Function Based Thinking (FBT): Answering the Question WHY?

1. Function Based Thinking (FBT): Answering the Question WHY? Dr. Patti Hershfeldt Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health Center for Prevention of Youth Violence July , 2010

2. Introduction: Advance Organizer • Overview of PBIS Plus • The Goals • The People • Lessons Learned • FBA/FBT Issues • Overview of FBT • Rationale • 3 steps of FBT • Case Study • Strategies to Promote Use

3. Overview PBIS Plus Catherine Bradshaw, PhD, Karen Pell, PhD, Richard Sechrest, PsyD, Patti Hershfeldt, EdD, Katrina Debnam, MPH, & Philip Leaf, PhD Johns Hopkins Center for the Prevention of Youth Violence Michael S. Rosenberg, PhD Johns Hopkins University School of Education Andrea Alexander, LCPC, & Milt McKenna, MBA Maryland State Department of Education Jerry Bloom, MEd, & Susan Barrett, MA Sheppard Pratt Health System

4. Overview PBIS Plus Sample 31 elementary schools that have: • High fidelity PBIS • Interested in assistance supporting “yellow-zone” students County Schools in Maryland Design 3 year randomized controlled evaluation Random assignment to either “SWPBIS” or “Plus” condition Model Use of evidence-based interventions to support yellow-zone students Emphasizes function-based thinking and effective teaming Supports culturally appropriate interventions and supports PBISplus Liaison provides on-site technical assistance to facilitate the process

5. Overview PBIS Plus Data Collected - Fall 2007: Staff Survey = 1,444 staff TOCA = 12,489 students Liaison Services Provided (Sept – May) • 432 visits, for a total of 1,296 hours of on-site services to Plus schools • Average of 3 hours per visit • Average of 3.4 visits per month • Most commonly provided support services were: • Attending SST meetings • Conducting classroom observations • Consulting with teachers • Conducting needs assessments

6. One Lesson Learned: FBA/FBT • Importance of FBAs • Evidence-Based Practice • Value to educational process • Leads to validated Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs) • Leads to Important Changes in Student Behavior • BUT…..

7. One Lesson Learned: FBA/FBT • FBAs Not Always Administered • Why? Some reasons: • Limited Time • Limited number of individuals trained to adequately perform functional analysis (Van Acker, Borenson, Gable, & Potterson, 2005) • Associated with special education • Limited technical assistance: FBAs • Contextual mismatch

8. One Lesson Learned: FBA/FBT • The Challenge: How to Get the Benefits of FBA in the Current Context of Schools • Testing of Function Based Thinking: A process designed to provide classroom teachers an enhanced and systematic method of dealing with behavioral issues (Not FBA)

9. FBT: What is it? • How Does it Differ From FBA? Ecological Considers context Simpler and user friendly Designed to support the needs of students w/less severe behaviors

10. FBT: What is it? • Ecological factors are ruled out • Double-Check (Hershfeldt, 2010) • Classroom management • When Used? • Conventional tactics have not been successful • Likely candidates include our “Yellow Zone” students

12. 3 steps of FBT • Gathering information Emphasize data already collected by teachers • Development of a plan Ensuring interventions match function Matches teacher style and comfort level • Evaluation/monitoring of the plan Simple

13. Gathering Information • Antecedent, Behavior, Consequence data • Data comes in many forms: • Student grades, homework and work completion, tardies, absences and even visits to the nurse or guidance office • Let the data define the problem • How do we know it’s a problem? “Show me the data”

14. Development of a Plan • Its easy to become overwhelmed and rely on whatever intervention might have worked with a previous student • Research suggests selecting an intervention that addresses the function of the behavior yields higher success in changing the targeted behavior (Scott et al., 2005)

15. Development of a Plan • Should take into consideration the function of the behavior • Answer the question WHY? • Replace the targeted behavior • Identify personnel that could help the student learn the new behavior • Be sure the personnel have the training to support the student

16. Development of a Plan: Functions of Misbehaviors – the WHY? • Avoidance • Unfamiliar w/the process or content • Academic deficits • Capacity (too much) • Engagement (material isn’t engaging) • Social skill deficit (doesn’t know how to interact w/ peers and adults) • Access • Attention from peers, adults, to a favorite task Macintosh, et al. (2008)

17. Development of a Plan: Functions of Misbehavior – the WHY? • Avoidance • To avoid a task • To avoid a person/interaction (less common) • What to do • Premack • Build in breaks • Permit escape for a specified time

18. Development of a Plan: Functions of Misbehavior – the WHY? • Access (Attention-Seeking) • Engages in behavior to satisfy (unconscious) need for attention • Chronic blurting out, excessive helplessness, tattling, minor disruptions • What to do: • Be careful about reinforcing the “problem behavior” • Planned ignoring • Provide attention and reinforce positive behavior

19. Development of a Plan: Functions of Misbehavior – the WHY? • Does the student have the skill? • Lacks ability or knowledge about how to behave • What to do: • Explore psychological or constitutional factors • Have capacity for insight? • If yes: Conduct lessons to develop skills and knowledge about appropriate behavior • Model, reinforce, and provide feedback • If no: Make accommodations

20. Development of a Plan: Functions of Misbehavior – the WHY? • Is the student aware? • Truly unaware that behavior is problematic • Defensive, argumentative • What to do: • Provide feedback • Develop a signal to cue the student about the misbehavior • Develop a self-monitoring and evaluation strategy

21. Evaluate/monitor the plan • Data collection should be on-going and simple (Jenson, Rhode, and Reavis (1995) in the Tough Kid Tool Box) • Periodically compared with the baseline • Reported to those involved • including the student • self-monitoring most effective

22. See handout #1: The Three Steps of FBT

23. See handout #2

25. The Case of the Disruptive Math Students • Two students calling out frequently, disrupting the learning of others • Step 1: Collect information • When • Where • Who was involved • ABC observations

26. The Case of the Disruptive Math Students • Step 2: Develop a plan • Answer the question WHY? • Teach and reinforce the replacement behavior: “ask for help” • Step 3: Evaluate/monitor the plan

27. Strategies to Implement FBT • Teacher willing and able • Training in FBT • On-going coaching • Evaluation (Fixsen, Naoom, Blasé, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005).

28. Levels of FBT • Student level • Rule out ecological factors • Empower the teacher to think functionally and plan accordingly • Classroom level • Classroom Check Up (Reinke, Lewis-Palmer, & Merrill, 2008 ) • School level • Use of school-wide data • Data based decision making

29. Activity : Staff Response Form

30. References Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blasé, K.A., Friedman, R.M. & Wallace, F., (2005). Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231). Hershfeldt, P.A., Rosenberg, M.S. & Bradshaw, C.P. (2010) Function based thinking: A systematic way of thinking about function and its role in changing student behavior problems. Beyond Behavior 19(2). McIntosh, K., Horner, R. H., Chard, D. J., Dickey, C. R., & Braun, D. H. (2008). Reading and skills in function of problem behavior in typical school settings. Journal of Special Education, 42(3), 131-147. Reinke, W.M., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Merrell, K. (2008) The classroom check-up: A class wide teacher consultation model for increasing praise and decreasing disruptive behavior. School Psychology Review, 37(3).

31. References Scott, T. M., McIntyre, J., Liaupsin, C., Nelson, C. M., Conroy, M., & Payne, L. (2005). An examination of the relation between functional behavior assessment and selected intervention strategies with school-based teams. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 7, 205-215. Van Acker, R., Borenson, L., Gable, R.A., & Potterson, T. (2005) . Are we on the right course? Lessons learned about current FBA/BIP practices in schools. Journal of Behavior Education, 14(1).