Developing a Classroom Management Plan Using a Tiered Approach

Full text

TEACHING ExcEptional childrEn | novEmbEr/dEcEmbEr 2014 119
TEACHING Exceptional Children, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 119 –127. Copyright 2014 The Author(s). DOI: 10.1177/0040059914553208
Randi, a special education teacher, has
worked in an inclusive 6th grade
classroom with Colleen since August.
Although the class has been running
fairly smoothly, it is September and
some behavior issues have arisen.
Transitions between lessons have been
taking longer, general noise level during
group work is up, and students have
been teasing peers or making negative
comments during group discussions. In
addition, a small group of students is
not completing assignments on time.
The two students who have
individualized education program (IEP)
goals directly related to behavior are
also experiencing difficulties. One
student has shut down and refuses to
do work, and the other student has
been getting into fights during lunch
break. Although Colleen and Randi had
rules and consequences in place at the
start of the year, they have decided they
need to develop a comprehensive
classroom management plan.
Every year teachers plan for the
management of students’ behavior
within their classrooms. Preparation
may include developing a set of class
rules, specifying procedures for daily
tasks, or developing a consequence
hierarchy (e.g., first infraction = X
consequence, second infraction = Y
consequence, and so on). Effective
classroom management is essential for
teaching, and it is not surprising to
any teacher to find that management
issues are frequently cited among
reasons for leaving the field (Browers
& Tomic, 2000; Ingersoll & Smith,
2003). Poor classroom management
results in lost instructional time,
feelings of inadequacy, and stress. In
addition, special educators often have
the responsibility of behavior change
as a primary goal of instruction. In
these situations, teachers move
beyond the need to “manage”
behavior and must address
challenging behaviors head on to
identify ways to transform the
maladaptive behavior into something
appropriate and effective for students.
In this article, we present a
response-to-intervention (RTI)
framework that both special and
general education teachers can use in
evaluating existing class structures and
developing comprehensive classroom
management plans for the purpose of
managing challenging behaviors. (See
box, “What Is RTI All About?”)
In this article, we applied the
concept of a three-tiered model of
support at the classroom level for
individual (or team) teachers.
Ultimately, this three-tier support
structure would be a part of a
schoolwide PBS model, but for many
teachers or teams who are still
addressing behaviors at a classroom
level instead of schoolwide the RTI
model provides an excellent structure
to think about behavioral interventions.
Special educators who teach in
self-contained, resource, or
collaborative classrooms can use the
guidelines to create comprehensive
classroom management plans. The
framework provided includes evidence-
based practices that teachers can apply
at each tier of support. The plan
incorporates guiding questions that
direct teachers in selecting those
practices that will best meet their
context (i.e., grade level) and student
population (i.e., students with and
without disabilities, students at risk for
school failure, students whose first
language is not English).
Three-Tiered Model of
Classroom Behavioral
Supports
Before teachers can begin to implement
a multileveled approach to classroom
behavioral support, they should
identify and evaluate existing
classroom structures. This process
provides a basis for determining where
additional supports are needed.
Specific, guiding questions include the
following:
 What is the core, behavioral
curriculum provided? How are
behavioral expectations
communicated to students through
existing practices?
 What interventions or additional
behavioral supports are in place? If
students demonstrate challenging
553208TCXXXX10.1177/0040059914553208Council for Exceptional ChildrenTeaching Exceptional Children
research-article2014
Developing a Classroom
Management Plan Using a
Tiered Approach
This article originally appeared in the September/October 2011 issue of TEC
Kristin L. Sayeski and Monica R. Brown
BEST
OF
TEC

120 council for ExcEptional childrEn
behaviors, what are the responses to
these behaviors?
 What individualized, intensive
behavioral supports are used for the
most challenging of classroom
behaviors? For those few students
who demonstrate chronic,
challenging behaviors, what
consistent strategies are used across
all classes and teachers?
These questions reflect the three
tiers: (a) Tier 1: Preventative Classroom
Management, (b) Tier 2: First-Line
Interventions, and (c) Tier 3: Intensive,
Individualized Interventions. See
Figure 1 for an overview of a
“Comprehensive Classroom
Management Plan: Three Tiered Model
of Support Checklist.”
After reviewing the three guiding
questions, Randi and Colleen decide
that the standard classroom rules need
to be updated to reflect specific concerns
regarding respect for peers and
preparedness for class. In addition, they
realize that they have no way to
recognize or reward those students who
are doing well. They want to work on
the overall classroom environment–shift
the focus from nagging to bragging–but
they aren’t sure where to begin.
Tier 1: Preventative Classroom
Management
What does a high-quality core
curriculum in behavioral support look
like? Anything a teacher does that
establishes behavioral expectations in a
classroom creates the core curriculum
of behavior. Researchers have revealed
that the more transparent and clear
teachers are about their behavioral
expectations, the more successful
students are in meeting those
expectations (Evertson, Emmer, &
Worsham, 2006; Zirpoli, 2008). Specific
strategies that are effective in
promoting desired behavior include the
following:
 High teacher expectations
(Marzano, 2010; McKown &
Weinstein, 2008). Stimulating
instruction with high levels of
student engagement (Emmer &
Stough, 2001 Sutherland & Wehby,
2001) Clearly communicated rules
and norms (Kerr & Nelson, 2006;
Sprick & Daniels, 2010; Tanol,
Johnson, McComas, & Cote, 2010).
 Established routines and procedures
(Evertson et al., 2006). Positive
teacher-student rapport (Marzano,
2003). Efficient use of classroom
time (Lee, 2006).
To develop or evaluate a current
core curriculum of behavioral supports,
What Is RTI All About?
The term response to intervention (RTI) applies to educational approaches that embrace multilevel prevention and
intervention systems (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2010). RTI includes the use of assessment data, progress
monitoring, and evidence-based practices to identify students in need of support, monitor their progress as they receive
targeted interventions, and adjust levels or type of interventions depending upon students’ responsiveness. The RTI
framework allows general and special educators alike a process for addressing students’ needs across a range of levels.
The underlying assumption of RTI is that when teachers apply effective instructional practices, the majority of students
will making satisfactory gains, whereas some other students will require additional levels of support (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006).
Applying this concept to classroom behavior, the application of effective behavioral supports in a classroom (e.g., high
expectations, engaging instruction, clearly identified routines and procedures) should enable the majority of students to
behave within classroom norms. Students who do not respond to preventative, proactive behavioral supports will require
additional levels of support. This is the concept underlying School-Wide Positive Behavioral Supports (SWPBS). Sugai and
Horner (2009) suggested that RTI is a broad conceptualization of tiered support, while SWPBS is a specific, research-based
application of the concept. Parallels between the concepts of RTI and Positive Behavior Support (PBS) have been identified
in the literature (e.g., Sandomierski, Kincaid, & Algozzine, 2007). Both RTI and PBS models account for three levels of
support, including three tiers of support:
 Tier 1 or universal support for all students with a focus on prevention.
 Tier 2 or targeted group support that includes evidence-based practices and monitoring.
 Tier 3 or individualized support based on individualized assessment processes.
Six Effective Behavior Supports
 High teacher expectations.
 Stimulating instruction with high levels of student engagement.
 Clearly communicated rules and norms.
 Established routines and procedures.
 Positive teacher-student rapport.
 Efficient use of classroom time.

TEACHING ExcEptional childrEn | novEmbEr/dEcEmbEr 2014 121
Figure 1. Comprehensive Classroom Management Plan: Three-Tiered Model of Support Checklist
Teacher(s) Name(s): ____________________________________________
Classroom: _____________________
School Year: ____________________
Tier 1: Preventative Classroom Management
Guiding Question
What is the core, behavioral curriculum provided? (i.e., How are behavioral expectations communicated to students
through existing practices?)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tier I Strategies: Select the tools that are either in place or can be put in place to address this tier of support.
High Student Engagement
 Response Cards
 Choral Responding
 Peer Tutoring
 Established Routines and Procedures
 High Expectations
 Teacher Modeling of Positive Behaviors
 Organized Classroom  Positive Student-Teacher Rapport
 Clear Communication (e.g., visual displays of
instruction, step-by-step procedures)
 Positively Stated Rules
 Ample Background Knowledge and Skill Instruction
Provided
 Frequent Academic Assessment (e.g., curriculum-based
assessments)
Tier 2: First-Line Interventions
Guiding Question
What interventions or additional behavioral supports are in place? (i.e., If students demonstrate challenging behaviors,
how are these behaviors responded to?)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tier II Strategies: Select the tools that are either in place or can be put in place to address this tier of support.
 Changes to Academic Instruction (e.g., tutoring
program, literacy lab, review supports)
 Contingency System (e.g., loss of privileges, time out,
behavior contracts, group contingency)
 Positive Reinforcement System
 Token Economy
 Behavior Contracts (e.g., Daily Behavior Report Card,
weekly contracts)
 Surface Management Techniques (e.g., planned
ignoring, signal interference, proximity, tension
decontamination through humor, hurdle help, direct
appeal, antiseptic bounce, rewards)
 Remedial Intervention or Tutoring Support  Home-School Note System
Tier 3: Intensive, Individualized Interventions
Guiding Question
What individualized, intensive behavioral supports are drawn on for the most challenging of classroom behaviors? (i.e.,
For those few students who demonstrate chronic, challenging behaviors, what strategies are used?)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tier III Strategies: Select the tools that are either in place or can be put in place to address this tier of support.
 Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBAs)/Behavior
Intervention Plans (BIPs)
 Support Groups (e.g., anger management, grief, study
skills)
 Self-Monitoring Strategies  Goal Setting/Monitoring
 Daily Student Evaluation  Crisis Management or Safety Plan
 Social Skills Instruction  Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers

122 council for ExcEptional childrEn
teachers can begin by evaluating their
(a) instructional practices, (b) rules
and procedures, and (c) overall
classroom climate. (See box, “Six
Effective Behavior Supports.”)
Instructional Practices. Students
who are occupied in instruction are
less likely to have behavior problems
(Greenwood, Horton, & Utley, 2002;
Sutherland & Oswald, 2005; Sutherland
& Wehby, 2001). Teachers can create
highly engaging instruction by
providing frequent opportunities for
students to respond. Research has
shown that practices such as the use of
response cards (Randolf, 2007), choral
responding (Hayon, Mancil, & Van
Loan, 2009; Kretlow, Wood, & Cooke,
2011), and peer tutoring (Kamps et al.,
2008; Sutherland & Snyder, 2007)
increase student engagement. These
instructional strategies increase
practice opportunities and provide
immediate academic feedback for
students. Visual supports can also
encourage student engagement.
Graphic organizers, flow charts, and
temporal sequence charts (e.g., first do
this, then do that) serve to clarify
teacher direction and expectations.
Students who know what is expected
of them are more likely to follow
directions and less likely to be off task
or to ask for clarification from the
teacher or their peers.
To ensure that the instruction
provided meets students’ academic
levels, many teachers use formative
assessments, such as curriculum-based
assessments, to conduct pretests and
regular assessments of students’
progress throughout a unit of study.
Teachers who track student
performance over time can see if
students are making gains. Failure to
make gains suggests a mismatch
between instruction and student need.
Certainly, behavioral concerns can
interfere with a student’s ability to
learn, but teachers should rule out the
possibility that the instruction is too
challenging, easy, or being delivered in
such a way as to present difficulties for
a student.
Rules and Procedures. Well-
designed and clearly communicated
rules and procedures set the stage for
effective student behavior. When
creating rules, teachers can apply the
concept of behavioral pairs (Kauffman,
Mostert, Trent, & Pullen, 2006). To
identify a behavioral pair, the teacher
first defines the behavior of concern
that the student is presenting. Then,
the teacher identifies an incompatible,
desired behavior that the student can
learn as a replacement behavior. The
identification of behavioral pairs allows
teachers to focus on the positive,
desired behaviors they need to teach or
reinforce.
A classroom’s practiced and
rehearsed daily procedures create the
backbone of effective classroom
management. Common routines and
procedures include: arrival/entering
the classroom, attendance, submitting
classwork and homework, transitions
between classroom activities, missed
classes, bathroom breaks, participating
in class discussions, and cooperative
learning groups. Teachers who
frequently and consistently employ
these types of routines are teaching
and reinforcing their behavioral
expectations. Teachers can provide
refresher lessons periodically to remind
students of specific expectations and to
add new nuances to established
routines.
Classroom Climate. In Marzano
and Marzano’s (2003) meta-analysis of
more than 100 studies, they found that
teachers who had positive relationships
with their students had 31% fewer
discipline problems and rule violations
over the course of the year than
teachers who did not have positive
relationships with their students.
Research consistently demonstrates
that students show a clear preference
for strong teacher guidance over
permissive classroom environments
(Wubbels & Brekelmans, 2005).
Teachers establish expectations
through the rules and procedures, as
discussed previously, but also by
communicating explicit learning goals.
Students should know what is expected
of them and how they will be assessed.
A final way of communicating a
strong teacher presence is to calmly,
clearly, and consistently reinforce rules
or expectations. Yelling, elevating pitch,
moving too close to students, lecturing,
displaying strong emotion, avoiding the
offending student behavior, and back-
talking (no, I didn’t; yes, you did) all
communicate teacher insecurity. Positive
classroom climate communicates to
students that the teacher is calm and
confident in his or her ability to respond
to student needs–whether by reinforcing
the rules, redirecting misbehavior, or
addressing an extreme situation. Simple
strategies such as proximity, eye contact,
or the incorporation of students’ names
or interests during instruction can
contribute to an overall positive
classroom climate.
Core behavioral supports can go a
long way in preventing misbehavior
and promoting desired classroom
engagement. For many students, the
atmosphere promoted by these types of
behavioral supports diminishes the
need for additional behavior
management strategies. Yet, some
students or groups of students will
require additional supports. For these
students more explicit instruction in
behavior is required.
In considering their Tier I supports,
Randi and Colleen decide to make their
instruction more engaging and clear for
their students. They decide to use
response cards to increase student
participation as well as visuals to show
the steps groups need to follow during
research time. They also select one
classroom procedure to rehearse and
review each day. Students will have the
opportunity to role-play situations to
ensure that they know what is expected
of them. Finally, both teachers decide to
work on making one positive
statements to all students.
Tier 2: First-Line Interventions
When challenging behaviors appear,
similar to when students begin to
struggle with the standard curriculum,
teachers should provide additional
supports. In the case of classroom
behavioral supports, teachers can look
to a range of intervention options that
complement the standard core practices
in their classrooms. Specific strategies

TEACHING ExcEptional childrEn | novEmbEr/dEcEmbEr 2014 123
for teaching the behavioral curriculum
include positive reinforcement systems,
token economies, and rule checklists.
Tier 2, or First-Line Interventions, can
be categorized as (a) surface
management techniques and (b)
reinforcement systems.
Surface Management Techniques.
In 1952, Redl and Winemann first
introduced the concept of “techniques
for antiseptic manipulation of surface
behaviors.” Commonly referred to as
surface management techniques, these
approaches can be extremely effective
for dealing with minor behavioral
infractions that arise in day-to-day
classroom activities. Although the
specific terminology can be adjusted to
reflect current lingo, surface
management techniques are still used
universally in classrooms. Figure 2
provides an overview of standard
surface management techniques.
Reinforcement Systems.
Reinforcement systems provide
consistent consequences to specific
behaviors for the purpose of increasing
the target behavior. In contrast to the
surface management techniques that
teachers use to address occasional
behaviors that occur in classrooms,
reinforcement systems are the planned
instruction and reinforcement of
desired behaviors. Reinforcement
systems teach and reinforce. Specific,
evidence-based reinforcement systems
include token economies (Filcheck,
McNeil, Greco, & Bernard, 2004;
Hakenberg, 2009), behavior contracts
(Anderson, 2002; Cook, 2005), and
group-contingencies (Hulac & Benson,
2010 ).
In token economies, students earn
tokens (e.g., stickers, coins, marks on a
chart) that can be used to obtain an
item or a preferred activity. As soon as
a student engages in the desired
behavior, he or she receives a token.
This immediate feedback is the
hallmark of the strategy. After the
student has acquired the requisite
number of tokens, those tokens can be
exchanged for an item or preferred
activity. Specific reinforcement systems
can include the use of raffle tickets as
the token and entry into a raffle for
items such as “lunch with the teacher”
or bathroom passes.
Behavior contracts specify
contingent relationships among
behaviors. If the student engages in X
behavior, then Y will occur. Behavior
contracts work best when they focus
on the desired behavior. For example, if
the problem behavior is not bringing in
homework, then the desired behavior
is bringing in completed homework.
The contract should establish
minimum expectations and tracking
method–Amy will complete at least 4
out of 5 of her daily Spanish homework
assignments each week as indicated on
her daily tracking chart; Each week
that Amy maintains 4 out of 5
assignments, she will be allowed to
choose her seat in class (or some other
reinforcer that Amy values). Benefits of
behavior contracts include the
following: (a) clear goals for both
student and teacher, (b) development
of a tracking system, and (c) shift in
responsibility from teacher to student
in terms of daily management. The
Daily Behavior Report Card is a specific
example of a behavior contract. For the
daily report card, specific target
behaviors are identified. Then, the
expectations for the behavior are
established. Examples of daily behavior
report cards and tools to create
customized cards can be found at this
website: http://www.
interventioncentral.org/.
Home-School Note systems are a
variation on the Daily Behavior Report
Card. In a Home-School Note program,
teachers collect data on a particular,
agreed-on behavior. If the student
meets the daily expectation, then a
positive note is sent home. Parents
agree to provide positive consequences
when their child receives a “Good
News Note.” Appropriate target
behaviors for a Home-School Note
program include academic productivity,
classroom rule compliance, homework
completion, peer interactions, teacher-
student interactions, and personal
responsibility for materials.
Finally, in “group contingency”
management systems, students either
receive or lose privileges based on the
behavior of an individual, several
individuals or the whole class.
Research has shown that group
contingencies can be an effective and
efficient method for reducing disruptive
behavior (Heering & Wilder, 2006).
Although many teachers have concerns
about the possible negative
repercussions for students who fail to
meet expectations and therefore “ruin
it” for the group, many studies have
demonstrated group support and
benefits tied to group contingencies
(Heering & Wilder, 2006; Kelshaw-
Levering, Sterling-Turner, Henry, &
Skinner, 2000).
The Good Behavior Game is a
research-based, group contingency
intervention that has been shown to
reduce disruptive and aggressive
behaviors (Lannie & McCurdy, 2007).
To set up the Good Behavior Game,
teachers first assign students to teams,
typically three teams per class, with an
equal proportion of gender, academic
ability, and behavioral needs in each
group. The teacher then clearly defines
the “good” or desired behaviors and
the disruptive behaviors. Teachers will
track the number of disruptive
behaviors exhibited by team members
on a publicly posted chart. Teams that
remain below the preset number of
checks (e.g., fewer than four checks)
during the game period win the game.
All teams can win during each game
period and consistent winners can
receive additional rewards at the end of
the week.
Reinforcement systems can be
implemented as a Tier 2 or Tier 3 type
of support. The degree of intensity
would indicate the appropriate tiered
level. For example, a classwide token
economy or a homework contract
could be implemented at a Tier 2 level,
indicating minimum to moderate
amounts of teacher support required.
More intensive behavioral supports are
those that are highly individualized
and require more teacher time to set
up, monitor and maintain.
Although Randi and Colleen are
confident that making their instruction
more interactive and focusing on
desired, positive behaviors will go a
long way in changing the classroom

124 council for ExcEptional childrEn
Figure 2. Surface Management Techniques
Planned Ignoring If an attention-seeking behavior, such as pencil tapping, is ignored, the child may
first increase the intensity of the tapping but may eventually stop due to lack of
reinforcement.
Signal Interference Nonverbal signals, such as the ringing of wind chimes or flicker of the lights, and
verbal signals, such as the reminder of the rules, can signal students to change their
own behavior.
Proximity and Touch Control The presence of the teacher nearby can remind students to refocus, refrain, and
reengage.
Involvement in the Interest
Relationship
Changing examples to reflect student interests or shifting the activity can reel
students back into classroom discussions. Personal attention can also serve to
reengage students (e.g., “Ben, what did you think of the story?”).
Hypodermic Affection For some students, the deliberate delivery of kindness or individualized attention
can boost their sense of wellbeing and reduce their need to act out within the
classroom. The term “hypodermic” implies that this sincere attention is more than
skin deep! A student who is having a bad day can be disarmed by the genuine
concern of a teacher.
Tension Decontamination
Through Humor
Behavior management can quickly turn into a power struggle between teacher and
student. One way to defuse this is through the use of humor.
Hurdle Help Providing instructional support rather than a reprimand or redirect can sometimes
help this situation. Statements like “Let’s look at the first problem together” or “Tell
me where you are on this assignment” serve to shift the focus to the instruction
and off of the behavior.
Interpretation as Interference A student who is acting out or frustrated might not have a clear picture of the
situation or attribute inappropriate motives to others. Clarifying statements, such as
“She did this in response to your action” serve as an “interpretation” of the event
and can help the student develop a more rationale view of a situation.
Regrouping Simply moving the players around can be an effective strategy for addressing
unwanted behaviors. Teachers should take care to remove emotion from this
strategy since negative attention can be reinforcing to some students. A statement
such as, “I am moving you because the two of you are always talking!” is less
effective than, “Today, we are switching partners in order to practice our new
strategy.”
Restructuring Teachers can change an activity that is not going as planned in order to avoid or
reduce undesired behaviors.
Direct Appeal A reminder of the rules can be all a student or group of students need in order to
get back on track.
Limitation of Space and Tools Making sure that students have limited access to materials during modeling and
instruction and having specific procedures in place for distribution, use and
collection of materials are two strategies for reducing the misuse of classroom
materials.
Antiseptic Bouncing This technique is the nonpunitive removal of a student from the classroom. Like its
punitive counterpart, “time out,” antiseptic bouncing should be used with caution.
Antiseptic bouncing involves sending a student out of the room on a neutral errand.
Permission and Authoritative
Verboten (“No!”)
Sometimes permitting a behavior is the fastest way to stop it. Some low-level
behaviors can be tolerated, particularly if a disproportionate amount of time is
spent attempting to eliminate it. The opposite of permission, the authoritative
verboten, can also be effective in communicating to students that a particular
behavior is not permitted. The key to an effective “no” is to eliminate the lecturing,
nagging, or rational building that often occurs with it.
Promises and Rewards Although rewards can be effective in reinforcing desired behaviors, caution should
be used when using promises and rewards as a surface management technique.
The inadvertent message rewards communicate, “If you behave, you will get a
prize,” can serve to undermine an overall classroom climate of productivity. In
terms of overall classroom support, rewards are best delivered randomly or at
unexpected times.

TEACHING ExcEptional childrEn | novEmbEr/dEcEmbEr 2014 125
climate, they know that a small group
of students will need something more.
They decide to implement a raffle ticket
system for completed work. Students
can earn one ticket for completed work
and a bonus ticket for “quality.” They
also are going to set up a help system,
and students who need extra help on
an assignment can earn a ticket for
working with a teacher to complete
their work. The teachers think this will
help both special education and general
education students who are struggling
to complete work. A raffle will be held
each week, and students can win items
from the school store.
Tier 3: Intensive, Individualized
Interventions
The identification of Tier 3 behavioral
supports always begins with a Functional
Behavioral Assessment (FBA). The
purpose of the FBA is to move beyond
the environmental scan of Tier 1 and the
surface management or reinforcement
strategies of Tier 2 to focus on an
individual student’s behavioral needs.
Through the FBA process, teams collect
data to identify the function of a
problematic behavior and then generate
strategies to address the identified need.
In short, the FBA seeks to answer two
fundamental questions:
 “Why is this student behaving like
this?”
 “What socially acceptable behavior
can we teach to address this same
need?”
Because FBAs are required under
the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) for students
with disabilities who exhibit
challenging behaviors, the majority of
school districts will have their own
set of FBA tools and processes. You
can fine excellent materials and
information about conducting FBAs
at the Center for Effective
Collaboration and Practice website:
http://cecp.air.org/fba/.
As a result of conducting an FBA on
a student, educators generate
hypotheses about the communicative
function of the behavior. For example,
one FBA’s findings may indicate that a
student is displaying escape or
avoidance behaviors, whereas another
FBA determines that a student’s
behaviors are attention seeking in
function. The FBA team will then
generate specific strategies to address
the hypothesized need.
An important difference between
the strategies selected in response to an
FBA with those created at the Tier 2
level is that the FBA-generated
strategies will be tied to a specific
students’ profile and data collection
process and will require additional data
collection for monitoring. In addition,
Tier 3 strategies tend to be more time
intensive and reflective of
individualized services. Although
educators can identify almost any
behavioral support through the FBA
process and therefore consider the
support a Tier 3 strategy, researchers
have identified several strategies as
effective in teaching replacement
behaviors for students with intensive
behavioral needs. Two of these
strategies are social skills instruction
and self-monitoring.
Social Skills Instruction. For many
students with behavioral challenges, it
is difficult to reinforce desired
behaviors because students are either
not exhibiting these behaviors with any
frequency or the students do not
possess the behaviors from the
beginning. These desired behaviors
include basic skills in social and peer
interactions. Specific skills that can be
taught include alternatives to
aggression, dealing with feelings,
dealing with stress, negotiating
interpersonal communication such as
joining a group or conversation or
convincing others of your point, and
planning skills such as goal setting or
decision making.
Three tenets of social skills
instruction are as follows:
 All behaviors are learned; therefore,
appropriate, adaptive behaviors can
be taught and learned by all
students.
 Social skills instruction should be
customized to meet individual
students’ communication and
behavioral needs.
 Social skills instruction cannot be
considered successful until the skill
is generalized to new settings
(Schoenfeld, Rutherford, Gable, &
Rock, 2008).
Although many different social skills
curricula exist, a fundamental
instructional approach cuts across most
programs–model, lead, reinforce,
practice, and monitor.
Self-Monitoring Instruction. The
majority of self-monitoring
interventions include the following
steps:

126 council for ExcEptional childrEn
 Identification of a target behavior.
 Soliciting buy-in from the student
on the advantages of
self-monitoring.
 Defining the method for monitoring
and collecting data on the behavior.
 Teaching the student to self-monitor.
 Implementing the self-monitoring
system with reinforcement.
 Fading the teacher monitoring
(Ganz, 2008).
Educators can customize self-
monitoring systems to meet individual
students’ needs. For example, a young
student may benefit from tokens or other
physical manipulatives to track his or her
behavior; in contrast, an older student
can make use of a graph to document
progress. Self-monitoring systems are
relatively low-cost and effective tools to
increase desired student behaviors.
Finally, Randi and Colleen needed to
address the behaviors of the two
students with IEPs. First they conducted
an FBA on both students. Using data
from the analysis, they decided to teach
and implement a self-monitoring
system for the student who was not
completing his work. To get the student
excited about the new process, they
enlist the art teacher with whom the
student has a close relationship. He will
serve as the “reinforcer”; and when the
student meets his individual goals, he
will report his success to the art teacher.
For the student who is fighting on the
playground, Randi and Colleen work
with the school counselor to set up a
social skills group with several other 6th
grade students from other classes. The
counselor will work with the students
on anger management, appropriate
social interactions, and other issues
that may be individual to the students.
Why a Tiered Framework for
Behavior?
An RTI model provides a framework
for teachers to evaluate classroom
practices and make decisions about the
level of intervention or support needed.
Effective instruction and clear
expectations can go a long way in
many classrooms. Some teachers jump
to a Tier 2-level support when it may
not be warranted. Other teachers may
have Tier 2 supports in place, such as a
reinforcement system, but have
neglected the foundation of a core
“curriculum” of prevention. That is, the
classroom lacks rules, routines and
procedures to support appropriate
behaviors. Similar to RTI for academic
achievement, a high-quality core
curriculum must be in place before
examining student-specific concerns.
Without a solid “core” of behavioral
support in the classroom, students do
not have the guideposts necessary to
learn, practice and develop desirable
skills. Students with disabilities require
specialized instruction for academic
and behavioral needs. A tiered-model
of behavioral support ensures that
students with disabilities, whether in
inclusive or self-contained settings, will
receive appropriate levels of support.
The tiered behavior framework allows
teachers to clearly communicate with
administrators, parents, and colleagues
how they are providing those
behavioral supports for students in
their classrooms.
References
Anderson, J. (2002). Individualized
behavior contracts. Intervention
in School & Clinic, 37, 168.
doi:10.1177/105345120203700306
Browers, A., & Tomic, W. (2000). A
longitudinal study of teacher burnout
and perceived self-efficacy in classroom
management. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 16, 239–253. doi:10.1016/
S0742-051X(99)00057-8
Cook, M. N. (2005). The disruptive or
ADHD child: What to do when kids
won’t sit still and be quiet. Focus on
Exceptional Children, 37, 1–8.
Emmer, E. T., & Stough, L. M. (2001).
Classroom management: A critical
part of educational psychology, with
implications for teacher education.
Educational Psychologist, 36, 103–112.
doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3602_5
Evertson, C. M., Emmer, E. T., & Worsham,
M. E. (2006). Classroom management for
elementary teachers (7th ed.). Boston,
MA: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Filcheck, H. A., McNeil, C. B., Greco, L. A.,
& Bernard, R. S. (2004). Using a whole-
class token economy and coaching of
teacher skills in a preschool classroom to
manage disruptive behavior. Psychology
in the Schools, 41, 351–361. doi:10.1002/
pits.10168
Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (2006). A framework
for building capacity for responsiveness
to intervention. School Psychology
Review, 35, 621–626.
Ganz, J. B. (2008). Self-monitoring across
age and ability levels: Teaching students
to implement their own positive
behavioral interventions. Preventing
School Failure, 53, 39–48. doi:10.3200/
PSFL.53.1.39-48
Greenwood, C. R., Horton, B. T., & Utley,
C. A. (2002). Academic engagement:
Current perspectives on research and
practice. School Psychology Review, 31,
328–349.
Hakenberg, T. D. (2009) Token
reinforcement: A review and analysis.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis
of Behavior, 91, 257–286. doi:10.1901/
jeab.2009.91-257
Haydon, T., Mancil, G., & Van Loan, C.
(2009). Using Opportunities to Respond
in a General Education Classroom: A
Case Study. Education and Treatment of
Children, 32(2), 267–78. doi: 10.1353/
etc.0.0052
Heering, P. W., & Wilder, D. A. (2006). The
use of dependent group contingencies to
increase on-task behavior in two general
education classrooms. Education and
Treatment of Children, 29, 459–468.
Hulac, D. M., & Benson, N. (2010). The use
of group contingencies for preventing
and managing disruptive behaviors.
Intervention in School & Clinic, 45, 257–
262. doi:10.1177/1053451209353442
Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2003). The
wrong solution to the teacher shortage.
Educational Leadership, 60(8), 30–33.
Kamps, D., Greenwood, C., Arreaga-Mayer,
C., Veerkamp, M. B., Utley, C., Tapia,
Y., Bowman-Perrott, L., & Bannister, H.
(2008). The efficacy of classwide peer
tutoring in middle schools. Education
and Treatment of Children, 31, 119–152.
doi:10.1353/etc.0.0017
Kauffman, J., Mostert, M., Trent, S., &
Pullen, P. (2006). Managing classroom
behavior: A reflective case-based
approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson.
Kelshaw-Levering, K., Sterling-Turner,
H. E., Henry, J. F., & Skinner,
C. H. (2000). Randomized
interdependent group contingencies:
Group reinforcement with a
twist. Psychology in the Schools,
37, 523–533. doi:10.1002/1520-
6807(200011)37:6xxx523::AID-
PITS5yyy3.0.CO;2-W

TEACHING ExcEptional childrEn | novEmbEr/dEcEmbEr 2014 127
Kerr, M. M., & Nelson, C. M. (2006).
Strategies for addressing behavior
problems in the classroom (5th ed.).
Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Kretlow, A., Wood, C., & Cooke, N. (2011).
Using in-service and coaching to
increase kindergarten teachers’ accurate
delivery of group instructional units.
The Journal of Special Education, 44(4),
234–46. doi: 10.1177/0022466909341333
Lannie, A. L., & McCurdy, B. L. (2007).
Preventing disruptive behavior in the
urban classroom: Effects of the Good
Behavior Game on student and teacher
behavior. Education and Treatment
of Children, 30, 85–98. doi:10.1353/
etc.2007.0002
Lee, D. L. (2006). Facilitating transitions
between and within academic tasks.
Remedial and Special Education, 27,
313–317. doi:10.1177/07419325060270
050601
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in
schools: Translating research into action.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Marzano, R. (2010). High expectations for
all. Educational Leadership, 68(1), 82–4.
Marzano, R. J., & Marzano, J. S. (2003).
The key to classroom management.
Educational Leadership, 61(1), 6–13.
McKown, C., & Weinstein, R. (2008).
Teacher expectations, classroom context,
and the achievement gap. Journal of
School Psychology, 46(3), 235-61. doi:
10.1016/j.jsp.2007.05.001
National Center on Response to
Intervention. (2010, March). Essential
components of RTI: A closer look at
response to intervention. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education,
Office of Special Education Programs,
National Center on Response to
Intervention.
Randolf, J. J. (2007). Meta-analysis
of the research on response cards:
Effects on test achievement, quiz
achievement, participation, and off-task
behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 9, 113–128. doi:10.1177/1
0983007070090020201
Redl, F., & Wineman, D. (1952). Controls
from within: Techniques for the
treatment of the aggressive child. New
York, NY: Free Press.
Sandomierksi, T., Kincaid, D., & Algozzine,
B. (2007). Response to intervention and
positive behavior support: Brothers from
different mothers or sisters with different
misters? Positive Behavioral Interventions
and Supports Newsletter, 4(2), 1–8.
Schoenfeld, N. A., Rutherford, R. B., Gable,
R. A., & Rock, M. L. (2008). ENGAGE: A
blueprint for incorporating social skills
training into daily academic instruction.
Preventing School Failure, 52(3), 17–27.
doi:10.3200/PSFL.52.3.17-28
Sprick, R., & Daniels, K. (2010). Managing
student behavior. Principal Leadership,
11(1), 18–21.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2009).
Responsiveness-to-intervention and
school-wide positive behavior supports:
Integration of multi-tiered system
approaches. Exceptionality, 17, 223–237.
doi:10.1080/09362830903235375
Sutherland, K. S., & Oswald, D. P. (2005).
The relationship between teacher and
student behavior in classrooms for
students with emotional and behavioral
disorders: Transactional processes.
Journal of Child and Family Studies, 14,
1–14. doi:10.1007/s10826-005-1106-z
Sutherland, K. S., & Snyder, A. (2007).
Effects of reciprocal peer tutoring and
self-graphing on reading fluency and
classroom behavior of middle school
students with emotional or behavioral
disorders. Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders, 15, 103–118. doi:
10.1177/10634266070150020101
Sutherland, K. S., & Wehby, J. H.
(2001). Exploring the relationship
between increased opportunities to
respond to academic requests and the
academic and behavioral outcomes
of students with EBD. Remedial
and Special Education, 22, 113–121.
doi:10.1177/074193250102200205
Tanol, G., Johnson, L., McComas, J.,
& Cote, E. (2010). Responding to
rule violations or rule following: A
comparison of two versions of the
Good Behavior Game with kindergarten
students. Journal of School Psychology,
48(5), 337–55. doi: 10.1016/j.
jsp.2010.06.001
Wubbels, T., & Brekelmans, M. (2005). Two
decades of research on teacher-student
relationships in class. International
Journal of Educational Research, 43,
6–24. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2006.03.003
Zirpoli, T. J. (2008). Behavior management:
Applications for teachers. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson.
Kristin L. Sayeski, Assistant Professor,
Department of Communication Sciences and
Special Education, University of Georgia;
Monica Brown, Professor, Department of
Educational and Clinical Studies, University
of Nevada, Las Vegas
Address correspondence concerning this
article to Kristin L. Sayeski, Department
of Communication Sciences and Special
Education, 517 Aderhold Hall, Athens, GA
30602 (e-mail: ksayeski@uga.edu).
TEACHING Exceptional Children,
Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 119–127.
Copyright 2014 The Author(s).

CopyrightofTeachingExceptionalChildrenisthepropertyofSagePublicationsInc.andits
contentmaynotbecopiedoremailedtomultiplesitesorpostedtoalistservwithoutthe
copyrightholder'sexpresswrittenpermission.However,usersmayprint,download,oremail
articlesforindividualuse.