afternoon rewards
except for Wednesday April 13. Taras had started off the day well; he had one too many
warnings in his morning special but was able to listen after he did not get his morning reward.
However, Taras got in trouble during period 6/7 for hitting a student and was yelled at by staff
and was not able to recover. Taras did not listen when told to stop blowing in period 6/7 and
period 8/9 and therefore lost his afternoon reward. Thursday afternoon special was music and
Taras has problems blowing at objects on the computer station behind his seat. Taras was noncompliant when told to stop blowing, did not listen and lost his afternoon reward. I honestly feel
that if this implementation had been started towards to beginning of the school year, Taras would
not need the use of the token economy and his behavior issues would be reduced and not an
issue. Taras has exhibited great strides in exhibiting the replacement behavior when told to not
blow. He is becoming more aware of the consequences and that blowing is not acceptable.

The largest effect on outcomes has to do with the nature of Taras having Down
syndrome. Taras at times can be extremely stubborn when told to do something by staff. His
non-compliance behavior can happen for no reason. This was a large factor in the days when
Taras would not receive his morning and afternoon rewards, especially when it was not earned
over multiple periods. From the information gained from observations, review of limited records
on Taras and discussions with Mrs. Messier, this process to positively change his behavior was
Taras first experience with an authority figure holding him accountable for his own behavior.
This process made the beginning part of implementation more difficult because Taras did not
like to listen and follow instructions from staff. This also made teaching the replacement
behavior and that his targeted behavior had consequences harder and took longer.
I also feel that if I could have been with Taras in every single class to help with initial
implementation that Taras process could have been a lot smoother. I have built a great
relationship with Taras and he has taken to me really well. I feel that I could have used that
relationship in order to help with the initial implementation process. The FALS program has a
portion of their curriculum that is centered on the community and building functional skills for
use when students age out of the public school system. This program has students attend field
trips on a regular basis in order to maintain and generalize the important life skills being taught.
This also changes the schedule of the day and from 9:30-1:10 (depending upon the nature and
length of the trip) and leaves room for behavior issues. Having field trips also makes
implementing a morning reward extremely hard. Depending upon where the class goes on a trip,
determines what Taras has to eat for lunch. This is no option to take away pizza or give him
pizza because Taras can only have one option for lunch to bring with him. One of the biggest
struggles with Taras is his communication and being an ELL learner. Taras has the ability to

speak, however the majority of his language is unintelligible and a mixture of English and
Ukrainian. I believe that he also has a hard time understanding English and this at times can
confuse him. This may have became a difficulty talking to Taras and giving him directions about
teaching the replacement behavior and giving him warning to stop blowing in class. This also
affects instruction with Taras. If Taras is not able to understand what is being taught due to a
language barrier, Taras may no longer become interested in the content and then will exhibit the
targeted behavior and other behaviors.
Reflection
Starting the process for the Positive Behavior Support Plan I felt very comfortable
collecting data and being able to take initial data to implement positive behavior supports to help
with negative behavior. Having the opportunity last semester to practice really helped myself
prepare and execute this plan well. Reflecting back on this process I realized that I grew as a
teacher than anything else. During the first two weeks of internship I did a lot of observation of
my mentor teacher paying close attention to the routines and behavior management of the class
and the different group rotations. I was able to and will take with me the routines used in this
class. I will have routines for every class including a morning routine, afternoon routine and for
transitions between classes. Transitions were not a strong suit for myself. I had trouble managing
my time during instruction and always found myself running out of time for lessons. Since
starting internship I have become better at managing time and getting all planned activities
completed during a single class period. I have also become more aware of everything happening
in the classroom during instruction and maintaining attention on all of my students during
instruction, as well as learning to use different tones of voice with students in order to maintain
authority over the class. At the same time I learned that enforcing rules and giving consequences

when rules are broken is key to maintaining a class. I also did not become afraid to give
consequences to students.
Since beginning this school year I knew that a teacher had a responsibility of maintaining
control over their class and limiting behaviors during instruction. I did not know the extent and
impact to which maintaining and limiting behavior during instruction was until I started student
teaching full time. I now thoroughly believe that by having meaningful and engaging instruction
almost 90% of behaviors can be eliminated. The better the teacher the fewer problems a teacher
has with behavior from students. I plan on taking these experiences and knowledge on classroom
management with my when I have my own classroom and keeping behavior issues to a
minimum.
Not only was having positive behavior supports in place for Taras was important but
maintaining and generalizing the behavior in school is even more important. Having Taras use
the token economy chart on a daily basis for an extended period of time. Taras used the chart
over a collected period of 14 school days. This initial process will help with the longevity of
reduced the targeted behavior. Maintaining the positive behavior is only half of what is necessary
when dealing with reduced negative behaviors. Not only did Taras need to use his positive
behavior supports over an extended period of time, he had to use them in all settings at school.
Taras needed support from all of his teachers and staff involved in his education in order to
generalize the behavior in all settings and have positive behavior in all of his classes. After the
end of my internship experience support will still be needed from all staff to maintain the
positive behavior from Taras.
As with the process of reflecting on this experience I would like to do things differently if
I could repeat the project. I appreciated the challenge working with Taras and using positive

behavior supports in order to limit or cease negative behavior. Due to the nature of Down
syndrome and how behaviors can be, most importantly stubbornness, I would have chosen a
different student in my class to collect data on. Taras had multiple obvious behaviors that were
exhibited during instruction, which is why I initially chose him. The other thing that I would
have done differently is take more time to understand Taras native language and used Ukrainian
during implementation. Taras may have been more inclined to listen better on numerous
occasions due to him being an English Language Learner and not being fluent in English.