From Pre-K to the Workplace: How PBIS Impacts At-Risk Students Achieving Success Beyond Graduation
First Presenter's Institution
Marion County School District
First Presenter's Brief Biography
Dr. Elesha Buckley is the Principal of West Marion High School in the Marion County School District. With 24 years of experience, Dr. Buckley has taught 3rd, 5th, and 6th grades. Buckley is also the founder and coordinator of a summer enrichment program that serves school-aged children of one of the urban housing communities in Hattiesburg, Mississippi. Dr. Buckley, who strongly believes a rich P-16 education is essential for students to succeed in society, has mentored new teachers for most of her career. She has hosted several practicum students and student teachers from Mississippi State University, the University of Southern Mississippi, and William Carey University. She also serves a member of the University of Southern Mississippi Field Experiences Advisory Board. Dr. Buckley earned a B.S. in Elementary Education, a M. Ed. in Elementary Education, a M. Ed. Educational Administration, and a Ph.D. in Educational Administration from the University of Southern Mississippi.
Document Type
Event
Primary Strand
Positive Behavior Interventions and Support
Relevance to Primary Strand
The presentation will describe an urban elemenary school, an urban high school, and a rural high school. The step-by-step process in developing and utitlizing a school-wide PBIS plan will be outlined. Examples of interventions used will be explained. Real-life examples of the success of at-risk students beyond graduation will be detailed.
Brief Program Description
This session will challenge participants to reconsider the role of PBIS in revolutionizing the entire educational career of at-risk students through interventions that will maximize student achievement and success beyond graduation. Participants will hear about educators who diligently with educational, community, and cultural systems to transform the academic experience of students in an urban district and a rural high school through the PBIS three-tiered framework.
Summary
Sugai and Simonsen (2012) described PBIS as a Response to Intervention model (RtI) consisting of three-tiers of support and a process to solve problems that hinder schools from effectively educating all students. The first level intervention tier, Tier 1, includes supports for all students through teaching, modeling, and positively reinforcing expectations (Cressey, et al., 2014). Fairbanks, Sugai, Guardino, and Lathrop (2007) stated that more interventions are used at the secondary intervention level, Tier 2, to produce positive outcomes for a small group of students when those students do not respond to the Tier 1 interventions. Fairbanks, et al. (2007) explained that the tertiary intervention level, Tier 3, emphasizes individualized and specialized interventions for students who are nonresponsive to Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions. Tier 3 intervention efforts include planning for function-based behavior interventions, implementing social skills lessons, monitoring intensive individualized behavior plans, constant data-driven decision-making, planning team, and school-community based mental health support services (Cressey, et al., 2014). Banks and Obiakor (2015) concluded that PBIS improves school safety and climate by enhancing positive behavior for students through the implementation of the three-tiered process.
To close the gaps in achievement and discipline of at-risk students and their peers, educational interventions are necessary (Davis, 2003). According to Cook, Duong, McIntosh, Fiat, Larson, Pullmann, and McGinnis (2018), longstanding discipline disparities for some groups of students are related to unfortunate outcomes and require practical and effective school-based solutions. Noguera (2012) suggested implementing educational interventions early when warning signs, such as failure to meet academic expectations and grade retention, are present. Bell (2010) agreed that intervening at younger ages is associated with more positive outcomes for students. Bradshaw (2013) reported that Positive Behavior Intervention Support programs have been shown to reduce behavior problems. Johnson and Hannon (2014) asserted that services provided by school counselors are instrumental in students overcoming behavior and academic challenges. Grant and Dieker (2011) recommended mentoring as an effective intervention. Dyce (2013) concluded that providing educational interventions would increase their chances of obtaining academic success.
Evidence
According to Cressey, Whitcomb, Rivet, Morrison, and Reynolds (2014), PBIS is a preventative framework focused on creating safe and healthy environments that reflect socially competent school climates. Fallon, O’Keeffe, and Sugai (2012) reported that the consistent teaching, recognizing, and rewarding of positive student behavior is the center of PBIS and will reduce unnecessary discipline and promote a highly productive, safe, and learning climate. Bradshaw, Waasdorp, and Leaf (2011) proffered that PBIS changes school climate through enhanced systems, data-driven decision making, and implementation of evidenced based strategies and practices.
Sugai and Simonsen (2012) described PBIS as a Response to Intervention model (RtI) consisting of three-tiers of support and a process to solve problems that hinder schools from effectively educating all students. The first level intervention tier, Tier 1, includes supports for all students through teaching, modeling, and positively reinforcing expectations (Cressey, et al., 2014). Fairbanks, Sugai, Guardino, and Lathrop (2007) stated that more interventions are used at the secondary intervention level, Tier 2, to produce positive outcomes for a small group of students when those students do not respond to the Tier 1 interventions. Fairbanks, et al. (2007) explained that the tertiary intervention level, Tier 3, emphasizes individualized and specialized interventions for students who are nonresponsive to Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions. Tier 3 intervention efforts include planning for function-based behavior interventions, implementing social skills lessons, monitoring intensive individualized behavior plans, constant data-driven decision-making, planning team, and school-community based mental health support services (Cressey, et al., 2014). Banks and Obiakor (2015) concluded that PBIS improves school safety and climate by enhancing positive behavior for students through the implementation of the three-tiered process.
Learning Objective 1
Implement the PBIS framework from beginning stage to maintenance stage.
Learning Objective 2
Identify PBIS interventions that will maximize student achievement and success beyond graduation.
Recommended Citation
Buckley, Elesha, "From Pre-K to the Workplace: How PBIS Impacts At-Risk Students Achieving Success Beyond Graduation" (2022). Southeast Conference on School Climate. 22.
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/secsc/2022/2022/22
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
From Pre-K to the Workplace: How PBIS Impacts At-Risk Students Achieving Success Beyond Graduation
Sugai and Simonsen (2012) described PBIS as a Response to Intervention model (RtI) consisting of three-tiers of support and a process to solve problems that hinder schools from effectively educating all students. The first level intervention tier, Tier 1, includes supports for all students through teaching, modeling, and positively reinforcing expectations (Cressey, et al., 2014). Fairbanks, Sugai, Guardino, and Lathrop (2007) stated that more interventions are used at the secondary intervention level, Tier 2, to produce positive outcomes for a small group of students when those students do not respond to the Tier 1 interventions. Fairbanks, et al. (2007) explained that the tertiary intervention level, Tier 3, emphasizes individualized and specialized interventions for students who are nonresponsive to Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions. Tier 3 intervention efforts include planning for function-based behavior interventions, implementing social skills lessons, monitoring intensive individualized behavior plans, constant data-driven decision-making, planning team, and school-community based mental health support services (Cressey, et al., 2014). Banks and Obiakor (2015) concluded that PBIS improves school safety and climate by enhancing positive behavior for students through the implementation of the three-tiered process.
To close the gaps in achievement and discipline of at-risk students and their peers, educational interventions are necessary (Davis, 2003). According to Cook, Duong, McIntosh, Fiat, Larson, Pullmann, and McGinnis (2018), longstanding discipline disparities for some groups of students are related to unfortunate outcomes and require practical and effective school-based solutions. Noguera (2012) suggested implementing educational interventions early when warning signs, such as failure to meet academic expectations and grade retention, are present. Bell (2010) agreed that intervening at younger ages is associated with more positive outcomes for students. Bradshaw (2013) reported that Positive Behavior Intervention Support programs have been shown to reduce behavior problems. Johnson and Hannon (2014) asserted that services provided by school counselors are instrumental in students overcoming behavior and academic challenges. Grant and Dieker (2011) recommended mentoring as an effective intervention. Dyce (2013) concluded that providing educational interventions would increase their chances of obtaining academic success.
