Behavioral Trajectories During Middle Childhood: Differential Effects of the School-Wide Positive Behavior Support Model

Abstract

The aims of this study were to assess the longitudinal trajectories of externalizing problem behavior during middle childhood among typically developing children and to examine subgroup differences in the effectiveness of the School-Wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS) model, called N-PALS in Norway. Participants were approximately 3000 students, and behavioral assessments were performed by class head teachers at four time points from the 4th or 5th grade through the 7th grade. Using a combination of latent class growth analyses (LCGA) and growth mixture modeling (GMM), four distinct trajectory classes were identified, i.e., persistent low (84.4%), persistent high (2.5%), decreasing (7.9%), and increasing (5.3%). An indication of a significant positive effect of the N-PALS model was found for students with a persistently high-risk trajectory. The current study adds to the evidence that this school-wide prevention model can moderate the development of externalizing behavior problems among children and youth.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s11121-018-0938-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Impact of the School Environment on Medical Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Population‐Wide Register Data Study of School‐Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

“…For example, whereas effects on classroom order have been found in Norway, previous studies have not found any intervention effects on bullying victimization, poor school behavior, academic achievements, school dropout, and youth crime (Borgen et al., 2019, 2021). Moreover, whereas a previous study from Norway found short‐term effects on behavioral outcomes for a 2.5% high‐risk group only (Sørlie et al., 2018), a U.S. study found effects of SWPBIS both for high‐risk (6.6%) and for at‐risk (23.3%) students (Bradshaw et al., 2015). One explanation for intervention effects for a broader group of students in the United States is that the prevalence of behavioral problems, including ADHD, is higher in the United States than in Norway (Rescorla et al., 2012).…”

“…Evaluations of SWPBIS in Norway has found positive intervention effects on behavioral outcomes (Sørlie, Idsoe, Ogden, Olseth, & Torsheim, 2018; Sørlie & Ogden, 2015) and classroom order (Borgen et al., 2019), with the overall intervention effects driven by effects for the 2.5% of students with persistent high behavior behavioral problems (Sørlie et al., 2018). No effects have been found for students on a persistent low (84.4%), decreasing (7.9%), or increasing (5.3%) trajectory of externalizing behavior problems (Sørlie et al., 2018). Likewise, no effects of SWPBIS have been found on short‐term academic achievement, bullying victimization, or school well‐being (Borgen et al., 2019) and the long‐term probability of dropout and youth crime (Borgen et al., 2021).…”

Knowledge and Will: An Explorative Study on the Implementation of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support in Sweden

“…Although PBIS has shown promising results in previous research, these results have shown to be dependent on the implementation (Bradshaw et al, 2008 ; Horner et al, 2009 ; Dix et al, 2012 ; Flannery et al, 2014 ; McIntosh et al, 2014 ; Sørlie et al, 2018 ). Initial implementation is one of the most critical stages in program implementation (Nese et al, 2016 ), and this study used an implementation model of behavior change, COM-B, to investigate enablers and barriers in the initial implementation of PBIS in Swedish schools.…”

“…The evidence base of the PBIS is extensive, and is related to positive behavioral, academic, and organizational outcomes (Bradshaw et al, 2010 , 2012 ; Horner et al, 2010 ; Solomon et al, 2012 ; Gage et al, 2018 ; Mitchell et al, 2018 ). However, the effectiveness of PBIS is dependent on the quality of its implementation (Bradshaw et al, 2008 ; Horner et al, 2010 ; Dix et al, 2012 ; Flannery et al, 2014 ; McIntosh et al, 2014 ; Sørlie et al, 2018 ). In fact, schools have been shown to vary widely in their fidelity to and implementation rates of the approach (Buzhardt et al, 2006 ; Lee and Gage, 2020 ), and there is often a gap between research and practice when preventive programs are implemented in schools (Wandersman et al, 2008 ).…”

Heterogeneity in Short- and Long-Term Impacts of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS) on Academic Outcomes, Behavioral Outcomes, and Criminal Activity

“…Using a differencein-difference (DiD) design, we investigate whether SWPBS affects short-term test scores and long-term academic grades, high school dropout, school behavior, and youth crime. While previous research from Norway has not found any short-term effect of SWPBS on bullying and school wellbeing (Borgen, Kirkebøen, Ogden, Raaum, & Sørlie, 2019), research has found effects on other behavioral outcomes (Sørlie, Idsoe, Ogden, Olseth, & Torsheim, 2018;Sørlie & Ogden, 2015) and classroom order (Borgen et al, 2019). Consequently, this paper investigates whether the short-term effects of SWPBS on behavioral outcomes in Norway produce a durable impact on academic failure and marginalization.…”