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

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

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

Overview PBIS Plus

Sample31 elementary schools that have:

– High fidelity PBIS– Interested in assistance supporting “yellow-zone” studentsCounty 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

Overview PBIS Plus

Data Collected - Fall 2007:Staff Survey = 1,444 staffTOCA = 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

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…..

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

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)

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

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

Differences between FBA and FBT

Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) Function-Based Thinking (FBT)

A process and a product Requires formal assessment and analysis

of comprehensive data Involves multiple team members Requires individual trained in behavior

analysis or functional assessment Typically a lengthy and intensive

assessment and intervention process Not often used as a preventative measure,

but rather instituted when more

problematic behaviors arise

A quick systematic way of thinking that

informs the selection of effective function-

based supports

A preliminary step, prior to an extensive

FBA

Only requires the teacher and an individual

knowledgeable of behavior management to

facilitate the learning process for teachers

Draws from the research-based components

of FBA

Designed to be used as an early intervention

strategy with mild to moderate behavior

problems

Designed to be used prior to involving the

student support team or outside supports

3 steps of FBT

1. Gathering informationEmphasize data already collected by teachers

2. Development of a planEnsuring interventions match functionMatches teacher style and comfort level

3. Evaluation/monitoring of the planSimple

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”

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)

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

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)

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

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

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

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

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

See handout #1: The Three Steps of FBT

See handout #2

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

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

Strategies to Implement FBT

Teacher willing and able Training in FBT On-going coaching Evaluation

(Fixsen, Naoom, Blasé, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005).

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

What did the student do ?(Be specificMeasurable /observableWhat, when, who, )

How do I feel? What do I usually do?What do I say?What do I look like/sound like?

As a result, what does the student do?

What is maintaining the behavior?Why is it happening?

Student shoved his book on the floor in the direction of his neighbors feet when I asked the class to begin working independently on their math assignments

I feel startled at first and then I get anxious

I usually send him to the office to conference w/the principal. I tell him, “Go straight there – do not pass go…”

He spends the remainder of math class waiting for the principal to see him.

AvTI believe he escaping to the office to avoid independent work in math.

Adapted from Cooperative Discipline- Linda Albert-

AA =Access adult attention; AP =Access peer attention; AC =access to choice; AI =Access to item; AvP = Avoid peer attention; AvA =Avoid adult attention; AvT = avoid task

Activity : Staff Response Form

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).

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).