CENTER FOR EFFECTIVE COLLABORATION AND PRACTICEImproving Services for Children and Youth with Emotional and BehavioralProblems

It is the mission of the Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice (CECP) tosupport and to promote a reoriented national preparedness to foster the development andadjustment of children with or at risk of developing serious emotional disturbance. Toachieve that goal, the Center is dedicated to a policy of collaboration at Federal, state, andlocal levels that contributes to and facilitates the production, exchange, and use ofknowledge about effective practices. We have strategically organized the Center to identifypromising programs and practices, promote the exchange of useful and useable information,and facilitate collaboration among stakeholders and across service system disciplines.

Note: This document was reviewed for consistency with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act(P.L. 105-17) by the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs.

This document was produced under contract number HS92017001 and grant number H237T60005. Theviews expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Education or any otherFederal agency and should not be regarded as such. The Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice: Improving Services for Children and Youth with Emotional and Behavioral Problems is funded under acooperative agreement with the Office of Special Education Programs, Office of Special Education andRehabilitative Services, U.S. Department of Education, with additional support from the Child, Adolescent, andFamily Branch, Center for Mental Health Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration, of theU.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

ADDRESSING STUDENT PROBLEM BEHAVIORPART II:

CONDUCTING A FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT

(3RD EDITION)

May 12, 1998

Prepared By

Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice

Robert A. Gable, Ph.D., Research Fellow; Professor, Old Dominion UniversityMary Magee Quinn, Ph.D., Deputy Director, Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice

Robert B. Rutherford Jr., Ph.D., Research Fellow; Professor, Arizona State UniversityKenneth W. Howell, Ph.D., Research Fellow; Professor, Western Washington University

Catherine C. Hoffman, A.B., Research Associate, Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice

This information is copyright free. Readers are encouraged to copy and share it, but please credit theCenter for Effective Collaboration and Practice.

Please address all correspondence to: Mary Magee Quinn, Center for Effective Collaboration andPractice. American Institutes for Research, 1000 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW, Suite 400, Washington,D.C. 20007

iACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to thank the following individuals for their valuable assistance in the reviewand production of this document:

Beth Bader, M.Ed., American Federation of TeachersGeorge Batsche, Ph.D., University of South FloridaDenise M. Conrad, M.Ed., Behavior Specialist, Toledo Public SchoolsEleanor Guetzloe, Ph.D., University of South FloridaMary Holway, Parent, Woodbridge, VABeverley Johns, M.S., Past-President, Council for Children with Behavior DisordersDavid Osher, Ph.D., Center for Effective Collaboration and PracticeTrina Osher, M.A., Federation of Families for Childrens Mental HealthTom Valore, Ph.D., West Shore Day Treatment Center, Positive Education ProgramLawrence T. Waite, M.Ed., New York State United Teachers

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................................i

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1

Rationale for Using Functional Behavioral Assessments To Develop Positive Behavior Interventions ...........................................................................2

Functional Assessment is a Team Effort ......................................................................................3

A Method for Conducting a Functional Behavioral Assessment ...............................................41. Describe and Verify the Seriousness of the Problem...............................................................42. Refine the Definition of the Problem Behavior........................................................................73. Collect Information on Possible Functions of the Problem Behavior.......................................8

Ways to Categorize Student Behavior..................................................................................8

Direct and Indirect Measures of Student Behavior.....................................................................9Direct Assessment................................................................................................................9Indirect Assessment...........................................................................................................13Accuracy of Behavior Measurement..................................................................................14

4. Analyze Information Using Triangulation and/or Problem Pathway Chart............................145. Generate Hypothesis Statement Regarding Likely Function of Problem Behavior................156. Test Hypothesis Statement Regarding the Function of Problem Behavior.............................15

Summary of Steps to Conduct a Functional Behavioral Assessment ......................................17

The Behavior Intervention Plan ..................................................................................................17

Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................17

Additional Information on Functional Behavioral Assessment ...............................................18

Appendix A: Scatterplots ........................................................................................................A-1

Appendix B: ABC Charts.........................................................................................................B-1

Appendix C: Functional Assessment Interview Forms..........................................................C-1

Appendix D: Sample Teacher and Student Interviews.........................................................D-1

Appendix E: Problem Behavior Questionnaire ......................................................................E-1

Appendix F: Data Triangulation Chart ..................................................................................F-1

Appendix G: Behavior Pathway Charts.................................................................................G-1

1ADDRESSING STUDENT PROBLEM BEHAVIORPART II:CONDUCTING A FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT

oday, educators at all grade levels face agrowing number of student behaviors that

challenge effective classroom instruction. Fortunately, most students respond to standardstrategies for addressing potential behaviorproblems (e.g., classroom rules, verbal praiseand reprimands, and loss of privileges). However, for some studentswith and withoutdisabilitiesthese classroom managementtechniques do not produce the desiredoutcomes and may even worsen an alreadydifficult situation. In recognition of thegrowing need to proactively address theproblem, the 1997 Amendments to theIndividuals with Disabilities Education Act(IDEA) (P.L. 105-17) include provisions thathelp schools address both the classroomlearning and behavior problems of studentswith disabilities.

The requirement that schools address studentbehavior problems in their efforts to ensure thatschools are safe and conducive to learning forall students signals a fundamental shift inemphasis in Federal legislation. Beginningwith P.L. 94-142 (Education for AllHandicapped Children Act of 1975), schoolswere required to ensure students withdisabilities a free, appropriate publiceducation in the least restrictiveenvironment. Now, schools also must ensurethat students are able to be involved andprogress in the general education curriculum,measure the educational progress of studentswith disabilities, and take preventive andproactive steps to address the relationshipbetween student behavior and classroomlearning. The 1997 Amendments are explicitabout what is required of IndividualizedEducation Program (IEP) teams whenaddressing behaviors of children withdisabilities that interfere with their learning orthe learning of others.

The IEP team must consider, whenappropriate, strategiesincluding positivebehavioral interventions, strategies, andsupportsto address that behavior throughthe IEP process (see 614(d)(3)(B)(i)).

In response to disciplinary actions byschool personnel described in Sec.615(k)(1)(B), the IEP team must, eitherbefore or no later than 10 days after theaction, develop a functional behavioralassessment plan to collect information. This information should be used fordeveloping or reviewing and revising anexisting behavioral intervention plan toaddress such behaviors, if necessary.

In addition, states are required to addressthe in-service needs and pre-servicepreparation of personnel (includingprofessionals and paraprofessionals whoprovide special education, generaleducation, related services, or earlyintervention services) to ensure that theyhave the knowledge and skills necessary tomeet the needs of their students withdisabilities. This includes enhancing theirabilities to use strategies such as behavioralinterventions and supports(653(c)(3)(D)(vi)).

This is the second of three guides that addressthe 1997 Amendments to IDEA as they relateto the issue of functional behavioral assessmentand positive behavioral interventions andsupports. The first monograph, AddressingStudent Problem Behavior: An IEP TeamsIntroduction to Functional BehavioralAssessment and Behavior Intervention Plans,provided a general overview of theserequirements and is available through theCenter for Effective Collaboration andPractices web site (www.air-dc.org/cecp/) orby calling toll free 1-888-457-1551. Thissecond monograph examines the rationale for

T

2and discusses the process of conducting afunctional behavioral assessment and describesthe ways schools and IEP teams can translatethis new public policy into classroom practiceby means of a step-by-step approach tofunctional behavioral assessment. This guideexplains how IEP teams can decide how tocollect various kinds of information and how toorganize and analyze this information. A thirdmonograph will discuss how to use theinformation gathered during the functionalbehavioral assessment process to develop andimplement positive behavioral interventionplans that address both the short- and long-termneeds of the student.

This monograph covers an integrated, six-stepprocess that has been used by some forconducting that assessment (four additionalsteps cover the development of a behaviorintervention plan, which will be discussed inthe third document in this series). Blank formsand sample completed forms that might beused during the functional behavioralassessment process are included. In addition,this guide highlights the role that bothprofessional collaboration and school-widesupport can play in addressing student problembehavior. Finally, there is a list of sources forreaders interested in obtaining moreinformation on functional behavioralassessment.

RATIONALE FOR USING FUNCTIONALBEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENTS

TO DEVELOP POSITIVEBEHAVIOR INTERVENTIONS

hen a students behavior disruptsclassroom instruction, teachers often

address the problem by manipulating eventsthat follow the misbehavior (e.g., verbalreprimands, isolation, detention, suspension). Experience has shown that this approach failsto teach the student acceptable replacementbehaviors (i.e., behaviors that are expectedunder certain circumstances). Recently,

educators have begun to introduce variousprograms designed to teach students moreacceptable ways to behave. The area of socialskills development has been especially popular. However, decisions regarding which behaviorsto teach a student are largely subjective andoften unrelated to the cause of the problembehavior.

In some instances, what has been absent is amethod for determining why the studentmisbehaved in the first place. Today, there isgood reason to believe that the success ofclassroom behavior interventions hinges onidentifying the likely causes and purposes ofproblem behavior and finding ways to teachand promote appropriate replacement behaviorsthat serve the same functions as theinappropriate behaviors. We know thatinappropriate student behavior may have thesame form (e.g., Charles and James both swearat the teacher) but serve different functions(e.g., Charles is seeking peer approval whileJames is attempting to escape an aversiveteacher-pupil interaction). Functionalassessment helps IEP teams to understandwhat function the problem behavior serves forthe students and leads to interventions thatreduce or eliminate problem behavior byreplacing it with behavior that serves the samepurpose or function for the student, but is moresocially acceptable (e.g., teaching Charles moreacceptable ways to gain peer attention).

The logic behind functional behavioralassessment is that practically all behavioroccurs within a particular context and serves aspecific purpose. Students learn to behave (ormisbehave) in ways that satisfy a need orresults in a desired outcome. Students willchange their behavior only when it is clear thata different response will more effectively andefficiently result in the same outcome. Identifying the purpose of problem behaviors ormore specifically, what the student gets oravoids through those behaviors) can provideinformation that is essential to developinginstructional strategies and supports to reduce

W

3or eliminate behaviors that interfere withsuccessful classroom performance orparticipation.

Functional behavioral assessment is generallyconsidered to be a problem-solving process thatrelies on a variety of techniques and strategiesto identify the purposes of specific behaviorand to help IEP teams select interventions todirectly address the problem behavior. Functional behavioral assessment should beintegrated, as appropriate, throughout theprocess of developing, reviewing, and, ifnecessary, revising a students IEP. Afunctional behavioral assessment looks beyondthe behavior itself. The focus when conductinga functional behavioral assessment is onidentifying significant, pupil-specific social,affective, cognitive, and/or environmentalfactors associated with the occurrence (andnon-occurrence) of specific behaviors. Thisbroader perspective offers a betterunderstanding of the function or purposebehind student behavior. Intervention plansbased on an understanding of why a studentmisbehaves are extremely useful in addressinga wide range of problem behaviors.

The following sections discuss a multi-stepstrategy that some have used to carry out afunctional behavioral assessment. The tensteps listed below include the development andimplementation of behavior intervention plans,which may follow the functional behavioralassessment. Only the first six steps relating tothe actual functional behavioral assessment willbe discussed in this document. The other foursteps will be discussed in the third monograph: Addressing Student Problem Behavior PartIII: Developing and Implementing BehavioralIntervention Plans.

A Method for Performing a FunctionalBehavioral Assessment

1. Describe and verify the seriousness of theproblem.

2. Refine the definition of the problem behavior.

3. Collect information on possible functions of theproblem behavior.

4. Analyze information using triangulation and/orproblem pathway analysis.

5. Generate a hypothesis statement regardingprobable function of problem behavior.

6. Test the hypothesis statement regarding thefunction of the problem behavior.

A Method for Developing, Implementingand Monitoring a Behavior Intervention

Plan (to be covered in the third monograph)

7. Develop and implement behavior interventionplan.

8. Monitor faithfulness of implementation ofplan.

9. Evaluate effectiveness of behavior interventionplan.

10. Modify behavior intervention plan, if needed.

FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT IS A TEAMEFFORT

efore beginning, we want to stress the rolethat teamwork plays in addressing student

behavior problems. In conducting a functionalbehavioral assessment and developing abehavior intervention plan, education personnelshould draw upon a range of communicationand interpersonal skills. Like knowledge ofassessment itself, IEP team members may needspecial training in the skills of successfulcollaboration, such as time management, groupproblem-solving (including brainstormingstrategies), active listening, and conflictresolution processes, to mention a few. If team

B

4members are to conduct the assessment, theymay also need training in the skills andknowledge required to conduct a functionalbehavioral assessment and use of behaviorintervention techniques. As with othercollaborative efforts, building-leveladministrative and collegial support is essentialto a successful outcome.

A METHOD FOR CONDUCTING AFUNCTIONAL BEHAVIORAL

ASSESSMENT

1. Describe and Verify the Seriousnessof the Problem

ost teachers recognize that manyclassroom discipline problems can be

resolved by consistently applying standardmanagement strategies. Strategies proven tobe effective include: teaching students how tocomply with well-defined classroom rules,providing students more structure in lessons,making strategic seating assignments, andposting a class schedule, to mention a few. These proactive procedures can sometimeseven alleviate the need for more intensiveinterventions. Today, many teachers learnabout other solutions to the problems they facethrough teacher assistance or interventionassistance teams. Regardless of the source ofthis information, school personnel generallyshould introduce one or more standardstrategies before seeking to initiate the morecomplex, and often time-consuming, process offunctional behavioral assessment. A formalassessment usually is reserved for serious,recurring problems that do not readily respondto typical discipline strategies, impede astudents learning, or have been ongoing.

In addressing student behavior that impedeslearning, IEP teams usually will work with thereferring classroom teacher to define, inconcrete terms, the exact behavior of concern(e.g., Trish is verbally and physicallyaggressive toward other students on the

playground.). Using this description of thebehavior, the IEP team or other schoolpersonnel can conduct initial observations ofboth the student of concern and 1-2 classmatesselected at random. By observing otherclassmates, the team will be able to determinethe seriousness of the problem and thediscrepancy between present behavior andwhat is considered to be an acceptable level ofbehavior. Finally, initial observations mayindicate that many students have similardiscipline problems and that the solution mayactually rest in changes in classroom practices.

In collecting preliminary information aboutstudent behavior, the team should also take intoconsideration teacher expectations for studentacademic performance as well as classroomconduct. It might be that teacher expectationsfor the student exceed or fall below thestudents ability to perform. The resultingbehavior problems may stem from a sense offrustration, fear of embarrassment, or boredom.

In assessing a students behavior, it may beimportant to consider whether a particularresponse may relate to cultural differences orexpectations. For example, in some cultures,making eye contact with adults is consideredrude; in others, peer competition isdiscouraged. Remember that no two students(or their families) are the same, regardless oftheir gender, cultural or ethnic background. Aspart of the IEP team, parents can providevaluable information regarding the behaviorstheir culture values. School personnel shouldbe aware that differences may exist, respectthese differences, and work to adopt thefamilys perspective when considering studentbehavior. When making judgments aboutcultural differences or expectations,professionals who are qualified to make suchstatements may be another resource to the IEPteam. Such individuals may be in a goodposition to assess the impact of culturaldifferences on learning.

M

5One way for the IEP team to judge thesignificance of the behavior exhibited by thestudent of concern is to pose the followingquestions:

Does the students behavior significantlydiffer from that of his/her classmates?

Does the students behavior lessen thepossibility of successful learning for thestudent and others?

Have past efforts to address the studentsbehavior using standard interventions beenunsuccessful?

Does the students behavior represent abehavioral deficit or excess, rather than acultural difference?

Is the students behavior serious, persistent,chronic, or a threat to the safety of thestudent or others?

If the behavior persists, is somedisciplinary action likely to result?

If the answer is yes to any of these questions,then the team should proceed with a functionalbehavioral assessment. The followingvignettes illustrate the fact that problembehavior can vary widely and that variousfactors can influence student behavior. Thevignettes also show that not all problemsrequire complex solutions or a functionalbehavioral assessment.

Vignette I

Mrs. Gambino, the seventh grade social studiesteacher at Havelock Middle School, reportedthat according to her mid-term progress report,Tommy, a student with a learning disability,was in danger of failing. Together with Mrs.Lofties, the special education teacher, theydetermined that the problem probably stemmedfrom Tommys not doing his homework every

night, rather than from his not having theknowledge or skills to complete it. Mrs.Gambino explained that although she modifiesthe homework assignment to help Tommy,whose disability makes it difficult for him towrite, he still doesnt complete theassignments. She explained that the homeworkassignments were given so that the studentshave an opportunity to practice using what theylearned during class, and it was important forthem to spend time doing them so they couldkeep up with what was being taught.

Mrs. Lofties asked how many other students inher class came without having their homework. Mrs. Gambino explained that she did not takeup the homework or grade it. Mrs. Gambinoexplained that students kept their homework intheir notebooks so they could use it to study. Idont believe in giving kids grades forhomework, she explained. I dont think youshould grade practice work. Mrs. Loftiessuggested that for the next five days Mrs.Gambino observe Tommy and the otherstudents in his class to see how many hadcompleted homework assignments. Mrs.Gambino said she would watch the students asthey were discussing their homeworkassignments and record (without the studentsknowing) who did not have their homework. They agreed to meet again after the five dayshad passed.

During their next meeting, Mrs. Gambino andMrs. Lofties looked at the homework data. Itseemed that on any given day about 25 percentof the students did not have their homework. They decided that the problem was morewidespread than just with Tommy and workedtogether to develop a plan to increase the classhomework production. They developed asystem where Mrs. Gambino could check tosee if each student had completed his or herhomework. If everyone in the class came withhis or her homework, then she would give theclass one point. When they accumulated 15points they would be allowed to bring snacks toclass the next day and eat while they worked.

6Mrs. Gambino thought it would be a good ideaand decided to try it in all of her classes. Mrs.Lofties and Mrs. Gambino decided to meetagain in two weeks to see how things weregoing.

In two weeks, Mrs. Gambino reported that ittook the students a couple of days to get intothe swing of the game, but now most classeswere earning points daily. She said thatTommys grades were improving, and at thistime a functional behavioral assessment wasnot deemed necessary.

Vignette II

This is the third time in two weeks Trish hasbeen sent to the office for fighting on theplayground! Something has to be done! Ms.Osunas tone showed her exasperation with herstudents behavior. Ms. Frey, the principal,agreed with Ms. Osuna but explained that heroptions were limited. Weve tried keeping herin during recess, but that does not seem to help. We also tried to reward her for playing nicelyon the playground, but that didnt work either. I agree that this is getting out of hand. Noother student in this school has had so manyoffice referrals for problems on the playground. I am willing to listen to any suggestions youmight have. Ms. Osuna suggested theyinclude Mr. Church, Trishs LD resource roomteacher, in their discussion.

After speaking with Ms. Osuna and Ms. Frey,Mr. Church realized that Trishs behavior wassignificantly different from those of the otherthird graders on the playground, had beengoing on for some time, was possibly a dangerto other students, and didnt change when theusual interventions were tried. I suggest wecall a meeting of her IEP team and discussconducting a functional behavioral assessmentto try to determine what might be causing Trishto behave this way. Ill ask the secretary to callTrishs parents and set up a meeting time thatwould be convenient for them.

At the meeting, Trishs mother, Mrs. Waldo,explained that Trish was the same way with herbrothers when she was at home. They hiteach other a lot. I yell at them, but they dontlisten to me. Mr. Church explained to the IEPteam about functional behavioral assessmentand suggested they do an assessment to findout more about why Trish was being physicallyaggressive. Mrs. Waldo was relieved, I wasso afraid you were going to tell me that she wasgoing to be suspended or sent away to adifferent school. Mr. Church explained thatMrs. Waldo could help with the functionalbehavioral assessment, too. He explained thathe would like to talk to her more about Trishsbehavior at home and he could give her somequestions that she could ask Trish to help themwith the functional behavioral assessment. After deciding what each person could do tocontribute to the assessment, everyone agreedto meet again in two weeks to discuss his orher findings. Meanwhile, playgroundsupervision would be increased to make surethat no one got hurt.

The vast majority of classroom challenges canbe successfully addressed through the kind ofcollaborative efforts illustrated in Vignette I. School personnel should try to distinguishbetween problems that can be eliminatedthrough informal assessment and universalinterventions (i.e., interventions designed foruse with the entire group) and those thatdemand functional behavioral assessment andindividualized positive behavioral interventionplans and supports.

2. Refine the Definition of the ProblemBehavior

efore determining the techniques to use tocollect information about student behavior,B

7school personnel must identify specificcharacteristics of the behavior that is interferingwith learning. This way, it is possible tonarrow the definition to make it easier toobserve and record the behavior. Ifdescriptions of behaviors are vague (e.g., poorattitude or aggressiveness), it is difficult tomeasure these behaviors and determineappropriate interventions. Even behavior asunacceptable as aggression may mean differentthings to different people. For example, somemay feel a threatening gesture representsaggression; others may not. A precisedefinition, one that includes examples (andnonexamples) of the behavior of concern,should eliminate measurement problemsstemming from an ambiguous description ofbehavior.

In collecting information to refine the definitionabout behavior, it may be necessary to observethe student in various settings (e.g., classroom,cafeteria, playground, and other socialsettings), during different types of activities(e.g., individual, large group, or cooperativelearning), and to discuss the students behaviorwith other school personnel or family members. This will help the IEP team to determine theexact nature of the behavior and to narrow itsscope of the examination of the problemsituation. These multiple observations increasethe likelihood that IEP teams will be able toaccurately assess relevant dimensions of thebehavior, thereby allowing them to writeaccurate behavior intervention plans. Information should be collected on:

times when the behavior does/does notoccur (e.g., just prior to lunch, during aparticular subject or activity);

location of the behavior (e.g., classroom,playground);

conditions when the behavior does/does notoccur (e.g., when working in small groups,structured or unstructured time);

individuals present when the problembehavior is most/least likely to occur (e.g.,when there is a substitute teacher or withcertain other students);

events or conditions that typically occurbefore the behavior (e.g., assignment to aparticular reading group);

events or conditions that typically occurafter the behavior (e.g., student is sent outof the room);

common setting events (e.g., during badweather); and

other behaviors that are associated with theproblem behavior (e.g., a series of negativepeer interactions).

Once the behavior of concern has beenidentified, it is important to complete thedefinition of the behavior. For example, initialobservations enable the IEP team to moreaccurately define Trishs aggression as, Trishhits, kicks, or uses threatening language (e.g.,Im going to kill you!) with other studentsduring recess when she does not get her way.Other examples of well-defined behaviorinclude defining verbal off-task behavior as:Charles makes irrelevant and inappropriatecomments during reading class (e.g., This isdumb. or Anyone could do that.); andhyperactivity as: Jan leaves her assigned areawithout permission (e.g., walks around class,goes to reward area of class), completes onlysmall portions of her independent work (e.g., 3of 10 problems), and blurts out answerswithout raising her hand.

Since students often evidence multiple ratherthan single behavior problems, when definingproblem behavior, IEP teams may groupmultiple problem behaviors together. Forexample, Charles call-outs, put-downs ofclassmates, and vulgar comments madeabout a lesson might be defined as disruptiveacts. However, if an intervention plan fails to

8change these behaviors, it may be necessary forthe team to separate, individually define, andassess each of these behaviors. Also, it may benecessary to prioritize the behaviors and decidewhich to address first (e.g., the most disruptivebehavior, the easiest behavior to modify).

3. Collect Information on PossibleFunctions of the Problem Behavior

y collecting and analyzing various kinds ofinformation about behavior that

significantly disrupts the teaching and learningprocess, school personnel are better able toselect the most appropriate interventions. Information on the social/environmentalcontext, antecedent and consequent events (i.e.,events preceding or following the behavior,respectively), and past events that mayinfluence present behavior, assists teams inpredicting when, where, with whom, and underwhat conditions certain behavior is most/leastlikely to occur. While the Amendments to theIDEA call for a functional behavioralassessment approach to determine the specificfactors that contribute to problem behavior,they do not recommend specific assessmenttechniques or strategies.

Information from a variety of assessmenttechniques should lead the IEP team to betterunderstand the problem behavior. Dependingon the nature of the behavior of concern, it iscrucial that multiple means be used to collectinformation about the behavior. This mightinclude a review of the students records(educational and medical), along with anevaluation of a sample of the studentsacademic products (e.g., in-class assignments,tests, homework). In addition, the use ofvarious observation procedures; questionnaires;interviews with parents, teachers, and otherschool personnel (e.g., bus driver, cafeteriaworkers, playground monitors), as well asinterviews with the student; and perhapsmedical consultation should allow datacollection tailored to produce information that

will help the IEP team to better understand thecauses of the specific problem behavior.

Ways to Categorize Student Behavior

here are several ways the IEP team cancategorize student behavior for purposes

of behavioral intervention planning. One wayis to characterize student behavior according toits function, separating actions which getsomething that is positively reinforcing for thestudent (e.g., peer attention or adult approval)from behavior intended to avoid (or escape)something that is aversive to the student (e.g.,academic assignments that are too demanding,interactions with specific peers). For example,the IEP team may determine that Mandy makeswisecracks during class lectures because shefinds the laughter of her peers very rewarding. On the other hand, Bill, who is not prepared toparticipate in class discussion, may makewisecracks to be sent out of the room andthereby avoid being called upon to answerquestions. Many times, the studentsmisbehavior stems from multiple sources ratherthan a single source. Mandys wisecracks,while resulting in peer attention, may also serveto draw attention away from the fact that shedoes not know the answer.

In addition to categorizing behavior byfunction, the team should attempt to distinguishbetween behaviors that stem from a skill deficitversus those that result from a performancedeficit. Skill deficits involve an inability toperform the appropriate behavior. Forexample, Bill does not have the sight wordvocabulary necessary to read his social studiestext aloud; Trish does not have the socialproblem-solving skills to interact appropriatelywith her peers on the playground.

Behavior that is linked to a performance deficitreflects the fact that the student is able toengage in the desired behavior but fails to do sowhen specific conditions are present. Performance deficits are manifested in variousways. For example, Jeff generally is able to

B

T

9control his temper when confronted by a peer(Whats your problem, jerk?). In someinstances, however, outside factors influencehis behavior, as when hunger, fatigue, orextreme frustration override self-control. Incontrast, Juan may not be able to discriminateexactly what behavior is expected of himwithin a particular social context; Juan may notsee any relationship between what is expectedof him and what he wants to get out of thesituation (e.g., to be verbally supportive of aclassmate he really dislikes). Or, Juan may beunable to deal with competing emotionalresponses (e.g., anger or frustration). In Figure1, we have combined several classificationoptions to account for the fact that problembehavior may stem from multiple sources. Figure 2 gives a specific example, of howTrishs behavior might be categorized usingthis form. While categorizing behavior byfunction is integral to functional behavioralassessment, recognition that problems can alsorelate to either skill or performance deficits, orboth, can contribute significantly todevelopment of a sound behavioral interventionplan. Finally, it is also important to rememberthat one behavior may have an impact on otherbehaviors the student may engage in.

DIRECT AND INDIRECT MEASURESOF STUDENT BEHAVIOR

unctional behavioral assessment can be atime-consuming process, one that usually is

best accomplished in stages. As discussed inStep 2, the functional behavioral assessmentprocess may begin with a series of initial directand indirect observations (e.g., using ascatterplot) and/or discussions with adults orstudents who have witnessed the behavior(e.g., functional interviews). An examinationof the information from these observations andinterviews may suggest specific times andsettings in which to conduct more thoroughobservations (e.g., during a specific academicsubject or class period). These subsequentobservations would lead the IEP team todevelop an hypothesis statement regarding the

factors that are most predictive of the studentsbehavior (e.g., a science lesson that requireslengthy silent reading of technical material). Both direct and indirect measures of studentbehavior are described more thoroughly in thissection.

Direct Assessment

irect assessment consists of actuallyobserving the problem behavior and

describing the conditions that surround thebehavior (its context). This context includesevents that are antecedent (i.e., that occurbefore) and consequent (i.e., that occur after)to student behaviors of interest. There areseveral tools to select from in recording directassessment data. Each has its particularstrength. IEP teams should consider what theywant or need to know about the presentingbehavior and select direct observationstrategies and recording tools accordingly. Adescription of the most commonly used toolsand the kinds of data they can help gatherfollows.

Scatterplots. Often, initial observations can beaccomplished through the use of a scatterplot(see Appendix A for sample scatterplot forms).The purpose of a scatterplot is to identifypatterns of behavior that relate to specificcontextual conditions. A scatterplot is a chart orgrid on which an observer records single events(e.g., number of student call-outs) or a series ofevents (e.g., teacher requests and studentresponses) that occur within a given

F

D

Categorizing Student Problem Behavior

Student: Mike Grade: 4th School:

Behavior of concern: non-compliant with teacher directions/swears at teacher

SkillProblem

PerformanceProblem

GetSomething

uses inappropriateattention-seekingbehavior to get peerapproval

inappropriatebehavior morerewarding thanappropriatebehavior

AvoidSomething

lacks skillsnecessary tocomprehendassignment

inconsistently asksfor assistance withdifficult material

Figu

re 1

10

Categorizing Student Problem Behavior

Student: Trish Grade: 4th School:

Behavior of concern: aggression toward peers on the playground

SkillProblem

PerformanceProblem

GetSomething

Trish hits, kicks, or usesthreatening language(e.g., Im going to killyou!) with otherstudents during recesswhen she does not gether way.

AvoidSomething

Figu

re 2

11

12

context (e.g., during teacher-led readinginstruction, at lunch, on the playground). Scatterplots take various forms, depending onthe behavior of interest and its social/physicalcontext. Some require observers to sequentiallyrecord (by category) various events (e.g., formatof instruction, teacher behavior, student/peerresponses, likely purpose of student reaction).

ABC charts. Another way to observe studentbehavior is with an Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence (ABC) chart (also referred to asan Antecedent-Response-Consequence or ARCchart) (see Appendix B for examples of ABCcharts). This approach allows an observer toorganize anecdotal or descriptive information onthe students interactions with other studentsand adults in such a way that patterns ofbehavior often become clear. A modified ABCchart might be individualized to contain severalpredetermined categories of teacher or peerantecedent behavior, student responses, andconsequent events, along with space fornarrative recording of classroom observations.

Using scatterplots and ABC charts together. By using the ABC procedure, the student maybe observed in settings and under conditionswhere the behavior is most likely and leastlikely to occur. A scatterplot to chart therelationship between specific types ofinstruction and the studentsappropriate/inappropriate responses may alsobe developed.

A scatterplot can be developed to observe andrecord the relationship between a specific set ofclassroom variables (e.g., teacher lecture andstudent off-task behavior) or playgroundbehaviors and to analyze a particular situation.For instance, out-of-seat behavior might bemeasured in increments of 1-5 minutes, whilefights on the school bus may be recorded daily(e.g., critical incident reports). Furthermore,student behavior may be a function of specificteacher-pupil interactions (e.g., there may be arelationship between teacher reprimands andstudent outbursts). Observing and recording

teacher-pupil interactions may lead to a betterunderstanding of the relationship between thesefactors of classroom interactions. Both theABC and scatterplot procedures are useful inidentifying environmental factors (e.g., seatingarrangements), activities (e.g., independentwork), or times of the day (e.g., mornings) thatmay influence student behavior.

Both ABC and scatterplot recordingprocedures are useful not only in identifyingproblem behavior, but also in identifying theclassroom conditions that may trigger ormaintain the students behavior. It is alsoimportant to observe situations in which thestudent performs successfully so that IEPteams can compare conditions and identifysituations that may evoke and maintainappropriate rather than inappropriate behavior(e.g., in science class as opposed to languagearts class). In this way, it is possible to get aclearer picture of the problem behavior,determine the critical dimensions of thebehavior, write a precise definition of thebehavior, select the most appropriateassessment tools, and develop an effectiveintervention plan for changing the behavior.

As we already mentioned, multiple measures ofstudent behavior and its social/ environmentalcontexts usually produce more accurateinformation than a single measure. This isespecially true if the problem behavior servesseveral functions or purposes that may varyaccording to circumstance. In our previousexample of Mandys wisecracks, makinginappropriate comments during lectures mayserve in some instances to get her something(e.g., peer attention). In another classroom, thesame behavior may help her to avoid something(e.g., being called on by the teacher). Information gathered through repeatedobservations of Mandy across settings willenable the IEP team to distinguish among thevarious purposes for her inappropriate remarks.

Amount versus quality of behavior. Differenttypes of behavior may require different data

13

collection techniques. For example, it isimportant to know how often a behavior occurs(e.g., call-outs); in this case, a system thatyields the number of behaviors, or frequencymeasure, is appropriate. At other times,knowing how long the behavior occurs is morerelevant (e.g., out-of-seat), so that a durationmeasure becomes more useful. Furthermore,the usefulness of documenting the severity orintensity of a behavior is evident when the IEPteam tries to measure other disruptivebehaviors. To say that Charles was upset twotimes yesterday may not reflect the fact that hesucceeded in disrupting instruction in the entiremiddle school wing for a total of 45 minutes.

Severity of Disruptive Behavior Rating

Rubric1. Behavior is confined only to the observed

student. May include such behaviors as: refusalto follow directions, scowling, crossing arms,pouting, or muttering under his/her breath.

2. Behavior disrupts others in the studentsimmediate area. May include: slammingtextbook closed, dropping book on the floor,name calling, or using inappropriate language.

3. Behavior disrupts everyone in the class. Mayinclude: throwing objects, yelling, open defianceof teacher directions, or leaving the classroom.

4. Behavior disrupts other classrooms or commonareas of the school. May include: throwingobjects, yelling, open defiance of schoolpersonnels directions, or leaving the schoolcampus.

5. Behavior causes or threatens to cause physicalinjury to student or others. May include: displayof weapons, assault on others.

In some cases, it is useful to report the severityand measure of a behavior using a rubric tocapture the magnitude and/or amount ofvariation in the behavior. This is true withregard to both student and adult behavior. Thatis, a student tantrum may be minor or extremeand of short or long duration. Teacherreprimands might be insignificant except whenthey are repeatedly and loudly delivered to the

student for an extended amount of time. Thefollowing rubric could be used to observe andrecord the severity of a students disruptivebehavior.

Indirect Assessment

e know that student behavior usually isrelated to the context in which it occurs.

However, the IEP team will not always be ableto directly observe all the events that bringabout or maintain specific student behavior. So-called setting events (sometimes referredto as slow triggers) can exist within theclassroom (e.g., Charles is asked to join a newreading group), or be far removed from it butstill exert a powerful influence over studentbehavior (e.g., Charles has an argument withanother student at the bus stop before school). External events of this nature may increase thelikelihood of conflict in the classroom,especially if the student is strugglingacademically and/or dislikes the subject matter. These setting events (or specific antecedentsfor the behavior) often may not be directlyobservable. In other cases, the behavior maybe serious but not occur frequently enough insettings accessible to adults to be readilyobserved (e.g., verbal or physical aggression). In these instances, the behavior must beassessed by using indirect measures.

Methods of indirect assessment. Indirect or, asit is sometimes called, informant assessment,relies heavily on the use of interviews withteachers and other adults (e.g., bus drivers,cafeteria workers, office staff) who have directcontact with the student. (See Appendix C for asample interview form.) In addition, a semi-structured interview with the student, himself,could provide insight into the studentsperspective of the situation and yield a morecomplete understanding of the reasons behindthe inappropriate behavior. It may be useful tofollow the same interview format with both thestudent and significant adults (e.g., special andregular classroom teachers, support personnel)and to compare these two sources of

W

14

information. Even elementary aged students canbe credible informants, capable of sharingaccurate information about contextual factorsthat influence their behavior. Indirect measurescan yield valuable information, but they usuallyare not as reliable as direct observationmeasures. For this reason, IEP teams must becareful not to put too much faith in informationderived from informant accounts alone. Examples of interviews conducted with teachersand students to help determine the likelyfunction of a students behavior are included inAppendix D.

Surveys or questionnaires are another source ofindirect information. For example, a ProblemBehavior Questionnaire can be administered toone or more teachers who have day-to-daycontact with a student of concern (see AppendixE for sample Problem Behavior Questionnaireforms). Recalling a typical behavioral episode,teachers read 15 statements and circle a numberon the questionnaire that corresponds to thepercent of time each statement is true for thatstudent. A second form is used for recordingand interpreting the responses from everyonewho completed a questionnaire for that student. Any item marked with a three or above on thisprofile form suggests the potential function ofthe problem behavior. If there are two or morestatements scored as three or above (i.e., (50%of the time) under a particular sub-column (e.g.,escape under peers or attention under adults),then it may indicate a possible primary functionof the behavior.

In collecting information regarding the contextof a behavior problem, it is important tounderstand that contextual factors may includecertain affective or cognitive behaviors, as well. For instance, Juan repeatedly acts out and isverbally threatening during instruction whengiven lengthy and difficult assignments. Evenso, it may not be the assignment itself thattriggers the acting-out behavior. Rather, it maybe the fact that he knows he doesnt have theskills necessary to complete the work thatprompts an anticipation of failure or ridicule.

Or, he may have a family member who iscritically ill; therefore, he finds it difficult toconcentrate.

Accuracy of Behavior Measurement

here are a number of ways that accuracy inobserving and recording student behavior

and the social/environmental conditions thatsurround it can be jeopardized. Commonproblems include:

a vague definition of the behavior (e.g.,Charles sometimes gets upset);

untrained or inexperienced observers;

difficulty observing multiple studentbehaviors (e.g., out of seat, off task, andrude gestures);

potential observer bias regarding thestudents behavior (e.g., the observer issubjected to repeated teacher complaintsabout the severity of the studentsclassroom conduct); or

difficulty precisely capturing classroominteractions (e.g., observing a grouplearning activity in which students moveabout the classroom).

In the end, the usefulness of functional behavioralassessment depends on the skills and objectivity ofthe persons collecting the information. Accordingly,if the information is to be helpful to IEP teams, itmust be reliable and complete information about thebehavior. Those conducting the functionalbehavioral assessment must: a) clearly define thebehavior of concern and regularly review thatdefinition; b) have sufficient training and practice tocollect observation and interview data; c) select themost appropriate assessment procedure(s) for boththe behavior and the context; d) collect informationacross time and settings using multiple strategiesand individuals; and, e) conduct routine checks ofthe accuracy of observer scoring/recordingprocedures.

T

15

4. Analyze Information UsingTriangulation and/or ProblemPathway Analysis

nce the team is satisfied that enoughinformation has been collected, the next

step is to compare and analyze all the compiledinformation. Such an analysis helps todetermine which specific social, affective,and/or environmental conditions are associatedwith student behavior. For example, inrecalling Vignette II, an analysis of Trishsbehavior might lead the team to conclude thatwhenever Trish does not get her way she reactsby hitting someone. Analysis of theinformation gathered can be accomplishedthrough techniques called data triangulationand problem pathway analysis.

Use of a data triangulation chart (seeAppendix F) allows IEP teams to pull togetherand visually compare information collectedfrom various sources (e.g., functionalinterviews, observations using a scatterplot,student questionnaires). Using a datatriangulation chart, team members attempt toidentify possible patterns of behavior,conditions that trigger the behavior,consequences that maintain or continue thebehavior, and, finally, the likely functions theproblem behaviors serve for the student.

Problem behavior pathway charts also allowthe team to organize information by recording itunder the following columns: a) setting events,b) antecedents, c) the behavior itself, and d)likely maintaining consequences for the behaviorof concern (see Appendix G). In analyzinginformation using these techniques, the IEPteam can develop an hypothesis statement aboutthe probable function of the behavior andidentity one or more variables that may bestarting or continuing the behavior.

5. Generate a Hypothesis StatementRegarding Probable Function ofProblem Behavior

sing the information that emerges fromdata triangulation and/or pathway

analysis, the team can develop an hypothesisstatement regarding the likely function(s) of thestudent behavior. The hypothesis statementcan then be used to predict thesocial/environmental conditions (the context)within which the behavior is most likely tooccur. For instance, should a teacher reportthat Charles swears during reading class, thereason for the behavior might be to: (a) gainattention, (b) avoid instruction, (c) seekstimulation, or (d) some combination of thesefunctions.

Only when the function(s) of the behavior is(are) known is it possible for the IEP team toestablish an effective behavioral interventionand support plan that addresses Charles needs. Following are several examples of hypothesisstatements written in such a way that IEPteams can draw specific information from thestatement to develop an individualized behaviorintervention plan.

Charles disrupts reading class by swearing atthe teacher when he is asked to read aloud. He is most likely to disrupt the class if he hasnot had breakfast or if there was a problem atthe bus stop. Charles stops swearing whenhe is told to leave the group.

When she does not get what she wantsfrom her peers, Trish calls them names andhits them until they give in to her demands.

Juan verbally threatens the teacher when he isgiven a math assignment that he sees as toolengthy and too difficult, but stops when he istold to find something else to do.

The hypothesis statement is a concise summaryof information collected during the assessmentphase, a statement that explains or represents a

O U

16

best guess regarding the reason(s) for thebehavior. A well-written hypothesis statementgives clear direction to IEP members, who areresponsible for developing a behaviorintervention plan. It allows the IEP team tospell out a three-fold contingencywhen Xoccurs, the student does Y, in order to achieveZand to translate that knowledge into anindividualized behavior intervention plan.

6. Test the Hypothesis StatementRegarding the Function of theProblem Behavior

ecause of the obvious difficultiesassociated with problem behavior in the

school and classroom, school personnel may betempted to proceed immediately to designing abehavioral intervention plan. However, in mostcases, it is important that the team take the timeto make sure that the hypothesis is accurate. To do so, IEP team members shouldexperimentally manipulate certain variablesto see if the teams assumptions regarding thelikely function of the behavior are accurate. For instance, after collecting data, the teamworking with Charles may hypothesize that,during reading class, Charles swears at theteacher to escape an aversive academicsituation. Thus, the teacher might changeaspects of instruction to ensure that Charlesgets work that is within his capability and is ofinterest to him. If these accommodationsproduce a positive change in Charles behavior,then the team can assume its hypothesis wascorrect and a behavioral intervention plan canbe fully implemented. However, if Charlesbehavior remains the same following thischange in classroom conditions, a newhypothesis should be formulated.

As a general rule, IEP teams will stay with aplan for at least 5-7 lessons, to distinguishbetween behavior changes stemming from thenovelty of any change in classroom conditionsand those changes related specifically to theintervention. It is important to remember thatthe inappropriate behavior has probably served

the student well for some time and that it willbe resistant to change. For this reason, theteam will need to be patient when testing itshypothesis regarding the function(s) of themisbehavior.

A procedure known as analogue assessment isone way to verify the IEP teams assumptionsregarding the function of a students behavior.Analogue assessment involves a contrived set ofconditions to test the accuracy of the hypothesis. This procedure allows school personnel tosubstantiate that a relationship exists betweenspecific classroom events (e.g., an aversive task)and the students behavior (e.g., disruptivebehavior). This can be accomplished throughteacher manipulation of specific instructionalvariables (e.g., complexity of learning tasks, oralor written student responses), introduction orwithdrawal of variables (e.g., teacher attention,physical proximity), or other changes inconditions assumed to trigger the occurrence ofproblem behavior (e.g., student seatingarrangement, desk placement). In this way, theIEP team may be able to determine precisely theconditions under which the student is most (andleast) likely to behave appropriately. Finally,similar to an allergy test, teachers can brieflysample student responses to a succession ofchanges in classroom conditions to determine theaccuracy of the hypothesis statement.

There are times when it may not be feasible tomake changes to classroom variables and toobserve their effects on student behavior. A primeexample is when a student begins to engage inacting-out or aggressive behavior. In theseinstances, the IEP team should immediatelydevelop and implement a behavioral interventionplan (before any disciplinary action is required). Then, they should directly and continuouslyevaluate its impact against any availableinformation about the level or severity of thebehavior prior to the intervention. IEP teams can,however, continue to consider informationcollected through a combination of interviews anddirect observation.

B

17

Finally, there may be instances when the IEPteam may not be able to identify the exact mix ofvariables that cause the student to misbehave(e.g., composition of the learning group, theacademic subject area, teacher expectations) orthe exact amount of a specific setting orantecedent variable that serves to trigger thebehavior (e.g., repeated peer criticism). Sinceproblem behavior can have multiple sourceswhich can change across time, IEP teams shouldcontinue to evaluate and modify a studentsbehavioreven after an initial intervention planhas been implemented. The nature and severityof the behavior will determine the necessaryfrequency and rigor of this ongoing process.

SUMMARY OF STEPSTO CONDUCT A FUNCTIONALBEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT

o review, in conducting a functionalbehavioral assessment, the IEP team

identifies and defines the problem behavior firstin broad and then specific terms (Steps 1 and2). The team reviews information from varioussources (e.g., questionnaires; semi-structuredinterviews with students, teachers, and others;or observations of students in various settings)and in various forms (e.g., scatterplots or ABCcharts) (Step 3). Next, the team carefullyexamines what they have learned about thebehavior and its context in order to determineits function(s) and decides what to do next(Step 4). In some cases, both the purpose of themisbehavior and an appropriate interventionwill quickly become apparent, as when astudent repeatedly acts up when asked tocomplete too demanding an assignment inreading. In other instances, the IEP team willneed to collect and analyze different types ofinformation and look for multiple cluesregarding the source(s) of the problembehavior, such as antecedents that trigger orconsequences that maintain acting-out behavior(Step 5).

As we have suggested, no two problems arelikely to stem from the exact same source, and

information collected on different students willlikely vary in kind and amount. In the end, theteam must work to develop a probableexplanation of why the student is not behavingappropriately, test the hypothesis (Step 6), anddevelop a behavior intervention planaccordingly.

THE BEHAVIORINTERVENTION PLAN

fter collecting sufficient information abouta students behavior to determine the

likely function of that behavior, the IEP teammust develop (or revise) the students behaviorintervention plan. The process of identifyingpossible behavioral supports and developingand implementing a behavioral interventionplan will be discussed in more detail in thethird and final monograph in this series. Thisplan should include positive strategies,program modifications, and the supplementaryaids and supports required to address thedisruptive behaviors and allow the student to beeducated in the least restrictive environment. Italso should contain strategies to teach thestudent functionally equivalent replacementbehaviors (i.e., behavior that serves the samepurpose but is more acceptable). This isaccomplished by drawing upon the informationcollected during the functional behavioralassessment to determine the most effective andpractical intervention(s) and supports toaddress the students behavior.

CONCLUSION

ccording to the 1997 Amendments to theIDEA, the IEP team is required under

certain circumstances to develop a functionalbehavioral assessment plan and a behaviorintervention plan to address a studentsbehaviors that interfere with learning or requiredisciplinary action. Schools are seeking tobetter understand the exact conditions underwhich to implement this provision of IDEA. The persons responsible for conducting the

T

A

A

18

functional behavioral assessment likely will varyfrom state to state, district to district. Somefunctional behavioral assessment procedureswill require persons with specific training (e.g.,a behavior specialist or a school psychologist). With specialized training and experience, anadjusted job assignment, and ongoing technicalsupport, various IEP team members (e.g.,special or general educators, counselors,parents) can conduct different parts of theassessment.

Regardless of who is charged with theresponsibility to conduct a functionalbehavioral assessment, emphasis should be ondeveloping both a short- and long-term plan toenhance the students ability to benefit as muchas possible from classroom instruction. Students can be helped to accomplish this goalthrough positive behavior interventions based

on an accurate assessment of their individualneeds. This goal is best accomplished beforestudent behavior becomes so severe that formaldisciplinary action is necessary.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT

The following references served as the basis for this monograph and represent useful sources ofadditional information on functional behavioral assessment and behavioral intervention plans.

Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (1999). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

Cantrell, R. P., & Cantrell, M. L. (1980). Ecological problem solving: A decision makingheuristic for prevention-intervention education strategies. In J. Hogg & P. Mittler (Eds.), Advances inmental handicap research. Vol. 1. Chicester, England, New York: John Wiley Publishers.

Carr, E. G., & Durand, V. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functionalcommunication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 111-126.

Donnellan, A. M., Mirenda, P. L, Mesaros, R. A., & Fassbender, L. L. (1984). Analyzing thecommunicative functions of aberrant behavior. Journal of the Association of Persons with SevereHandicaps, 9, 201-212.

Dunlap, G., Kern, L., dePerczel, M., Clarke, S., Wilson, D., Childs, K. E., White, R., & Falk,G. D. (1993). Functional analysis of classroom variables for students with emotional and behavioraldisorders. Behavioral Disorders, 18, 275-291.

Durand, V. M. (1990). Severe behavior problems: A functional communication trainingapproach. New York: Guilford.

19

Flugum, K., & Reschly, D. (1994). Prereferral interventions: Quality indices and outcomes.Journal of School Psychology, 32, 1-14.

Fox, J., Vaughn, K., Cindy, D., Bush, M., Byous, M., Orso, M., & Smith, S. (1998). Translating the IEP into practice: Ensuring positive outcomes for students with E/BD in areas ofconduct and social skills. In L. M. Bullock & R. A. Gable (Eds.), Implementing the 1997 IDEA: Newchallenges and opportunities for serving students with E/BD (pp. 7-16). Reston, VA: Council forChildren with Behavioral Disorders.

Gable, R. A. (1996). A critical analysis of functional assessment: Issues for researchers andpractitioners. Behavioral Disorders, 22, 36-40.

Gable, R. A., Quinn, M. M., Rutherford, R. B., Jr., & Howell, K. W. (1998). Functionalbehavioral assessments and positive behavioral interventions. Preventing School Failure, 42, 106-119.

Gable, R. A., Sugai, G. M., Lewis, T. J., Nelson, J. R., Cheney, D., Safran, S. P., & Safran,J. S. (1998). Individual and systemic approaches to collaboration and consultation. Reston, VA;Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders.

Gresham, F. M. (1985). Behavior disorders assessment: Conceptual, definitional, andpractical considerations. School Psychology Review, 14, 495-509.

Gresham, F. M. (1991). Whatever happened to functional analysis in behavioral consultation? Journal of Educational Psychological Consultation, 2, 387-392.

Iwata, B. A., Bollmer, T. R., & Zarcone, J. R. (1990). The experimental (functional) analysisof behavior disorders: Methodology, applications, and limitations. In A. C. Repp & N. Singh (Eds.),Aversive and nonaversive treatment: The great debate in developmental disabilities (pp. 301-330). DeKalb, IL: Sycamore Press.

Kameenui, E. J., & Darch, C. B. (1995). Instructional classroom management: A proactiveapproach to behavior management. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Kerr, M. M., & Nelson, C. M. (1998). Strategies for managing behavior problems in theclassroom (3rd ed.). New York: MacMillan.

Korinek, L., & Popp, P. A. (1997). Collaborative mainstream integration of social skills withacademic instruction. Preventing School Failure, 41, 148-152.

Lawry, J. R., Storey, K., & Danko, C. D. (1993). Analyzing behavior problems in theclassroom: A case study of functional analysis. Intervention in the School and Clinic, 29, 96-100.

Lewis, T. J., Scott, T. M., & Sugai, G. M. (1994). The problem behavior questionnaire: Ateacher-based instrument to develop functional hypotheses of problem behavior in general educationclassrooms. Diagnostique, 19, 103-115.

Mathur, S. R., Quinn, M. M., & Rutherford, R. B. (1996). Teacher-mediated behaviormanagement strategies for children with emotional/behavioral disorders. Reston, VA: Council forChildren with Behavioral Disorders.

20

Quinn, M. M., Gable, R. A., Rutherford, R. B. Jr., Nelson, C. M., & Howell, K. (1998). Addressing student problem behavior: An IEP teams introduction to functional behavioral assessmentand behavior intervention plans (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: Center for Effective Collaboration andPractice.

Reed, H., Thomas, E., Sprague, J. R., & Horner, R. H. (1997). Student guided functionalassessment interview: An analysis of student and teacher agreement. Journal of Behavioral Education,7, 33-49.

Rutherford, R. B., Quinn, M. M., & Mathur, S. R. (1996). Effective strategies for teachingappropriate behaviors to children with emotional/behavioral disorders. Reston, VA: Council forChildren with Behavioral Disorders.

Sasso, G. M., Reimers, T. M., Cooper, L. J., Wacker, D., & Berg, W. (1992). Use ofdescriptive and experimental analyses to identify the functional properties of aberrant behavior inschool settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 809-821.

Schmid, R. E., & Evans, W. H. (1998). Curriculum and instruction practices for student withemotional/behavioral disorders. Reston, VA: Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders.

Sugai, G. M., & Tindal, G. A. (1993). Effective school consultation: An interactive approach. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Symons, F. J., McDonald, L. M., & Wehby, J. H. (1998). Functional assessment and teachercollected data. Education and Treatment of Children, 21(2), 135-159.

Touchette, P. E., Macdonald, R. F., & Langer, S. N. (1985). A scatter plot for identifyingstimulus control of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 343-351.

Van Acker, R. (1998). Translating discipline requirements into practice through behavioralintervention plans. In L. M. Bullock & R. A. Gable (Eds.), Implementing the 1997 IDEA: Newchallenges and opportunities for serving students with E/BD (pp. 29-41). Reston, VA.: Council forChildren with Behavioral Disorders.

Walker, H. M., Colvin, G., & Ramsey, E. (1995). Antisocial behavior in school: Strategiesand best practices. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Wood, F. M. (1994). May I ask you why you are hitting yourself? Using oral self-reports inthe functional assessment of adolescents behavior disorders. Preventing School Failure, 38, 16-20

.

OTHER AVAILABLE RESOURCES

The Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice has produced additional materials onimproving services for children and youth with emotional and behavioral problems. Most of ourproducts are free of charge and available by contacting the Center, except where otherwise indicated.These and other related Center documents are also available on our web site, and we encourage you todownload them and make and distribute copies.

Addressing Student Problem BehaviorPart I: An IEP Teams Introduction to FunctionalBehavioral Assessment and Behavior Intervention Plans. Written with some of the countrysleading experts, this document serves as a useful tool for educators to understand therequirements of IDEA 97 with regard to addressing behavior problems and implement thefundamental principals and techniques of functional behavioral assessment and positivebehavioral supports with students with behavior problems.

The third document in this series Addressing Student Problem BehaviorPart III: Creatingand Implementing Behavior Intervention Plansis forthcoming.

Functional assessment and behavioral intervention plans: Part 1 is a two-hour videoworkshop on functional behavioral assessment. Produced as a cooperative effort between theCenter for Effective Collaboration and Practice and Old Dominion University as part of ODUsstate-funded technical assistance project, it covers the definitions and origins of functionalbehavioral assessment, what is involved in conducting a functional behavioral assessment andthe criteria for determining when one is needed, and other relevant issues surrounding thistechnique. It is available from Training and Technical Assistance Center, Old DominionUniversity, 1401 West 49th Street, Norfolk, VA 23529-0146.

The National Agenda for Achieving Better Results for Children and Youth with SeriousEmotional Disturbance (SED). Prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, the NationalAgenda offers a blueprint for change and presents seven strategic targets and cross-cuttingthemes for achieving better results for children and youth with SED.

Early Warning, Timely Response: A Guide to Safe Schools. This document was produced incollaboration with the National Association of School Psychologists in response to thePresidents call for the development of an early warning guide to help adults reach out totroubled children quickly and effectively. This guide has been distributed to every district inthe nation to help them identify children in need of intervention into potentially violent emotionsand behaviors. It can be acquired through the U.S. Department of Education by calling toll-free 1-877-4ED-PUBS or via the Centers web site.

Safe, Drug-Free, and Effective Schools for ALL Students: What Works! This report came outof a collaborative effort between the Office of Special Education Programs and the Safe andDrug-Free Schools Program, both of the U.S. Department of Education. It profiles sixdifferent approaches in three different communities or districts to addressing schoolwideprevention and reduction of violent and aggressive behavior by all students. The report is theresult of a literature review and focus groups with students, families, administrators, teachers,and community change agents from local agencies.