Action Research Project

A STUDY OF PBIS AT EDISON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
A Study of The Effectiveness of PBIS At

Edison Elementary in Detroit, Michigan
A report submitted by
Felecia Hemingway, Cassandra Moore and Tamiko Walton
Lindson Feun, Ph.D.
Oakland University
May 2021
2
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………… .4
Abstract………………………………………………………………………..5
Chapter 1 - Introduction……………………………………………………….6
● Background
● Assumptions and Limitations
● Evaluation/Research Questions
Chapter 2 - Review of the Literature………………………………………….9
● Introduction
● Literature Review
● Tier 1 (Primary) Support
● Tier 2 (Secondary) Support
● Tier 3 (Tertiary) Support
● Check-In/Check-Out Behavior Intervention & PBIS
Chapter 3 - Method of Study………………………………………………….18
● Overview
● Selection of Subjects
● Evaluation/Research Design
● Description of Instruments
● Data Analysis
● Summary
Chapter 4 - Results of the Study……………………………………………..21
● Triangulation of Data
● Data Source 1: Counselor Interview
● Data Source 2: Principal Interview
● Data Source 3: Teacher Survey
● Data Source 4: I-Ready
● Discussion of the Results
Chapter 5 - Conclusions and Recommendations……………………………29
● Conclusions
● Recommendations
● Implications for Future Evaluation/Research
References…………………………………………………………………..32
Appendices………………………………………………………………….34
3
Appendix A - Principal Permission Letter…………………………..34
Appendix B - Teacher Survey……………………………………….35
Appendix C - Principal Interview……………………………………37
Appendix D- Counselor Interview…………………………………...38

4
Acknowledgements
A special thank you to Principal, Akeya Murphy, and her staff for allowing us to conduct
our research for PBIS at Edison Elementary. We would also like to thank Dr. Lindson Feun for
his continued support and guidance through the action research project. As well as Oakland
university for providing us with the resources and experience to develop our research skills.
5
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Positive Behavior
Intervention Systems (PBIS) at Edison Elementary School. PBIS is a three-tiered systems
framework for schools to establish social and behavior support to increase academic gains and
reduce problem behavior across all students using evidence-based practices. PBIS creates
schools where all students succeed. Teachers and students in grades 3-5 participated in this
study, along with the principal and the guidance counselor. Student achievement data was
collected from i-Ready diagnostic assessments. Overall, PBIS is beneficial to the teachers and
the students of Edison Elementary. Including measures of decreased student office disciplinary
referrals and increased student achievement. Due to COVID-19, research at Edison Elementary
has been limited during the 2019-20 school year.

6
Chapter 1
Introduction
Background
Edison Elementary School of Detroit Public Schools Community District is
located on the northwest side of Detroit in Rosedale Park. Edison has a total population of 382
students and has a mixture of general, as well as Montessori classrooms that range from grades
preschool to fifth grade. Edison’s community is a lower to middle-class socioeconomic group. A
total of 98% of students are of African-American descent and 100% of students receive free
lunch. Due to Detroit’s total socioeconomic status, all students are offered free breakfast and
lunch throughout the entire district.
Edison has one Exceptional Student Education teacher and eleven resource students.
Teachers are platooned in grades K-2. One teaching ELA and Social Studies, and the other
teaching Math and Science. Teachers in grades 3-5 are departmentalized with a separate teacher
for all subjects: ELA, Math, Science, and Social Studies. Teachers in grades K-1 are supported
by three paraeducators, and teachers in 2-5 are supported by two academic interventionists.
Montessori teachers are self-contained with classrooms that hold preschool and kindergarteners,
first and second graders, and another of second through fifth graders. Each Montessori classroom
is supported by two or three aids depending on the student population. Twice a week, we meet
with a school psychologist, social worker, and a speech therapist. There is a full-time
Department of Human Services employee and attendance agent on staff. Principal, Akeya
Murphy, and Assistant Principal, Kenneth Hall, are the instructional leaders in the building.
There are two Master Teachers, one for ELA and another for Mathematics.
In spring 2019, Edison students completed the first i-Ready diagnostic with scores that
were unimpressive to say the least. A total of 14.6% of students in grades third through fifth
7
scored proficient on the reading diagnostic and 2.6% of students scored proficient on the
mathematics diagnostic. i-Ready Diagnostic is an adaptive assessment designed to provide
teachers with actionable insight into student needs. It offers a complete picture of student
performance and growth, eliminating the need for multiple, redundant tests. By adapting to
student responses and assessing a broad range of skills—including skills above and below a
student’s chronological grade—the i-Ready Diagnostic pinpoints student ability level, identifies
the specific skills students need to learn to accelerate their growth, and charts a personalized
learning path for each student.
The PBIS program has been at Edison for five years. The program focuses on building
wide expectations of behavior in all settings of the school building (“i.e.,” arrival, dismissal,
hallways, restrooms, playground, lunchroom, and classrooms). The PBIS committee focuses on
monthly office disciplinary referrals and puts in place plans to address any concerns within the
data. Suspension rates in the building made a significant increase in the beginning of the school
year, with 60 suspensions between September and October of 2019.
The PBIS committee created an action plan to implement cool down spots, a check-in/
check-out system, and weekly, as well as monthly incentives for positive reinforcement.
“Previous research suggests that Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) can reduce
student disciplinary office referrals and out-of-school suspensions, especially when implemented
with fidelity” (Houches, Zhang 2017). The action plan was put into place to lower high
suspension rates in the building.
Assumptions and Limitations

8
An assumption to be made is that parents, students, and teachers all responded accurately
and honestly to the surveys. Since the study was completed at one school, the results cannot be
generalized to other schools. The school selected is a sample of convenience and cannot be
generalized to other schools. Limitations may include that there is no measurable way to
determine if PBIS is connected to student achievement, and schools were mandated to provide
virtual instruction beginning in March for the remainder of the school year.
Evaluation/Research Questions
1. To what extent does PBIS reduce the student office disciplinary referral rate?
2. How does PBIS affect student achievement?
3. How does PBIS affect the attitudes of students toward learning?

9
Chapter 2
Review of the Literature
Introduction
The current paper examines how the implementation fidelity of an increasingly popular
and widely disseminated prevention model called School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions
and Supports (SW-PBIS) relates to student outcomes at Edison Elementary School. The school is
located within an urban district where a lack of resources, poverty, homelessness, and
unemployment impact many citizens. Abandoned buildings and dilapidated homes are what the
children are exposed to as they travel throughout their community. There is established literature
supporting the efficacy of various prevention programs used throughout the state, but PBIS
seems to target a particular audience within the schools directly. The goal is to examine the PBIS
program outcomes for two years to determine if the program's overall implementation would
provide positive results, such as decreased suspensions and behavioral referrals, yet increase
attendance and overall academic achievement.
The PBIS program has been implemented within Detroit Public Community District for
years. Our findings will consist of surveys, data, feedback from teachers, parents, and
administrators to determine what is working and what needs improvement. The district is
pushing the program because of the legislature, school officials, community leaders, and parents
calling for the school districts to have a proactive approach to student behaviors. Literature
Review discusses the research on the various components of the PBIS process. The literature is
substantial and is supportive of PBIS programs in schools. Researchers Chitiyo & May 2018
suggest increasing legislative demands on schools to provide safe and orderly learning
environments have resulted in a greater emphasis on the use of school-based prevention
programs. Local school districts and prevention scientists turn to school-wide prevention models,
10
such as Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, to promote a positive school climate and
reduce behavior problems.
Childs et al. (2016) suggest educators are under increasing pressure to improve urban
schools' climate and safety. Unfortunately, schools have addressed school safety concerns by
increasing exclusionary measures such as suspensions and expulsions. Knowing that
exclusionary measures can have detrimental effects, state legislatures have called for more
proactive strategies for positive student behavior and increased school climates. School-Wide
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS) is a systems approach to establishing
the sociocultural and behavioral supports needed for all children to achieve social and academic
success (Childs et al., 2016). Over the past 30 years, several studies have documented the
effectiveness of SWPBIS. This growing body of research supports improvements in disciplinary
behavior, school climate, organizational health, student bullying behavior and peer victimization,
and academic achievement. SWPBIS is a systems framework for schools to establish social and
behavior support to increase academic gains and reduce problem behavior across all students
using evidence-based practices. Childs et al. (2016) suggest the primary features of SWPBIS
include (a) capitalizing on the prevention of problem behavior, (b) teaching appropriate social
behavior and skills, (c) acknowledging appropriate behavior, (d) using a multitiered approach to
instruction/intervention that matches behavior support intensity to student need, (e) using data-
based problem solving, and (f) investing in systems that support evidence-based practices
(Childs et al., 2016).

11
Literature Review
According to PBIS (2019), the goal of PBIS is to create a positive school climate in
which students learn and grow; however, school climate can vary widely from school to school.
Several factors affect school culture and climate, including location, demographic of the
neighborhood student diversity, and school administration. Positive Behavior Intervention and
Support (PBIS) is a model of promoting positive school behavior and was developed by Horner,
Sugai, and others at the University of Oregon in the 1990s (Martin, 2016). PBIS is based on the
concept that positive behavior can be taught, and the school environment is the adaptive place to
promote this behavior. PBIS is an evidence-based approach to preventing and addressing
problem behaviors at school (Martin, 2016).
According to researchers Chitiyo and May (2018), problem behavior has become one of
the most pressing issues in school settings over the past decade. It is estimated that
approximately 12% to 22% of school-aged children engage in problem behavior that interferes
with their learning, and the numbers continue to grow (Chitiyo & May 2018), resulting in an
increased awareness of the need for practical approaches to school discipline. Traditionally,
school personnel have responded to the occurrence of problem behavior using punitive strategies
(i.e. automatic expulsion, suspension, detention, seclusion, and time-out procedures).
Unfortunately, most of these strategies have not been effective in reducing the occurrence of
problem behavior in school settings (American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task
Force (Chitiyo & May 2018).
Chitiyo, J., & May, M. E. (2017). Focus on the factors predicting the sustainability of the
schoolwide positive behavior intervention support model. Coffey, J. H., & Horner, R. H. (2012).
Provide information on the sustainability of schoolwide positive behavior. Houches G.W; Ph.D.,
12
Zhang J; Davis K; Niu C; Chon K.H; Miller S. (2017). Shared the impact of positive behavior
intervention and supports teachers’ perceptions of teaching conditions and student achievement.
Martin, A. (2016). Supporting Positive Behavior Change for At-Risk Students provided
information on the best practices. Oliver, R. M., Lambert, M. C., & Mason, W. A. (2017). A
Pilot Study for Improving Classroom Systems Within Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support.
Perle, J. G. (2016). Teacher-Provided Positive Attending to Improve Student Behavior.
The National Education Association (2014) views PBIS as a global education initiative,
though its impetus is derived from the special education law, the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) 1997. The NEA believes that PBIS improves the social culture and the
behavioral climate of classrooms and schools, which ultimately leads to enhanced academic
performance. Referred to as Positive Behavioral Interventions and Support in IDEA, PBIS is the
only approach to addressing behavior that is specially mentioned in the law. As a result, school
administrators have turned to schoolwide prevention models that articulate expected behaviors,
provide incentives for students who meet behavioral expectations, and establish a consistent
strategy for managing problem behavior (Chitiyo & May 2018). Researchers Coffey and Horner
(2012) believe that education research has made significant advances in defining effective
practices, or evidenced-based, in improving students’ academic and social outcomes. Using
evidence-based practices with fidelity is more important than ever as schools, districts, and state
departments of education strive to close the gaps between the achievement of students with
disabilities and their peers. According to Coffey and Horner (2012), practitioners cannot afford
to “experiment on students with practices that have not been proven. Instead, students need to be
given the best possible chance for succeeding by receiving instruction and supports that have an
13
evidence base. Although the content of the evidence-based practice, or innovation, is critical, it is
insufficient to ensure academic or behavioral success (Coffey and Homer 2012).
Teachers of today, for example, have multiple roles, daily classroom managers,
critical holders of information, social workers, and sometimes parents. Unfortunately, disruptive
behaviors rob the teacher of her ability to teach the lesson, but most importantly, it robs the other
students of their ability to learn and grow. Despite years of research and continued focus on
classroom management issues, translating research on evidence-based classroom management
programs into practice remains elusive Oliver & Lambert, Mason (2019). The increase in
aggressive and delinquent behaviors in schools throughout the country has reached critical
proportions (Safran & Oswald, 2003). Perle, J.G. (2016), despite their best effort, teachers quite
frequently observe students becoming off task or exhibiting disruptive behavior (e.g., calling out,
arguing, noncompliance, tantrums). Mainly, inattention, overactivity, and noncompliance have
long been cited as some of the most common areas of reported difficulty for schools. The
increase in aggressive and delinquent behaviors in schools throughout the country has reached
critical proportions (Safran & Oswald, 2003). Alarmed parents, students, and lawmakers expect
educators to respond more effectively by incorporating more “get tough” and “zero tolerance”
policies. Researchers Chitiyo & May 2018 suggests one prevention model that is now widely
implemented in schools is the schoolwide positive behavior intervention support model
(SWPBIS). The SWPBIS model is a conceptual framework focused on facilitating the social and
academic success of all students, including students with disabilities, by using positive and
proactive research-validated behavioral interventions. The frame comprises three tiers, namely,
primary, secondary, and tertiary tier (Chitiyo and May 2018). At the primary tier, school
personnel deﬁne behavioral expectations and routines for the entire student body, and rewards
14
are provided to students who meet behavioral expectations. The secondary level focuses on
specialized group interventions designed for students at risk of exhibiting problem behavior.
Third-tier interventions are highly individualized to meet the needs of each student if
reinforcement for proactive behaviors in primary interventions or group instruction in secondary
interventions is less effective at reducing problem behavior (Chitiyo and May 2018).
Tier I (Primary) Support
According to PBIS rewards (2019), Tier 1 systems, data, and practices impact everyone
across all settings. They establish the foundation for delivering regular, proactive support and
preventing unwanted behaviors. Tier 1 emphasizes prosocial skills and expectations by teaching
and acknowledging appropriate student behavior. Teams, data, consistent policies, professional
development, and evaluation are essential components for these practices to work effectively.
The core principles guiding Tier 1 PBIS include the understanding that we can and should:
• Effectively teach appropriate behavior to all children
• Intervene early before unwanted behaviors escalate
• Use research-based, scientifically validated interventions whenever possible
• Monitor student progress
• Use data to make decisions
Tier 2 (Secondary) Support
According to PBIS rewards (2019), The PBIS Tier 2 practices and systems provide
targeted support for students who are not successful with Tier 1 supports alone. The focus is on
helping students who are at risk for developing more severe problem behavior before they start.
15
Tier 2 supports often involve group interventions with ten or more students participating.
Specific Tier 2 responses include practices such as social skills groups, self-management, and
academic supports. Targeted interventions, like these, implemented by typical school personnel,
are likely to demonstrate positive effects for up to 67% of referred students. Tier 2 interventions
are:
• Continuously available
• Accessible within 72 hours of referral
• Very low effort by teachers
• Aligned with school-wide expectations
• Implemented by all staff/faculty in a school
• Flexible and based on assessment
• Function-based
• Allocated adequate resources
• Students choose to participate
• Continuously monitored
Tier 3 (Tertiary) Support
According to PBIS rewards (2019), the PBIS framework doesn’t just work with school-
wide and targeted support. It’s also an effective way to address sometimes dangerous, often
highly disruptive behaviors creating barriers to learning and excluding students from social
settings. At most schools, there are 1-5% of students for whom Tier 1 and Tier 2 support have
not connected. At Tier 3, these students receive more intensive, individualized support to
improve their behavioral and academic outcomes. Tier 3 strategies work for students with
16
developmental disabilities, autism, emotional and behavioral disorders, and students with no
diagnostic label at all.
Check-In/Check-Out Behavior Intervention & PBIS
PBIS rewards (2019) provide initiatives to improve school culture and climate by
teaching and reinforcing positive behaviors. Many students in any given school will not need
supports beyond Tier 1. However, for the roughly 15% of students who need behavior
intervention support beyond the support of Tier 1 PBIS implementation, there is Tier 2. The
Check-In/Check-Out behavior intervention is a commonly used option for behavior supported
within Tier 2. Tier 2 interventions provide additional support for students who need more
assistance to meet their goals socially, emotionally, and academically.
The objective of Tier 2 is to provide students with the tools to self-govern, allowing them
to move back into Tier 1. There are several interventions at this level to assist in that goal.
Because Tier 2 interventions apply to a subset of students overall, each intervention can be
personalized to each student’s needs. The Check-In/Check-Out behavior intervention is one such
customizable tactic. As a Tier 2 intervention in PBIS, Check-In/Check-Out (CICO) can give
students a boost and allow them to meet behavioral goals that can lead them back to Tier 1.
Check-In/Check-Out intervention forms can be customized to reflect behaviors that need
additional focus. Teachers provide feedback to the student on these behaviors throughout the
day. Reasons to use CICO in your PBIS implementation:
• Provides structure in a student’s day
• Creates accountability
• Provides teacher feedback to student and parents
• Creates internal motivation

17
• Improves student behavior
• Increases academic success
• Creates a stronger home-school connection

18
Chapter 3
Method of Study
Overview
All students at Edison Elementary School participate in PBIS. Each classroom has a cool
down spot for students who need a mental break to recharge or reset. Targeted students based on
previous referral rates check-in with a specific teacher every morning before going to their
regular class and then again in the afternoon before going home. Students are also offered
weekly and monthly incentives to behave appropriately such as, dances, movies, activities, and
games. Students earn behavior points on an app called Class Dojo. When a student has earned
points on Class Dojo, students may go down to the PBIS store and spend their points on an item
from the store. At the end of every month, there is a celebration that rewards good behavior.
Students with an average of 80% of positive behavior on Class Dojo participate in a celebration
at the end of each month. All consent forms are in Appendix A.
Selection of Subjects
Students at Edison Elementary School in grades kindergarten through fifth grade. The
building consists of 363 students in total. In third grade, a total of 53 students. In fourth grade, a
total of 59 students. In fifth grade, 50 students in total. Ethnic backgrounds consist of 99.8%
African American students and 0.2% Caucasion students. One hundred percent of students at
Edison receive free and reduced lunch.
Evaluation/Research Design
To collect data, we administered student, teacher, and parent surveys. Students were
administered surveys in the classroom. Staff were administered surveys in a staff meeting.
19
Parents were given a link for a survey online. All surveys were administered in April 2020.
PowerSchool monthly discipline referral data was collected to watch any trends of behavior
changes during PBIS implementation; Reading and mathematics i-Ready diagnostics from
September 2019 compared to May 2020 diagnostic and compared the scores.
Description of Instruments
Instruments to collect data include i-Ready diagnostic test results. i-Ready is an adaptive
assessment that determines the grade level of a student in reading and mathematics. i-Ready
diagnostics are given to students three times a year: September, January, and May. Students are
expected to reach their annual typical growth by the end of each school year. The annual typical
growth is set at about one year’s worth of growth for each student. A survey was administered to
all Edison teaching staff that engaged with PBIS in their classrooms during the 2019-20 school
year. The 11-question survey was a combination of 5-point Likert scale statements and open-
ended responses.
Data Analysis
Data has been analyzed from i-Ready diagnostic in September 2019 compared to May
diagnostic 2020 in subjects reading and mathematics. With the teacher survey, the percentage of
the responses on the Likert scale were calculated and two open-ended responses were
summarized. Discipline referral rate is the percentage of students who received referrals for each
incident, along with the violation classification from September to February.

20
Summary
All students participated in PBIS. During the interview the principal, counselor and
teachers staff, and students were provided a survey. The principal administered the survey during
the staff meeting, students took the survey during class, parents survey was available online. The
data from the survey had some common themes like a number of the students were new to the
school. Due to the pandemic normal activities were eliminated and the stress level for everyone
was at an all time high. The Edison staff ensured PBIS implementation happened daily, weekly,
and monthly by providing incentives such as movies, activities, and games. Students earned
points through Class Dojo and had the opportunity to shop at the PBIS store. At the end of every
month, 80% of the students with positive behavior were eligible to participate in the monthly
celebration. One hundred percent of students at Edison receive free and reduced lunch. Our
research collected data using surveys from students, teachers, and parents during school hours.
Powerschool mentored the progress relating to behavior changes during the time PBIS
implementation period. A comparison of reading and mathematics scores for I-Ready
diagnostics results is from September 2019 to May 2020. To collect data, we administered
student, teacher, and parent surveys. Students were administered surveys in the classroom. Staff
were administered surveys in a staff meeting. Parents were given a link for a survey online. All
surveys were administered in April 2020.

21
Chapter 4
Results of the Study
Triangulation of Data
To answer our research questions, we used a triangulation of data that included four data
sources consisting of both qualitative and quantitative methods: a counselor interview, principal
interview, a teacher survey and 2019-2020 i-Ready scores. The first source was an interview
conducted with the school counselor. The counselor was asked nine open-ended, short-answer
questions with hopes of responses that detailed her personal account of experiences with PBIS.
The second source was a similar interview conducted with the principal, also responding to nine
open-ended, short-answer questions regarding her experiences with PBIS at Edison. The third
source was a survey administered to all Edison Elementary teaching staff involved with PBIS.
The survey consisted of 11 questions that provided information regarding the impact of PBIS on
their students. It included nine 5-point likert scales, and two open-ended responses that allowed
for specific details and additional comments. During the research I-ready during the 2019-2020
school year was conducted which provided data that the third, fourth and fifth graders increase
performance at the final diagnostic compared to when the first took the assessment at the
beginning of the school year.
Data Source 1: Principal Interview
See Appendix C
1. How did students show they understood the PBIS expectations during the 2019-20 school
year?
22
Our students knew the Edison way. We had a large influx of new students. It was a
challenge teaching them the Edison way. This also had an impact on students that were originally
with the school. We had PBIS assemblies, worked with the guidance counselor/school facilitator.
It taught character development. Posted expectations on banners throughout the school (hallway,
bathroom, classrooms, lunchroom, gym).
2. How was Class Dojo used daily in the building?
It was used as a behavior management tool. Students were able to earn points for positive
behavior. Lose points for inappropriate behavior. Parents are notified of all behavior points given
or taken away. Teachers can communicate with parents through the app as well. It encouraged
more parent engagement.
3. What was the benefit of cool down spots in classrooms?
It gives a child a time out in a safe space for a child to be able to return to their normal
space without increasing their level of anxiety. And they do not have to leave the classroom. Safe
place for the child to go to and reflect and decompress.
4. How were PBIS monthly celebrations an effective incentive for students?
The students enjoyed getting accolades, dances, arts and crafts, and games. The students
wanted to participate so they tried their best to go. Students who didn’t get to go were genuinely
upset.
5. How did the check-in, check-out program improve student behavior?

23
People were experiencing a lot of stress and anxiety with the influx of new students. It
was implemented too late (January). If it was used as preventative early on, it would have
worked better. It worked but was cut short due to covid.
6. How was positive student behavior acknowledged in the building?
Student of the month, Celebrations, attendance awards, honors awards, morning
announcements. Not only through PBIS, but also through other avenues.
7. How was inappropriate behavior addressed in the building?
Interventions by the teacher. By the parents/administration, guidance counselor. In school
suspension. Send a child to another room, cool down spots. And hearing officers at district level.
8. What worked best for our PBIS system during the 2019-20 school year?
The monthly celebrations and the team revising monthly, provided the time needed to
support students that participated.
9. How can PBIS be improved for the future?
Have an administrator that is specifically assigned to PBIS. The new Dean of Culture will
be assigned to work with the team to build more admin engagement. Ensuring that the staff owns
PBIS/expectations as well. If we grow the accountability, then we will not have to worry about
the small things. Parent ownership as well. Students owning their actions in school.
Data Source 2: Counselor Interview

24
See Appendix D
year?
The students showed they understood PBIS expectations through Class Dojo points
add/subtract behavior system, Currency for the school store (that was never really used),
recognition from teacher & administration
Class Dojo is used daily for behavior Incentives, for class dojo points - add/subtract
throughout the day, to communicate with parents & students re: classroom behavior i.e., sending
messages through dojo
The benefit of cool down spots in classrooms was to provide students with a get-a-way
from others to collect themselves throughout the day. It also provides a coping mechanism that
is positive - choosing to walk away from trouble. It is an overall positive solution for a students'
problem in some cases.
The PBIS monthly celebrations was an effective incentive for well- behaved students
because it rewarded them for doing what they always do, behave. Therefore, it was the same
students celebrated over and over and the same ones were continuously left out because of their
poor behavior. Also, Our PBIS celebrations were exciting and fun!!
25
Check In, check out improved student behavior according to some teachers. They stated
that overall, the students started taking ownership of the process and how the reports improved
over time. I think it was a success at Edison.
Positive student behavior was acknowledged in the building in many ways: dojo points
added, award ceremony - citizenship, student of the month, food incentives like pizza parties,
Edison addressed inappropriate behavior by subtracting dojo points, parent meetings,
meeting with school counselor or principal, sometimes both, In-school and Out of school
suspensions, outside counseling referrals, sent to another teacher's classroom to change student's
environment.
What worked best is well behaved students had incentive to continue behaving well.
Unfortunately, the more behaviorally challenged students did not rise to the level to secure an
invitation to the celebrations and were constantly excluded. Although they would have liked to
attend the celebrations, there were unable to change their behavior based on that motivation.

26
Our school could become a PBIS driven culture meaning an all-hands-on-deck
approach...all staff is responsible for PBIS. It would become more equitable for the students as
some teachers use dojo points regularly and others sporadically. We could talk about PBIS
more, so our students and parents are more aware of this systematic approach to improving
behavior, this will produce buy in. Also, one well behaved student and one behaviorally
challenged student could be added to the committee for valuable input and hopefully being a part
of the process will help the student with behaviors change it up and spread the change to friends
who need to change. Additionally, we could bring the Zen room back for students who are not
invited to the PBIS celebrations. Students should not be sitting on the sidelines watching the
event because there is no place for them to go. They should be excluded and unable to
experience any portion. The counselor (me) could integrate PBIS into Expect Respect lessons as
well.
Data Source 3: Teacher Survey
See Appendix B
A survey was administered to all Edison teaching staff that engaged with PBIS in their
classrooms during the 2019-20 school year. The 11-question survey was a combination of 5-
point Likert scale statements and open-ended responses. Edison has a verteran staff with
approximately 80% of teachers with 10 or more years of experience. One hundred percent of
teachers stated that they held clear, consistent expectations for their students, and acknowledged
as well as addressed positive and negative behaviors of students when they saw it. A total 66% of
teachers used Class Dojo in their classrooms on a daily basis. Of the total, 34% of teachers were
neutral in this area. Fifty percent of teachers responded neutrally to the effectiveness of cool
27
down spots in their classrooms, and the effectiveness of the monthly celebrations. Sixteen
percent of teachers responded that the check-in, check-out program did not improve student
behavior in their classrooms.
In the open-ended responses, teachers stated that the check-in, check-out program and the
monthly celebrations were a good idea for improving student behavior. Suggestions for
improving the program are posting and reinforcing clear expectations; allowing students to give
input for celebrations and rewards; and uniformity with the program and compliance from all
teachers to ensure 100% participation. All responses from the survey are anonymous and no
personal information was shared during the collection of survey data.
Data Source 4: i-Ready Diagnostic Scores
Data collection for math provides results from the 2019-2020 school year, providing a
comparison of the 1st assessment (Window 1) and the last assessment (Final Diagnostic). The
math results state that there were 53 third graders, and only 46 of the students took the
assessment. Out of 59 fourth graders, only 51 students' have data, and out of the 50 fifth graders,
the data shows 42 students took the assessment. At the beginning of the third-grade evaluation,
28% of the students performed one grade level behind; however, by the time they took the final
diagnostic, 30% were at grade level. When the fourth graders went for an assessment, only 8% of
the students were at grade level; however, the final evaluation shows 20% of the students
increased. During the fifth grade assessment, 26% of the students performed below grade level;
however, 19% increased. Data collection for reading provides results from the 2019-2020 school
year, providing a comparison of the 1st assessment (Window 1) and the last assessment (Final
Diagnostic). At the beginning of the third-grade evaluation, 11% of the students performed at
the grade level; however, 35% increased in performance. The fourth graders went for an
28
assessment; 13% were at grade level; however, the final evaluation shows 37% of the students
increased. During the fifth grade assessment, 20% of the students performed at grade level;
however, 29% increased achievement.
Discussion of the Results
The I-Ready diagnostic data from the 2019-2020 school year provided evidence that the
students in third through fifth-grade achievement scores increased in math and reading areas
compared to the first assessment. The data offered scores that show that some of the students
who were not at grade level made progress toward being proficient. It is undetermined if PBIS
contributed to the improvement of academic performance.
The suspension rate significantly decreased from 60 in one month to less than 20 in
February 2020. Due to COVID-19, it is not certain if the improvement was a result of PBIS or a
decrease in attendance from the start of the pandemic. However, we do have survey data from
teachers that shows a positive trend in student behavior as a result of the PBIS program.
29
Chapter 5
Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions
After reviewing the data collected using the Likert scale, the assessment highlighted how
Edison Elementary promotes positive behavior using PBIS. Our research determines that PBIS is
effective when it is a part of the school culture, and everyone is promoting ways to increase
positive behavior. They work hard to ensure that the culture displays a positive atmosphere.
Edison pushes PBIS in different ways using Class Dojo, character development assemblies,
celebrations, and cool-down spots located throughout the building. Interviews were conducted
with the counselor, principal, and teachers to understand PBIS and its implementation. At
Edison, the school culture is PBIS driven, with everyone involved implementing PBIS with the
students; however, it wasn't consistent.
Even one day without the regularly assigned teacher not giving out the points or
rewarding the students may cause the research to have errors. The 2019-2020 school year was
unique because they received an influx of students who arrived and were not familiar with the
school norms. Thus, the intervention team worked hard to incorporate various assemblies
throughout the year, introducing students to the culture and the expectations. After reviewing the
data, we did not have 100% participation following PBIS. The breakdown is as follows 66% of
teachers used Class Dojo in their classrooms daily, and of that total, 34%, teachers were neutral.
Fifty percent of teachers responded neutrally to the effectiveness of cool-down spots in their
classrooms and the monthly celebrations' effectiveness. Sixteen percent of teachers responded
that the check-in the check-out program did not improve student behavior in their classrooms. As
a result, the data shows a lack of validity that PBIS helped support Edison with fewer
30
suspensions, attendance issues, and increased positive behavior. Further research needs to be
conducted.
Recommendations
The students that attended the Edison in the 2020 school year should be monitored for a
year to determine if PBIS is effective at Edison. Due to the large number of students entering the
school and the COVID-19 pandemic disrupting the regular school year, students could not have
full access to the incentives program that PBIS offers for positive behavior, attendance,
academics, etc. According to the three interviews, it would take time for the new students to
learn the school norms, participate in assemblies, and feel the school culture. The students could
not effectively utilize the check-in and check-out procedure which in the past was a great way to
acknowledge the desired behavior and redirect behaviors with coping mechanisms to use
throughout the school.
It is also recommended to increase accountability for staff implementation so that all
teachers are participating and implementing with consistency and fidelity. Furthermore, there
should be an increase of communication with students and parents regarding the culture and
climate of PBIS in the school.
Implications for Future Evaluation/Research
Edison Elementary has taken a comprehensive approach to the implementation of PBIS
to improve student behavior and academic achievement in the building. In the spirit of
continuous improvement, there are at least three areas of recommended future research with
Edison Elementary and their PBIS program:

31
1. Focus on improving the efficiency and effectiveness of tier III interventions such
as Check-in, Check-out. Also, consistently surveying teacher perspectives to
ensure the overall effectiveness of selected tier III interventions.
2. Collaborate with other schools utilizing PBIS in the district. Monitor what is
working and what is not in a PLC format. Research possible interventions that
help show desired results for the building.
3. Complete action research on possible factors outside of PBIS that contributes to
student behavior, such as Social Emotional Learning and fulfilled needs of the
Whole Child.
In conclusion, Edison Elementary engaged the majority of teachers and students in the
PBIS program. Teachers used preventative measures to manage student behavior as well as
targeting students for additional tier 2 and 3 support. Teachers and students enjoyed the monthly
celebrations and looked forward to them each month. The celebrations were a good tier 1
incentive for most students and the Zen room encouraged students to earn their way to the next
celebration. Tier 3 interventions can be researched and expanded upon for improvement. Overall,
Edison does a good job at implementing the PBIS program for students.
32
References
Chitiyo, J., & May, M. E. (2017). Factors predicting sustainability of the schoolwide positive
behavior intervention support model. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education
for Children and Youth, 62(2), 94–104. doi: 10.1080/1045988x.2017.1385446
Childs, K. E., Kincaid, D., George, H. P., & Gage, N. A. (2016). The Relationship Between
School-Wide Implementation of Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports and Student
Discipline Outcomes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(2), 89–99.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715590398
Coffey, J. H., & Horner, R. H. (2012). The Sustainability of Schoolwide Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports. Exceptional Children, 78(4), 407–422. doi:
10.1177/001440291207800402
Houches G.W; PhD, Zhang J; Davis K; Niu C; Chon K.H; Miller S. (2017). The impact of
positive behavior intervention and supports on teachers’ perceptions of teaching
conditions and student achievement. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,
19:3, 168-179.
Martin, A. (2016). Supporting Positive Behavior Change for At-Risk Students: A Best Practice
Checklist for Schools.
Oliver, R. M., Lambert, M. C., & Mason, W. A. (2017). A Pilot Study for Improving Classroom
33
Systems Within Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support. Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders, 27(1), 25–36. doi: 10.1177/1063426617733718
Perle, J. G. (2016). Teacher-Provided Positive Attending to Improve Student Behavior.
TEACHING Exceptional Children, 48(5), 250–257. doi: 10.1177/0040059916643707
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: A Multi-tiered Framework that Works for Every
Student. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/home/50899.htm
Safran, S. P., & Oswald, K. (2003). Positive Behavior Supports: Can Schools Reshape
Disciplinary Practices? Exceptional Children, 69(3), 361–373. doi:
10.1177/001440290306900307
34
Appendix A: PBIS Survey Principal Permission Letter
March 2020
Mrs. Akeya Murphy

Edison Elementary
17045 Grand River Ave,
Detroit, MI 48227
Dear Mrs. Murphy,
We are a part of an educational specialist cohort from Oakland University conducting action
research on the effectiveness of Positive Behavior Incentive Systems in an urban elementary
school. Our research questions are: To what extent does PBIS reduce the student office
disciplinary referral rate, how does PBIS affect student achievement, and how does PBIS affect
the attitudes of students toward learning?
We are asking for your permission to survey both your staff participating with PBIS. We would
like to conduct our surveys in late May towards the end of the school year. Prior to conducting
the surveys, we will get consent from parents, students, and staff. Their participation will be
voluntary and all information will remain anonymous. There is no risk in taking this survey.
Refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits and subjects and subjects may
discontinue participation at any time without penalty.
When the research is complete, the findings will be made public but no student information will
be identifiable as the survey is being completed anonymously. The information from our
research will benefit future students and staff as we plan on improving our implementation of
PBIS. We would appreciate your approval of this project. Please indicate your permission on the
form below and return it to Cassandra Moore. If you have specific questions regarding this
research project please contact Cassandra Moore at 313-415-1189 or Lindson Feun, Ph.D.,
Faculty Sponsor, Oakland University, 248-877-6565.
Sincerely,
Cassandra Nelson Felecia Hemingway Tamiko Walton
I give permission for the cohort group from Oakland University to conduct a survey of students
and staff participating in PBIS in the spring of 2020.
35
Appendix B: PBIS Teacher Questionnaire
1. I had consistent, clear expectations for my students during the 2019-20 school year.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
e. Strongly Disagree
2. My students understood my expectations of them.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
3. I used Class Dojo consistently (daily) in my classroom.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
4. Cool down spots were effective in my classroom.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
5. The PBIS monthly celebrations were an effective incentive for my students.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
6. I acknowledged positive student behavior when I saw it.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
7. I addressed inappropriate behavior when I saw it.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
36
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
8. The check-in, check-out program improved student behavior during the 2019-20 school
year.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
9. PBIS is an important part of our school community?
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
Short Answer Responses
10. What do you think worked best for our PBIS system during the 2019-20 school year?
11. How can we improve our PBIS system in the future?
37
Appendix C: PBIS Principal Interview
year?
38
Appendix D: Counselor Interview
year?

Action Research Project

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Action Research Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A STUDY OF PBIS AT EDISON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

A Study of The Effectiveness of PBIS At

Lindson Feun, Ph.D.

Appendix B - Teacher Survey……………………………………….35

Appendix C - Principal Interview……………………………………37

Appendix D- Counselor Interview…………………………………...38

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Positive Behavior

Intervention Systems (PBIS) at Edison Elementary School. PBIS is a three-tiered systems

has been limited during the 2019-20 school year.

Edison Elementary School of Detroit Public Schools Community District is

preschool to fifth grade. Edison’s community is a lower to middle-class socioeconomic group. A

lunch throughout the entire district.

mathematics diagnostic. i-Ready Diagnostic is an adaptive assessment designed to provide

student’s chronological grade—the i-Ready Diagnostic pinpoints student ability level, identifies

learning path for each student.

year, with 60 suspensions between September and October of 2019.

suspension rates in the building.

Assumptions and Limitations

2. How does PBIS affect student achievement?

3. How does PBIS affect the attitudes of students toward learning?

attendance and overall academic achievement.

environments have resulted in a greater emphasis on the use of school-based prevention

reduce behavior problems.

increasing exclusionary measures such as suspensions and expulsions. Knowing that

Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS) is a systems approach to establishing

effectiveness of SWPBIS. This growing body of research supports improvements in disciplinary

(Childs et al., 2016).

promote this behavior. PBIS is an evidence-based approach to preventing and addressing

problem behaviors at school (Martin, 2016).

(i.e. automatic expulsion, suspension, detention, seclusion, and time-out procedures).

Force (Chitiyo & May 2018).

Perle, J. G. (2016). Teacher-Provided Positive Attending to Improve Student Behavior.

practices, or evidenced-based, in improving students’ academic and social outcomes. Using

insufficient to ensure academic or behavioral success (Coffey and Homer 2012).

classroom management issues, translating research on evidence-based classroom management

arguing, noncompliance, tantrums). Mainly, inattention, overactivity, and noncompliance have

implemented in schools is the schoolwide positive behavior intervention support model

reinforcement for proactive behaviors in primary interventions or group instruction in secondary

Tier I (Primary) Support

• Effectively teach appropriate behavior to all children

• Intervene early before unwanted behaviors escalate

• Use research-based, scientifically validated interventions whenever possible

• Monitor student progress

• Use data to make decisions

Tier 2 (Secondary) Support

• Accessible within 72 hours of referral

• Very low effort by teachers

• Aligned with school-wide expectations

• Implemented by all staff/faculty in a school

• Flexible and based on assessment

• Allocated adequate resources

• Students choose to participate

Tier 3 (Tertiary) Support

diagnostic label at all.

Check-In/Check-Out Behavior Intervention & PBIS

Check-In/Check-Out behavior intervention is a commonly used option for behavior supported

assistance to meet their goals socially, emotionally, and academically.

customizable tactic. As a Tier 2 intervention in PBIS, Check-In/Check-Out (CICO) can give

Check-In/Check-Out intervention forms can be customized to reflect behaviors that need

day. Reasons to use CICO in your PBIS implementation:

• Provides structure in a student’s day

• Provides teacher feedback to student and parents

• Creates internal motivation