The Social Validity of Program-Wide Positive Behavior Support

Abstract

In preschool settings, the majority of interventions are individualized for children at high risk for challenging behavior. However, a few early childhood sites have begun to conceptualize and implement prevention and intervention initiatives modeled after the principles and key features associated with school-wide positive behavior support. In preschool settings, these efforts are referred to as program-wide positive behavior support (PWPBS). This article presents the findings of a descriptive evaluation in which 62 key stakeholders participated in focus group interviews to assess the social validity of a PWPBS initiative in the 1st year of implementation and to provide recommendations for how to improve the implementation effort. Other data sources included teacher surveys and classroom observations related to PWPBS goals and procedures, conducted intentionally to contextualize the social validity data gathered through the interviews. Results suggest that key stakeholders enthusiastically support the goals of the approach; perspectives about the procedures and outcomes varied considerably. Classroom observation and teacher survey data augment the qualitative data. Implications for model conceptualization and technical assistance efforts are discussed.

The Evaluation of a Three-Tier Model of Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports for Preschoolers in Head Start

“…Other studies have reported an increase in the use of PBIS practices following program implementation, which reflect program improvement (Fox & Hemmeter, 2009;Frey et al, 2010;Muscott, Pomerleau, & Szczesiul, 2009). For example, Fox and Hemmeter (2009) found that early childhood teachers and program teams in Iowa made progress in the implementation of the Teaching Pyramid model as measured by the Teaching Pyramid Observation Tool (TPOT) and the Early Childhood Benchmarks of Quality.…”

“…These models address the prevention of problem behavior and promotion of social competence in young children, and are portrayed as a pyramid with three tiers of increasing intervention intensityTier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 (Dunlap, Ester, Langhans, & Fox, 2006;Fox, Dunlap, Hemmeter, Joseph, & Strain, 2003;Stormont et al, 2007). Multiple publications and training materials have provided guidance on the implementation of these models in early childhood settings (e.g., Benedict, Horner, & Squires, 2007;Fox, Carta, Strain, Dunlap, & Hemmeter, 2010;Frey et al, 2010;Hemmeter, Fox, Jack, Broyles, & Doubet, 2007). These studies report positive child outcomes (e.g., reductions in problem behavior, increases in social competence) and program outcomes (e.g., improvements in program quality and teacher skills, reduction of child referrals for mental health intervention).…”

“…Program-wide positive behavior support (PWPBS) and the Teaching Pyramid are emerging models for preventing problem behavior in early childhood programs, such as Head Start (HS) and early childhood special education (ECSE) classrooms (e.g., Fox & Hemmeter, 2009;Frey, Park, Browne-Ferrigno, & Korfhage, 2010;Stormont, Lewis, Beckner, & Johnson, 2007). Both models use the PBIS framework that has been widely applied in K-12 settings.…”

Supporting parent engagement in programme-wide behavioural intervention implementation

“…This shift is marked by the emergence of schoolwide PBIS initiatives. PBIS models are designed to improve young children's social and emotional competence and prevent chronic challenging behaviours (Frey, Park, Browne-Ferrigno, & Korfhage, 2010;McCabe & Frede, 2007). School-wide PBIS efforts have been found to be effective for reducing challenging behaviours (Bradshaw, Mitchell, & Leaf, 2010).…”

Teacher motivation as an enhancement to the first step to success early intervention program for children with tertiary level behavioral challenges.

“…Social validity includes the evaluation of interventions by those involved in its implementation and those who receive the intervention, to examine the social significance of intervention goals, the appropriateness of procedures, and the importance of outcomes (Frey, Park, Browne-Ferrigno, & Korfhage, 2010;Schwartz & Baer, 1991).…”