Dealing Positively with Antisocial Behaviors

1
Dealing Positively with Antisocial Behaviors
Presented by Daniel R. Martin
2
(No Transcript)
3
(No Transcript)
4
Taken from the November 1989 Issue of Principal,
Vol. 69, No. 2
5
Authority to Control Conduct

• School authorities "have both the inherent and
  the statutory power to maintain order and
  discipline in the schools and to exclude from the
  student body those who are detrimental to such
  body and whose conduct is inimical to the
  exercise of the institutions scholastic
  function."
• See Davis v. Ann Arbor Public Schools, 313
  F.Supp. 1217 (ED Mich, 1970).

6
Authority to Control Conduct

• Revised School Code
• Educate pupils and provide for their safety and
  welfare
• MCL 380.11a(3)
• Adopt and enforce code of student conduct
• MCL 380.1312(8)

7
Limitations on Control

• Vigilant protection of constitutional freedom is
  nowhere more vital than in the community of
  American schools.
• Keyishian v Board of Regents, 385 US 589 (1967)
• It hardly can be argued that either students or
  teachers shed their constitutional rights . . .
  at the school house gates.
• Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Com. Sch. Dist., 393
  U.S. 503 (1969)

8
Limitations on Disciplinary Authority

• Constitutional Limits
• First Amendment
• Speech / Press / Religion
• Fourth Amendment
• Search Seizure
• Due Process

9
Limitations on Disciplinary Authority

• Statutory Limits
• IDEA
• Change of Placement / Manifestation Determination
• FBA/BIP
• Modified FAPE
• Corporal Punishment
• Seclusion and Restraint

10
Zero Tolerance Policies

• Mandatory Permanent Expulsions
• Dangerous Weapons
• Arson
• Criminal Sexual Conduct
• Physical Assault on School Personnel
• Mandatory Suspension or Expulsion
• Verbal Assault on School Personnel
• Bomb Threats

11
(No Transcript)
12
State Board of Education

• Researchers have found no evidence that zero
  tolerance policies make schools safer or improve
  student behavior.
• Studies suggest that overuse of suspensions and
  expulsions may actually increase likelihood of
  later criminal misconduct.
• Students subject to suspension and expulsion are
  isolated from learning environments.

13
State Board of Education

• Review existing zero-tolerance policies that are
  above and beyond those required in law
• Limit number of offenses mandating suspension and
  referral to law enforcement
• directly related to safety of students and
  personnel
• Reserve removing a child from an educational
  opportunity for the most serious infractions
• not used as discipline for minor occurrences

14
State Board of Education

• Implement or expand use of proven alternative
  behavior management strategies that allow
  educators to address disciplinary matters
  correctively, rather than punitively, reducing
  suspensions
• restorative practices,
• positive behavior supports, and
• peer mediation

15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
Positive Behavior Supports - FBAs BIPs

• Everyone Counts!
• Including those who engage in antisocial
  behaviors.

18
State Policy

• Every district must implement system of
  school-wide positive behavior support
  strategies

19
MDE PBS Policy Guidance

• A ... data-based effort that concentrates on
  adjusting the system that supports the student.
  Such a system is implemented by collaborative,
  school-based teams using person-centered
  planning.
• Implementation Guide 2008

20
School Wide PBS 3-Tiered Model
21
IDEA Reqts Proactive / IEP

• If childs behavior interferes with his/her
  learning or learning of others, then as part of
  the development of IEP the IEP Team must
• consider use of positive behavioral interventions
  and supports and other strategies to address that
  behavior
• 20 USC 1414(d)(3)(B)(i)
• 34 CFR 300.324(a)(2)

22
IDEA Reqts Reactive / Discipline

• As part of discipline process, when misconduct is
  determined a manifestation of students
  disability, IEP Team must either
• If no FBA or BIP, conduct FBA and implement BIP
  or
• If the student has a BIP, review and modify it as
  necessary to address behavior
• 1415(k)(1)(F)(i)
• 34 CFR 300.530(f)(1)

23
IDEA Reqts Reactive / Discipline

• Student must receive as appropriate an FBA, BIS
  and modifications designed to address behavior
  violation so it does not recur
• When suspended in excess of 10 consecutive school
  days, or
• When placed in an IAES
• 20 USC 1415(k)(1)(D)(ii)
• 34 CFR 300.530(d)(ii)
• See QA on Discipline Q E-2

24
MDE Discipline Procedures

• If manifestation, then
• Immediately initiate FBA/BIP process
  or review an existing FBA/BIP to
  address the behavior
• If not a manifestation, then
• Immediately initiate, as appropriate, an FBA and
  behavioral intervention services and
  modifications designed to address the behavior
  violation so that it does not recur, or review an
  existing FBA/BIP to address the behavior
• See, MDE Discipline Procedures 2011, p. 8

25
MDE Discipline Procedures

• Districts must document their process for
  determining whether a BIP or other behavioral
  intervention services or modifications are
  appropriate
• MDE recommends using FBA process as documentation
  of meeting this requirement

26
Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA)

• Generally, an acceptable FBA
• Defines target behavior
• Establishes baseline of behavior frequency
• Collects information regarding antecedents
• Collects information regarding consequences of
  the behavior for the child
• Not punishment, but what student gets from
  behavior

27
Functional Behavioral Assessments

• Key to an appropriate FBA is data
• Documentation and data collection are becoming
  increasingly focused upon in due process hearings
• ABC data and documentation of interventions
  must be collected across environments (regular
  education, special education and other
  educational settings) depending on where the
  behavior is exhibited
• Analysis of data is key to preparing an
  appropriate BIP
• Graph the data and the effects of interventions

28
When to Perform FBA

• In most cases where childs behavior impedes the
  learning of self or others and can be readily
  anticipated to be repetitive, development of IEP
  will include development of strategies to address
  that behavior
• Danielle G. v New York City BOE, 50 IDELR 247 (ED
  NY, 2008)
• ASD students self stimulatory behavior required
  FBA because it interfered with her learning
• See also, Mobile County Board of Ed, 50 IDELR 84
  (SEA Al., 2007)

29
When does one perform an FBA?

• When implementing PBS devising or revising BIPs
• school wide or individual
• For individual students, you need not conduct FBA
  or implement BIP when
• behavior no different than typical student for
  that grade
• behavior is not repetitive
• Regulatory Rule of Thumb
• where behavior impedes learning of the student or
  of others, and
• behavior is repetitive or readily anticipated to
  be repetitive

30
How Do PBS Relate to BIPs?

• PBS in the proactive IEP may constitute BIP in
  reactive/discipline context
• Functional behavior assessment is the foundation
  for both PBS and BIP
• P in PBS does not preclude use of negative
  consequences
• BIPs should contain positive components
• Existence of BIP referenced in IEP
• In certain situations MDE requires the BIP to be
  in the IEP

31
Who performs the FBA?

• IDEA does not require any particular person or
  any particular qualifications (e.g., a board
  certified behavior analyst)
• Staff who perform FBAs must be prepared and
  provided adequate training
• Such training, provided by the school district
  working with the state department of ed, may be
  in-services, technical assistance, etc.
• Letter to Janssen, 108 LRP 65830 (OSEP 2008)

32
Who performs the FBA?

• State guidance document on Implementing PBS
  recommends a team, including
• Students teacher
• Parents
• Student
• Support staff
• Administrators
• Outside providers

33
Consent for FBA

• Letter to Christiansen, 47 IDELR 161 (OSEP 2007)
• FBA may be an evaluation which requires consent
  if it is used to determine whether a child has a
  disability, or the extent of special education or
  related services
• No consent required if used for school wide PBS

34
Independent Educational Evaluations

• Harris v District of Columbia Public Schools, 50
  IDELR 194 (DC, 2008)
• FBA is an educational evaluation
• Evaluation is a procedure to determine the
  specialized instruction or related services a
  student needs
• Integral in determining the behavioral needs of
  the student
• Parent is entitled to IEE if they disagree with
  an evaluation obtained by the school
• Since FBA is an evaluation parent is entitled
  to an IEE on the FBA if disagree

35
Steps in Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs)

• Consider assessment information
• Make hypothesis regarding behavior
• Devise BIP
• Target and replacement behaviors
• Environmental supports
• Train Staff
• Collect Data
• Review Revise BIP as necessary

36
BIP Content

• More than one way to devise a BIP
• IEP itself could lay out elements of positive
  behavior support that could constitute a BIP
• Separate written document may set forth positive
  supports, replacement behaviors to be taught,
  intervention strategies and response strategies
• PBS and BIPs are process as well as product
• Good implementation requires good documentation
• Data tells you when to review and revise

37
BIP Content

• Generally, if district followed process and
  implemented a BIP, Courts will not second guess
  the content / strategies of the BIP
• Alex R. v Forrestville Valley Community School
  Unit, 41 IDELR 146 (7th Cir., 2004)
• Neither Congress nor US Department of Ed created
  any specific substantive requirements for the BIP
• As long as BIP reasonable (i.e., reasonably
  calculated) a court will not create substantive
  requirements for BIP

38
Elements of a BIP

• Identify Target Behavior
• Identify Replacement Behaviors
• Identify Strategies
• Environmental modifications/accommodations
• Proactive interventions/redirection
• Identify Rewards
• Identify Consequences

39
BIP in a Separate Written Document?

• School Bd of Independent School District No. 11,
  106 LRP 15941 (8th Cir., 2006)
• Held neither state nor federal law required the
  behavior plan to be in writing
• The District staff had documented interventions
• District staff responded to behavioral incidents
  with set procedures
• Student made progress

40
BIP in the IEP

• Neither the IDEA nor its implementing regulations
  require the BIP to be in the IEP
• While a district may choose to do so, it is not
  required under IDEA or Part B regs
• Letter to Huefner, 23 IDELR 1072 (OSEP 1995).
• However, best practice includes developing,
  reviewing, implementing and documenting a BIP as
  part of the IEP process
• Compare MDE Discipline Manual
• To exclude the removal as a count day, removal
  must be in BIP and BIP must be in IEP

41
MDE Discipline Procedures

• II.G. Removal Part of Behavior Plan
• 1. If a removal from school is written into a
  behavior plan that is part of the
  students IEP , the removal
  does not count as days of
  removal for disciplinary reasons. However, those
  days are counted as suspension for IDEA reporting
  purposes in MSDS.
• 3. When a removal from school is written into a
  behavior plan that is not part of the students
  IEP, the removal counts toward the days of
  removal for disciplinary reasons and the days are
  counted as suspension for IDEA reporting purposes
  in MSDS.

42
MDE Discipline Procedures

• For BIP to be considered part of IEP
• a. BIP must be explicitly written in the IEP
• MDE recommends that BIPs be written in the
  Supplementary Aids and Services or Special
  Factors section of IEP, and include the time,
  frequency, condition, and location for
  implementation of the BIP
• b. The district must convene an IEP or develop an
  amendment to change the BIP
• c. If removal is part of the BIP, Procedural
  Safeguards should be provided to the parent

43
Aversives in the BIP?

• Generally, Positive Behavior Supports does not
  mean that the BIP may not have negative
  consequences
• However, the majority of a well designed BIP will
  focus on the teaching aspect of behavior
  modification
• i.e., on teaching replacement behavior, not on
  the consequences for the behavior

44
Aversives in the BIP not prohibited

• OSEP clarified that IDEA does not expressly
  prohibit the use of aversive behavioral
  interventions
• Letter to Anonymous, 50 IDELR 228 (OSEP 2008)
• Must also look to state law, as state law may
  establish additional requirements
• Letter to Trader, 48 IDELR 47 (OSEP 2006)

45
Seclusion Restraint Standards

• Applies to use of Seclusion or Restraint with ALL
  students
• Students with and without disabilities
• must be undertaken only by trained personnel as
  a last resort

46
Prohibited uses

• May not be utilized
• for the convenience of staff
• as a substitute for an educational program
• as a form of discipline or punishment
• as a substitute for less restrictive alternatives
  
• as a substitute for adequate staffing
• as a substitute for staff training in PBS and
  crisis prevention and intervention

47
Training

• Personnel must have training
• Awareness training to the broader educational
  community
• Including pre-service training for all teachers
• Awareness training for substitute teachers
• Comprehensive training for key identified
  personnel

48
Emergency Exclusion

• Emergency seclusion is only appropriate
  where an emergency exists and seclusion is
  essential. Seclusion may be appropriate where
• the behavior poses an imminent risk to the
  safety of the individual student or others
• A behavior that requires immediate intervention
  constitutes an emergency
• Seclusion is not appropriate for students who
  exhibit self-injurious behavior or are suicidal

49
Three Types of Restraint

• Physical
• direct physical contact that prevents or
  significantly restricts a student's movement
• Chemical
• administration of medication for purpose of
  restraint
• Mechanical
• use of any device or material attached to or
  adjacent to students body that restricts normal
  freedom of movement and which cannot be easily
  removed by student

50
Other prohibited practices

• Prone restraints
• Restraints that negatively impact breathing
• Corporal punishment
• Deprivation of basic needs
• Anything constituting child abuse
• Intentional use of noxious substance(s) or
  stimuli which results in physical pain or extreme
  discomfort

51
Emergency Restraint

• Last resort intervention for student
  to regain self-control
• Behaviors that may require the use of restraint
• The behavior poses an imminent risk to the safety
  of the individual student or to others or
• is otherwise governed by the corporal punishment
  sections of the Revised School Code
• MCL 380.1312

52
Actions not prohibited

• Standards on physical restraint is
  not intended to forbid
  actions taken
• to break up a fight
• to take away a weapon
• to briefly hold the student in order to calm or
  comfort
• minimum contact necessary to physically escort a
  student from one place to another
• to assist a student in completing a task
  (provided the student does not resist or the
  resistance is minimal in intensity or duration)
• to hold a student to prevent an impulsive
  behavior that threatens the student's safety

53
Corporal Punishment 1312(1)

• 1312(1) of Michigan Revised School Code
  prohibits corporal punishment
• Defined as the deliberate infliction of physical
  pain by hitting, paddling, spanking, slapping, or
  any other physical force used as a means of
  discipline
• Specifically excludes physical pain caused by
  reasonable physical activities associated with
  athletic training

54
Reasonable Force 1312(4) of RSC

• An employee / volunteer / contractor may
• use reasonable physical force
• upon a pupil
• as necessary
• to maintain order and control in a school or
  school related setting
• for the purpose of providing an environment
  conducive to safety and learning

55
Reasonable Force 1312(4) of RSC

• As necessary for 1 or more of the following
• Restrain/remove a pupil whose behavior is
  interfering with the orderly exercise and
  performance of school functionsif the pupil has
  refused to comply with request to refrain from
  further disruptive acts
• Self defense/defense of another
• Prevent pupil from harming self
• Quell disturbance that threatens physical injury
  to another
• Obtain weapon or dangerous object from pupil
• Protect property

56
Reasonable Force 1312 of RSC

• Deference must be given to reasonable good faith
  judgments by an employee/volunteer/contractor in
  using physical force in the above situations
• When such force is used in accordance with the
  act on a student (or person of school age in a
  school related setting) there is immunity from
  civil damages
• A person willfully or through gross negligence
  violating the act may be appropriately
  disciplined
• An employee may be disciplined in accordance with
  school board policies

57
(No Transcript)
58
The Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS) Approach

• Everyone Counts!
• And deserves to be treated with compassion and
  respect.

59
Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS)
60
Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS)

• The trademarks Collaborative Problem Solving
  and Collaborative Problem Solving approach are
  registered to Dr. Ross W. Greene.
• I am not a certified trainer, have no affiliation
  with Dr. Greene, and am merely presenting an
  overview of the model. While I am presenting my
  best understanding of the model, the accuracy of
  the information presented should not be assumed.
• Visit the website www.livesinthebalance.org to
  access model updates and other resources.

61
www.livesinthebalance.org
62
www.lostatschool.org
63
CPS Paradigm Shift

• Behavioral challenges understood as form
  of developmental delay
• domains of flexibility/adaptability, frustration
  tolerance, and problem-solving
• deserving of the same compassion and approach as
  are applied to other cognitive delays
• reading, writing, and arithmetic

64
CPS Behavior Problems

• Challenging behavior occurs in response to
  specific unsolved problems
• e.g., homework, screen time, teeth brushing,
  clothing choices, sibling interactions, etc.
• These unsolved problems are usually highly
  predictable and can therefore be solved
  proactively

65
CPS Behavior Problems

• Typical disciplinary approach using
  time-outs, detentions, suspensions,
  expulsion, and isolation do not solve these
  problems or "build character" but rather often
  makes things worse
• Primary goal of intervention is to
  collaboratively solve these problems in a way
  that is realistic and mutually satisfactory so
  that they don't precipitate challenging behavior
  any more

66
Collaborative Problem Solving

• Adults take a genuine interest in kids
  concerns and perspectives, which
  are viewed as legitimate, important, and worth
  listening to and clarifying
• Adults who do not resort to physical intervention
  and are knowledgeable about and proficient in
  other means of solving problems

67
Collaborative Problem Solving

• Solving problems collaboratively prepares
  kids for the demands they will face in the
  real world
• Blind obedience to authority is dangerous life
  in the real world requires expressing one's
  concerns, listening to the concerns of others,
  and working toward mutually satisfactory
  solutions

68
CPS Five Goals of Plan B

• Goal 1 Pursue unmet expectations and ensure
  that your concerns about a kids challenges are
  addressed
• Goal 2 Solve the problems precipitating a
  childs challenging episodes in a collaborative,
  mutually satisfactory, and durable fashion
• Goal 3 Teach the kid the skills hes lacking
• Goal 4 Reduce challenging behavior
• Goal 5 Create a helping relationship

69
Three Approaches

• Plan A
• Adults impose their will in response to
  unmet expectation / problem
• Plan B
• Collaborative problem solving
• Plan C
• Dropping an expectation completely, or at least
  temporarily

70
CPS 3 Steps of Plan B

• Step 1 Empathy
• Understand the kids concern / perspective
• Step 2 Define the Problem
• Adults concern about problem or unmet
  expectation
• Step 3 Invitation
• Restate the two concerns (kids and adults) and
  invite the kid to solve it collaboratively
  together
• Realistic mutually satisfactory solution

71
CPS Assessment of Skills/Problems
72
(No Transcript)
73
Everyone Counts!