Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Challenging student behavior
Understanding and solving persistent behavior problems in schools Function-based behavior support plans Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir School of Education, University of Iceland annalind@hi.is
Extent of challenging student behavior • In Iceland, teachers report that 10-12% of students display behavior problems and that these problems are among their greatest concern (Ingvar Sigurgeirsson og Ingibjörg Kaldalóns, 2006; Samband íslenskra sveitarfélaga og Félag grunnskólakennara, 2012)
• 75% of school staff report having to deal with challenging student behavior at least weekly – Only 10% report rarely or seldom having to deal with challenging student behavior – Most common challenging behavior: Disruptions and noncompliance (Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir, 2013; Rúnar Sigþórsson, Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir & Þóra Björk Jónsdóttir, 2014)
• Intense behaviors that present physical, instructional, or social concerns to the teacher. These behaviors disrupt learning, are dangerous to the student or others, cause physical pain, cause property damage, or seriously disrupt the teaching–learning process. (Westling, 2010)
• Students with severe behavior problems have the poorest outcome of any disability group (e.g. Bradley, Doolittle, & Bartolotta, 2008)
Obstacle to inclusion • Teachers in Iceland consider „difficult students “ and discipline problems the most draining aspects of teaching (Samband íslenskra sveitarfélaga og Félag grunnskólakennara, 2012, bls. 36).
• According to 56% of teachers, challenging behavior makes them consider giving up their teaching carreer (Snæfríður Björgvinsdóttir & Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir, 2013)
• Teachers report lacking knowledge and skills to deal effectively with behavior problems (Ingvar Sigurgeirsson og Ingibjörg Kaldalóns , 2006; Ragnar Ólafsson & Júlíus Björnsson, 2009)
Multi-tiered system of support Tier 3:Tertiary prevention •Specialized for individual students: 1-5% •Based on functional behavioral assessment •Multi-component – individualized behavior support
Tier 1: Primary prevention •For all students •School/classroom-wide •Proactive – works for 80-90%
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
Sugai, 2006
Tier 2: Secondary prevention •For students at risk: 5-10% •Efficient - simple •e.g. Behavior Education Program
11
1
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Multi-tiered System of Support
Tier 1: Primary prevention •For all students •School/classroom-wide •Proactive – works for 80-90%
Sugai, 2006
eðaof bekkjarstjórnun Meeting the needs every student
12
13
Evidence-based practices for management of emotional/behavioral difficulties
Evidence-based practices for classroom management
• Establish positively stated rules – Post, teach, and review rules periodically.
• Structure and predictability in the classroom
• Post and review daily schedules, routines, and transitions.
• Routines
– Alert students to any changes in routine. – Schedule a quiet activity between recess and independent seatwork. – Alternate between passive and active activities.
• Positively stated and posted rules • Taught and reviewed
• Teaching involving active engagement of students • Specific praise and reinforcement systems • Least restrictive procedures to correct inappropriate behavior
• Model and provide explicit practice for classroom procedures. • Provide immediate and specific praise • Deliver high-probability directives before delivering lowprobability directives.
(Simonsen, 2008; Truffel, 2008)
Niesyn (2009)
Evidence-based behavior management • Consistency in reinforcing behavior according to rules and correcting inappropriate behavior
• Energetic and outgoing 6th grader • Challenging behavior:
– are related to positive teacher attitudes toward teaching •
Freiberg, Stein & Huang, 1995
– decreases aggressive and disruptive behavior and increases students´ cooperation •
(t.d. Acker & O'Leary 1987; Becker, 1986; Colvin, Sugai, et al. 1993; Embry, et al. 1996; Gottfredson,et al., 1993; Hawkins, et al. 1991; Hops, 1978; Kellam, et al. ,1998; Lewis, et al. 1998; Mayer, et al. 1983; Nafpaktitis, Mayer, et al. 1985; Olweus, 1992; Pfiffner & O'Leary, 1987; Pfiffner, et al. 1985; Walker et al., 1995)
Evertson, 1985; 1989; Evertson & Emmer, 1982; Evertson, Emmer, Sanford, & Clements, 1983; Johnson, Stoner, & Green, 1996; Marzano & Marzano, 2003
– can have long-term preventive effects on substance abuse and serious antisocial behavior of teenagers •
– – – –
Verbal aggression Disruptions Defiance Non-engagement
• Persistent over several years
– improves task engagement and academic achievement •
Meet „Emil“
Embry et al., 1996; Flannery et al., 2003; Kellam & Anthony 1998; Kellam, Ling, et al., 1998
– Negatively influenced learning and instruction – „Everything had been tried – nothing had worked“ (Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir, 2010).
16
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
2
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Effects of class-wide reinforcement system Class-wide token system Einstaklings-
Baseline
hvatningarkerfi
12 10
Attained goals fjöldi verkefna
8 6
áætlun Goals
4 2 0 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15
Vikur Weeks
Tier 2: Secondary prevention •For students at risk: 5-10% •Efficient - simple •e.g. Behavior Education Program Tier 1: Primary prevention •For all students •School/classroom-wide •Proactive – works for 80-90%
Sugai, 2006
viku náð á goals Fjöldi set and attained of markmiða Number
Multi-tiered System of Support Meeting the need of every student
(Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir, 2010).
20
Examples of Tier-2 interventions • Behavior Education Program (Crone, Horner og Hawken, 2006) • Check-in Check-out (Todd, Campbell, Meyer & Horner, 2008) – Student checks in with intervention coordinator in the morning – reviews behavioral goals – Point card on which teachers monitor student behavior – Teacher feedback at predetermined times – At the end of day, student checks out with designated adult – Parent gets point card, which signs and sends back to school – Recordings reviewed to make decisions regarding support
Added support creates equal opportunities
Effects of secondary prevention • Research has found reinforcement systems with frequent feedback to effectively decrease behavior problems (Hawken & Horner, 2003; March & Horner, 2002; Todd o.fl., 2008; Sigurðardóttir & Pétursdóttir, 2000)
• For example, CICO used with 1st to 5th graders who showed behavior problems despite primary prevention • School staff found CICO easy to implement, effective and efficient • 68% of students showed improved behavior • Other students needed more individualized support 23
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
(Filter et al., 2007)
3
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Functional behavioral assessment - FBA
Meeting the needs of every student Tier 3:Tertiary prevention •Specialized for individual students: 1-5% •Based on functional behavioral assessment •Multi-component – individualized behavior support Tier 2: Secondary prevention •For students at risk: 5-10% •Efficient - simple •e.g. Behavior Education Program
Consequences
» Iwata et al. (1982); O´Neill et al. (1997)
Consequences
Function purpose
Sugai, 2006
Antecedents
25
Function-based behavior support plan Problem behavior
Information gathered through interviews, direct observations…
Setting Events
• Based on findings from functional behavioral assessment Antecedents
•
Problem behavior
Tier 3: Primary prevention •For all students •School/classroom-wide •Proactive – works for 80-90%
Setting Events
• Systematic way of identify factors influencing problem behavior • Key questions: Why is the problem behavior occurring? What is the function?
Functionpurpose
Why function-based interventions? • Interventions based on findings of FBA are more effective (Heyvaert o.fl., 2012; Ingram, Lewis-Palmer & Sugai, 2005; March og Horner, 2002; Newcomer & Lewis, 2004)
• Decades of research have shown positive effects – on student behavior, academic engagement, and resilience
Setting Events Strategies
Antecedent Strategies
Teaching strategies Replacement behaviors
(Gage et al., 2012; Kern et al.., 1994; O´Neill & Stephenson, 2009)
Consequence strategies Reinforcement of appropriate behavior Extinction of problem behavior
Why function-based interventions? • Legalized practices in the US – Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (1997) and Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004) • A child with disability who is removed from the child´s current placement… shall receive a functional behavioral assessment… • The IEP team shall in the case of a child whose behavior impedes the child´s learning or that of others, consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies, to address that behavior.
– on teachers´ self-efficacy, competence, and resilience (Stoiber & Gettinger, 2011)
• Recommended practices – National Association of State Directors of Special Education – National Association of School Psychologists – National Institutes of Health
Meet „Bjarki“ • Creative, sweet, and strong-minded 5-year-old • Diagnosis of autism and ADHD • Difficulties remaining in designated area, concentrating and participating in preschool activities • Challenging behavior: – Noncompliance, defiant behavior, yelling, refusal to participate in activities, social withdrawal – Physical aggression, socially inappropriate behavior 31
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
4
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Bjarki´s engagement in circle time prior to intervention
Baseline Mean: 63 occurrences 140
Behavior Support Plan 4 occurrences
A
B2
B1
Follow-up 2 B3
A
120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1
6
11
16
21
26
31
36
41
46
51
56
61
Mean:
(%) samverustund þátttöku í in Active Hlutfall engagement circle time (%)
Disruptive behavior during circle time (20 minute observations)
Bjarki´s disruptive behavior prior to intervention
A
100
Sleep difficulties Symptoms of autism and ADHD (language delay, lack of social skills, short attention span…)
Large group activity, group singing during circle time
Behavior Refuses to participate Makes loud noises
Leaves designated area
Follow-up 85% B3
40 20 0 1
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67
Sessions
33
Consequences
Teacher accompanies him to another room Function: Avoids/escapes activity (group singing)
Desired behavior:
Participates Sings with group
Positive Reininteraction forcing Enjoyment consequences
Tired Language delay
Group activity/ singing
Defiant and disruptive behavior
Leaves area
Setting event interventions
Antecedent interventions
Training in appropriate behavior
Reinforcement of appropriate behavior Extinction of inappropriate behavior
34
Bjarki´s Behavior Support Plan
Bjarki´s Behavior Support Plan
Setting event interventions
Antecedent interventions •
• Collaboration with parents regarding Bjarki´s sleep difficulties
Avoids / ecapes task
Circle time divided up into smaller units - dance and games in between songs
– Parents will seek consultation to improve sleep – Inform preschool staff when Bjarki is tired after poor sleep
• Individualized support – Language support – Social skills training 36
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
A
Function-based Behavior Support Plan
Stomps feet Shouts
B1
60
66
Findings from FBA Antecedents
Behavior Support Plan 75% B2
80
Sessions
Setting Events
Baseline 15%
•
Clear and visual organization of circle time
•
Bjarki sits next to teacher in circle time
•
Clear instructions
•
Time timer to show how much time remains
•
Bjarki given a role during circle time 37
5
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Appropriate behavior replacing challenging behavior
Bjarki´s Behavior Support Plan Training in appropriate behavior Replacement behavior
Group singing in circle time
Disruptive, defiant behavior
Gets to leave
• Bjarki can use a break card to request leaving circle time with teacher for a few minutes
Escapes task
Training in appropriate behavior • Social story about appropriate behavior in circle time • Visual rules / behavior expectations • Positive feedback from teacher
Request break with break card 38
39
Tasks - Activities
Bjarki´s Behavior Support Plan Reinforcement of appropriate behavior Behavior expectations
• Positive attention for appropriate behavior • Individualized token reinforcement system – Reinforcement matrix – stamps for appropriate behavior in every 2-4-minute task – Reminders – Praise for effort – If two or more reminders are needed, no stamp – Reward for attaining given proportion of possible stamps
40
Bjarki´s engagement in circle time
Bjarki´s disruptive behavior 140
Behavior Support Plan 4 occurrences
A
B2
B1
Follow-up 2 B3
B0
120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1
6
11
16
21
26
31
36
41
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
46
51
56
61
Mean:
Active engagement in circle time (%)
Disruptive behavior during circle time (20 minute observations)
Baseline Mean: 63 occurrences
66
Baseline 15% A
Behavior Support Plan 75% B2
B1
Follow-up 85% B3
B0
100 80 60 40 20 0 1
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67
Sessions
43
6
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
• Engagement increased on average from 33.7% (baseline) to 92.9% and continued to be high after token system was discontinued
Disruptive beeavior during 20-minute circle time
• Bjarki was one of 5 participants in the master´s projects of Daðey Sigþórsdóttir and Erla Björk Sveinbjörnsdóttir (2016). • Disruptive behavior decreased on average by 95.3% and continued to be low after token system was discontinued.
(Erla Björk Sveinbjörnsdóttir, 2016)
Sessions
47
Detrimental effects of reinforcement on performance or motivation? • Findings of maintenance of improved behavior after fading of token system are in accordance with previous research with elementary students (e.g. Guðrún Björg Ragnarsdóttir & Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir, 2012; 2013)
• …and in accordance with meta-analyses showing that praise and rewards increase performance, task interest and enjoyment (Cameron, 2001; Eisenberger & Cameron, 1996) • Contrary to the common myth that rewards (both verbal and tangible) decrease motivation to perform task without reward (Deci, 1971; Kohn, 1993)
Effects of BSP on perceived well-being During circle time I feel ... 100% 90%
Very bad
80%
Good
70% 60% 50%
Bad
40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Very good
Good Pre-test Fyrir 20% good/very good
Post-test Eftir 100% good/very good
(Daðey Sigþórsdóttir, 2016)
Parents´ perception of behavior support plans • Interviews revealed that parents had a positive perception of BSP, for example: So, at first [beginning of preschool] I felt that they considered Bjarki to be the disruption. And then I felt more and more: What can I do? Is there something that I´m doing that is causing this disruptive behavior? … And over time I felt that they were much more willing to change according to what he needed. …I saw the gap between him and the other children decrease. (Birna, mother of Bjarki) (Daðey Sigþórsdóttir, 2016)
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
Training in Iceland • Lectures and long-distance training in FBA and BSPs have been part of an elective course on emotional and behavioral difficulties (EBD) at the School of Education, University of Iceland since 2009. • Study evaluated changes in students´ persistent behavior problems related to implementation of behavior support plans through measures of: – disruptive behavior – aggressive behavior – on-task behavior
7
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Method
Function-based behavior support plans 74 case studies See also: Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir. (2011). Understanding is key Decreasing students´ longlasting behavior problems with functional behavioral assessment and behavior support plans. Icelandic Journal of Education, 20(2), 121-143.
Participants • 188 master level students enrolled in course 2009-14 – Most studying educational studies (majority special education)
• 74 children with long-lasting behavior problems – – – –
behavior problems had lasted 1-18 yrs (avg: 3.9 yrs) 19 in preschool, 42 in elementary, 13 in secondary/high school 68 boys and 6 girls, 3-20 yrs old (avg: 9.3 yrs) 25 with ADHD, 12 with LD, 6 with ASD, 5 with anxiety or depression, 4 with ODD, 3 with DD and 2 with Tourette – Nearly all in public, mainstream schools
Method, cont.
Method, cont.
• Design and data analyses
• Independent variable FBA and BSP implemented by teams of 2-4 master students based on the following: – 12 hours of lectures on applied behavior analysis • e.g. Yell, Shriner, Meadows, & Drasgow (2009): Evidence-based practices for educating students with emotional and behavioral disorders.
– 11 hours of lectures on EBD • Kauffman & Landrum (2009): Characteristics of emotional and behavioral disorders ...
Before BSP
12
After BSP
10 8 d = 0.5
6 4 2
**
d = 0.8 **
d = 1.0 ***
0 Preschool
Elementary
Secondary
School Level Figure 1. Median of means of disruptive behavior of preschool, elementary and secondary students before and after implementation of function-based BSPs. ** p< .01; *** p< .001
Overall decrease: 78%
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
Frequency of Aggressive Behavior (during 20 min)
Frequency of Disruptive Behavior (during 20 min)
Course website with assessment and intervention materials Guidelines for conducting FBA and BSP in six steps Written feedback on each step 4 hours of supervised team work
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Before BSP
After BSP
d = 1.0
*
– – – –
– Teams used direct observations and AB single-subject designs – Data combined and descriptive statistics calculated – Single group pretest-posttest designs to evaluate effects of function-based BSPs on target behaviors – Nonparametric Wilcoxon tests for related samples (matchedpair signed-rank) to compare medians of means for each group before and after intervention – Adjusted effect sizes calculated based on means of the last three measures of baseline and intervention phases using Rosenthal's (1994) formula, taking into account the autocorrelation between repeated measures
d = 0.6
Preschool Elementary School Level Figure 2. Median of means of disruptive behavior of preschool, elementary and secondary students before and after implementation of function-based BSPs. * p< .05; ‡ Statistical significance not assessed due to small n Overall decrease: 88%
8
Percentage of Task Engagement (% of 20 min)
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Before BSP
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
*
***
d = 1.3
Meet “Leo“
After BSP
d = 1.6 ** d = 1.1
• • • • •
3rd grader in public elementary school in Reykjavik Class with 20 students – 1 teacher Strengths: Outgoing, positive and helpful Bilingual – parents not fluent in Icelandic Behavior problems since start of school – Excessive disruptive behavior – Short attention span
Preschool
Elementary
Secondary
• Spending increasing hours in resource room
School Level
– Placement there instead of home room class
and secondary students before and after implementation of function-based BSPs. * p< .05; ** p< .01; *** p< .001
Overall increase: 91%
Frequency of disruptive behavior in 20 minutes
Leo´s disruptive behavior prior to intervention 70 60 50 40 30 20
10 0 1
2
3
4
(Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir, Lucinda Árnadóttir & Snæfríður Björgvinsdóttir, 2012)
Leo´s task engagement prior to intervention Baseline
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Baseline
0
• Peers: Why don´t you just go the resource room?
Percentage of time on-task (%) of 20 min observation sessions
Figure 3. Median of means of task engagement exhibited by preschool, elementary
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15
Observations
Observations • Average frequency of disruptive behavior: 43 instances per 20 minutes.
Functional behavioral assessment: Hypothesis statement
Setting event intervention
Setting event
Antecedent
Problem behavior
Consequences
When Leo starts his school day early in the unsupervised classroom, he finds it difficult to calm down and concentrate on school tasks
When Leo is supposed to work at his desk or needs help…
…he shows disruptive behavior (leaves desk, shouts, makes noises, or talks about things unrelated to class work)…
…to get attention from teacher or peers.
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
• Average task engagement: 69%
• Leo starts his school day in the resource room – Instead of unsupervised classroom
• Reviews expectations and goals for the school day through focusing questions from special educator (aided by a checklist)
9
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Teaching replacement behaviors
Antecedent interventions
Training: – modeling – role play – feedback • Raising hand the right way
• Have Leo sit in the front with „appropriate“ peer • Clear instructions • Time timer • Visual reminder to raise hand
– waiting quietly until your turn – no shouting – etc.
Reinforcement of academic engagement and appropriate asking for help/attention Frequency of disruptive behavior in 20 minutes
Effects on disruptive behaviors
• Contract • Individualized token reinforcement system – – – –
Short work periods Clear behavior expectations Frequent positive feedback Reminder – chance to improve behavior – Reward if daily goals were met
Baseline
70
50 40 30
20 10 0 0
Percentage of academic engagement in 20 minutes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Observations
Frequency of disruptive behavior before and after intervention with behavior support plan in the general education classroom. • Average decreased from 43 to 2 per 20 minute observations
Effects on academic engagement Behavior support plan
Baseline
Behavior support plan
60
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Teacher and student perception • Leo: – “I find it easier and more fun to study now because I have a „star book“ and I learn more now than before“
• Leo´s teacher:
1
2
3
4
5
6 7 8 9 Observations
10 11 12 13 14 15
Academic engagement before and during intervention with behavior support plan in the general education classroom • Average increased from 69% to 95% in 20 minute observations.
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
– “Leo now interrupts teaching much less than before and it´s quite apparent that he doesn´t disturb the other students as much. Before he was thinking a lot about what all the other students were doing but that has decreased considerably. The plan is working and has clear and very positive effects on Leo´s behavior.“
10
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Leo - 6 months post intervention
Plan for generalization and maintenance
• Interview with Leo:
• Provide needed support in all settings • Important to gradually increase student independence and self-management step by step
– ”I´m seldom naughty“ – ”Easier to learn now“
• Interview with Leo´s teacher:
– Lengthen time between feedback – Higher goals for daily performance – Move from tokens and material reinforcement to solely social reinforcement – Decrease reminders and chances
– Leo is still doing well – No need for individualized support in the classroom – Leo gets support in the resource room 3 times a week, during the first class hour of the day
• End goal: general (whole class) methods sufficient to support positive behavior and learning
• No need for further segregated support
6 months post intervention • Leo´s teacher: – Uses methods from behavior support plan with all students • Praise for appropriate behavior • Time timer to remind students to make good use of time • Specific goals – tied to reinforcement for the whole class • Clear reminders of appropriate behavior
Remember „Emil“? • Energetic and outgoing 6th grader • Challenging behavior: – – – –
Verbal aggression Disruptions Defiance Non-engagement
• Persistent over several years – Negatively influenced learning and instruction – „Everything had been tried – nothing had worked“
– Plans to use individualized behavior support plans for those students who need it
(Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir, 2010).
Effects of a function-based behavior support plan
Emil´s behavior support plan • Setting event intervention:
(Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir, 2010).
– Consultation with mother about sleep and nutrition. – Clear objectives and schedule in a reinforcement booklet
• Training in appropriate behavior: – Polite ways to ask for different tasks or procedures
• Differential reinforcement: – Contract and reinforcement system/booklet. – Feedback from class teacher after each class hour, day and week. – Reward – provided at home at the end of week
set and attained of markmiða Number viku náð á goals Fjöldi
• Antecedent intervention:
Class-wide token system Individualized behavior support plan
Baseline 12 10
Attained
8
fjöldi verkefna goals
6
áætlun Goals
4 2 0 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15
Vikur Weeks
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
11
Dr. Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir annalind@hi.is
Effects of BSP on verbal aggression
athugasemda ljótra orða Tíðni Negative or eða hurtful comments kennslustund í 40 mín 40 during minute class
Baseline
Perception of Emil´s mother • Emil´s mother was interviewed 3 years after implementation of the behavior support plan: • He suddently got positive feedback from the school which he had NEVER received before and… his perception of himself changed. Suddenly it could be fun to do well. I don´t think he had ever realized that before... It was such a big relief… • …this just changed everything, both at school and here at home. …I´ve always said that this saved him.
Behavior Support Plan
12
10 8 6 4 2 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Sesselja Árnadóttir (2011)
Sessions Athugunardagar
Some references •
Thank you!
•
Questions? Comments? •
annalind@hi.is
•
Arnadottir, S. & Petursdottir, A.-L. (2013). “Now I can“. Students’ views on functional behavioral assessment and behavior support plans. Netla – Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. Petursdottir, Anna-Lind. (2010). Lotta and Emil learn to behave: The effects of functional behavioral assessment and positive behavior support plans. Netla – Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. http://netla.khi.is/menntakvika2010/ Petursdottir, A.-L. (2011). Understanding is key: Decreasing students´ longlasting behavior problems with functional behavioral assessment and behavior support plans. Icelandic Journal of Education, 20(2), 121-143. Petursdottir, A.-L., Arnadottir, L. & Björgvinsdottir, S. D. (2012). From segregation to inclusion: Decreasing persistent behavior problems in the classroom through a function-based behavior support plan. Netla - Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. http://netla.hi.is/menntakvika2012/002.pdf
Some references, cont. •
•
•
Ragnarsdottir, G. & Petursdottir, A.-L. (2012). “Now I really know how to behave”. Decreasing disruptive behaviors of students through increasingly demanding versions of function-based behavior intervention plans. Journal of Educational Research (Iceland), 9, 153-177. Ragnarsdottir, G. & Petursdottir, A.-L. (2013). “Shush, I´m studying!”. Improving academic engagement of students with persistent behavior problems through increasingly demanding versions of function-based behavior intervention plans. Netla – Online Journal on Pedagogy and Education. Zuilma Gabriela Sigurðardóttir og Anna-Lind Pétursdóttir (2000). Árangursríkar leiðir til að breyta hegðun skólabarna. Rannsóknir í félagsvísindum III, 315-334.
80
NFSP Understanding and solving behavior problems
12