1

HOW CAN WE EFFECTIVELY INCLUDE STUDENTS WHO HAVE

BEHAVIOUR DESIGNATIONS IN MAINSTREAM HIGH SCHOOL
CLASSROOMS?

By

Kristin Singbeil

B.A., B.Ed., Vancouver Island University, 2010

A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF EDUCATION
In
Special Education

VANCOUVER ISLAND UNIVERSITY

NANAIMO, BRITISH COLUMBIA
August 2014

2
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge and thank the students and families
that I have worked with. Without this amazing group of people I would
not have had the curiosity and aspiration to further explore ways in
which I could better support my students.
I would also like to thank Dr. Mary Ann Richards for her
suggestions, support and never-ending willingness to help during the
initial stages of my research. As well, for her frequent reminders to
take a break and enjoy the sun.
To my classmates in this program, I have learned so much from
discussions with each one of you, whether in class or online. In
particular, I would like to thank my library study buddy, Razan Chaar
for always keeping me motivated.
Most importantly, I would like to thank Dr. Amina Turton for the
countless hours spent working with me to complete this project. I very
much appreciate the knowledge and resources she has shared with
me. Her guidance, support, encouragement, and understanding
allowed me to always feel that I had a sense of direction, especially
when I was feeling most overwhelmed. From the beginning, Aminas
enthusiasm enabled me to feel that my work had a purpose and
showed that she was as interested and invested in this project as I
3
was. I could not have asked for a more dedicated and encouraging
advisor. Thank you.




















4
Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction6
Personal Perspective6
Emotional Behavioural Disabilities..9
Attachment.9
Overview of Study..12
Chapter 2: Literature Review for Models that Support
Behaviour13
Introduction..13
Positive Behavioural Interventions and Supports..14
Functional Behavioural Assessment..17
Reading and Behaviour...19
Response to Intervention...19
Attachment Theory.21
Reactive Attachment Disorder.........23
Interventions for Teachers...23
Chapter 3: Literature Review for Inclusion of Children with
0Behaviour Designations24
Inclusion..24
Strategies and Interventions..26
Current Studies..28
5
Areas Requiring Further Research..32
Summary....35
References.38



















6
Chapter 1: Introduction
Personal Perspective
Prior to starting my career as a teacher, what intimidated me
most was knowing that I would be faced with challenging behaviour
from some of my students. Though I had taken a course and attended
workshops on classroom management, I did not feel that I was
prepared nearly enough to manage a whole class of adolescents,
especially after learning that some may fall under a designation
category as requiring intensive behaviour intervention.
For example, consider the story of Jack, a fictionalized 14 year
old who would throw anything he could get his hands on - staplers,
binders, etc. whenever he became frustrated. He was well known by
his counselor and the school administration and had been suspended
multiple times for fighting. Sometimes he would burst into tears for no
apparent reason. This would cause him to bully other students in the
class as a result of him not liking his peers to see him cry. Jack was
designated as a category H for intensive behaviour. His story
represents one of many complicated students whom I want very much
to be able to help.
Now in my forth year of teaching, I have worked as a Student
Support teacher in both secondary and elementary schools as well as a
secondary school Skills for Life teacher. These experiences have
7
allowed me to work with many students designated as either a
category H or R. Category H refers to Students Requiring Intensive
Behaviour Intervention or Students with Serious Mental Illness as
defined on the B.C. Ministry of Education website. It is estimated that
these students, who require the most intensive interventions, make up
less than 1% of the school population. Regular classroom behaviour
strategies are not sufficient for these students and they have a need
for additional support. Students with this designation require
documentation of a behavioural assessment and an IEP that addresses
the students behaviour and social-emotional needs; Category R is
defined by the B.C. Ministry of Education as Students Requiring
Moderate Behaviour Support or Students with Mental Illness. Students
with this designation may demonstrate anxiety, stress, aggression or
social problems. In order to receive this designation, these students
must display a frequency or severity of disruptive behaviour over an
extended period of time and in more than one setting (Special
Education Services: A Manual of Policies, Procedures and Guidelines,
05/21/14).
After working with many students with behaviour designations in
both categories H and R, I quickly realized that the students
themselves were very interesting to speak with, at times very
intelligent and often quite pleasant. Nevertheless, I still had concerns.
8
However, my concern had changed from a student focus to the
manner in which the school, as well as others in the district, chose to
work with these students. It became clear to me that what we are
doing currently is often not the most effective way to support our
students with challenging behaviour.
I wondered if the academic subjects could be the issue. The
disruptions in class time due to behaviour definitely took away from
the available work time. Moreover, other students in the class were
being affected as well. What I realized is that sometimes students with
behaviour designations are being moved out of the regular classroom
and into support blocks with students who have learning disabilities.
This is a move that, for a short time, can resolve the original
classroom disruption, but quickly becomes problematic as the new
setting dos not provide access to all supports that the students need
such as curriculum, support staff experience and appropriate context.
As a student support teacher, my classes all grew in size throughout
the semester; more students were being brought up in school based
team meetings or had received multiple office referrals and as a result
were placed within the support teachers class. One could ask
themselves if these particular students do not work well in the regular
classroom, why would putting them all together in a support room at
the same time create an environment that is conducive for any of the
9
students to learn? I found that the majority of my time was spent
dealing with behaviour issues, rather than supporting students
academically.
Emotional Behavioural Disabilities
In British Columbia, the Ministry of Education defines a child with
special needs as a student who has a disability of an intellectual,
physical, sensory, emotional or behavioural nature, has a learning
disability or has special gifts or talents (Special Education Services: A
Manual of Policies, Procedures and Guidelines, 03/21/14, p. 1).
Students who have disabilities of a behavioural nature may be
consistently disruptive, antisocial, aggressive, anxious, stressed or
may have been diagnosed as having severe mental illness. Ministry
guidelines state that in order to meet the needs of these students,
reduction in class size (or placement in an alternate program or
learning environment) is not by itself a sufficient service (Special
Education Services: A Manual of Policies, Procedures and Guidelines,
03/21/14, p. 2). The policies and procedures indicate that as teachers
and districts, we need to develop programs or strategies in an effort to
properly support these students in their classrooms.
Attachment
Many of the students who were designated in either the H
10
(Students Requiring Intensive Behaviour Intervention or Students with
Serious Mental Illness) or R (Students Requiring Moderate Behaviour
Support or Students with Mental Illness) category were living in foster
care, with friends, other family members, or even on their own. Could
this factor play a role in the student outcomes? As a result I became
curious as to whether attachment theory or conditions such as
Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD) could possibly be used to explain
a link between the students various home environments, childhood
experiences, and the behaviour being displayed as adolescents in high
school.
Attachment theory, formed by John Bowlby, focused on the
importance of having a primary caregiver, a secure base, in a childs
life. Bowlby notes that the figure who generally serves this purpose is
the childs mother; when he wants to cling or follow or to find a haven
of safety when he is frightened, she is the figure who commonly
provides the needed object. It is for this reason that the mother
becomes so central a figure in the infants life (1958). Viewing
behaviour through the perspective of an attachment theorist could be
a way to explain how students relate to teachers and other students.
Attachment theorists believe that a secure attachment sets the stage
for later relationships and helps children form positive, self-fulfilling
expectations about other people (McDevitt & Ormrod, 2007, p. 414).
11
Parker and Forrest (1993) reported that schools are beginning to
recognize that many of the behavioral problems that require a great
deal of time and energy emanate from attachment issues. Attachment-
disordered children do not seem to fit into the regular classroom or
even into the special education classroom (p. 211). Our current
education system often does not provide a context where students
with behaviour designations can build a sense of belonging without an
ever-increasing pull towards more restricted school settings.
The lack of inclusion of these students is problematic on many
levels, which needs to be addressed. Removing them from their
regular classrooms to place them in support blocks seems to be a
method of exclusion rather than inclusion. Further, it did not address
the issue at all of the behaviour. It may have momentarily created a
better learning environment for the mainstream classroom, but for the
student, the problem only moved to a new room when they did and
will continue to do so if not fully addressed. McNamara and Moreton
also address this issue by explaining that exclusion offers only
temporary relief to the pupil and the to the school. In the long term it
changes nothing. For the pupil it means that the same behaviours
need to be addressed in another environment or later in life (p. 2,
2001). In regards to removing students from their regular classrooms,
Jull indicates that in many schools this practice is accepted as an
12
appropriate means for responding to antisocial or disruptive behaviour.
However, the effectiveness and even appropriateness of this practice is
questionable, given exclusions interrupt educational continuity for
these students at a time when they require increased supports (p.
490, 2009). This exemplifies the need to be aware of inclusion when
using strategies and programs to support students with behaviour
designations.
Overview of Study
Working with challenging students can be a source of frustration
for many teachers, both in regular classrooms and in special
education. McNamara and Moreton indicate that in regards to working
with students who display challenging behaviours, the usual
consequence for teachers is a feeling of frustration; they want the
children to change their behaviour so that the children get better
outcomes. They are concerned about the destructive climate that is
created for the rest of the class as they know it impedes learning, but
the usual strategiesjust do not seem to work for these children (p.
11, 2001). At any grade level, working with behaviour-designated
students is something that as teachers, we will all face with at some
point in our careers. My hope is that the work on this topic will not
only be valuable to myself, but may also be beneficial to other
teachers who are working in similar situations.
13
The aim of the research paper is to document the research that
supports best practice. The goal being to find out what types of
programs and interventions are available that are effective in
decreasing behaviour challenges. The main research question being:
How can we effectively include students who have behaviour
designations in mainstream high school classrooms?
As colleagues in special and regular education, there is much to
learn from each other. This I have experienced in my career. For this
reason I will be taking the information that I have learned and sharing
it with others who may also have an interest. I have created a website
with information and research designed specifically for use by
secondary school teachers. There is also a piece within it that is for the
support of our students with behavioural challenges. My hope is that
this information may be transferable to other teachers with questions
similar to mine.

Chapter 2: Literature Review for Models that Support Behaviour
Introduction
This research explores issues affecting student behaviour and
possible strategies that teachers can use to successfully include
students with behavioural designations in their mainstream
classrooms. Research indicates that challenging behaviour displayed
14
by students could be exhibited as a result of an attachment disorder,
emotional difficulties, or a lack of important thinking/processing skills.
In order to create inclusive secondary school classrooms where
students with behaviour designations can function appropriately with
their typically developing peers; teachers, whether regular or special
education, need to be equipped with strategies and interventions that
can assist these students. Examples of these strategies include self-
monitoring and collaborative problem solving. This literature review
has been divided into six sections. The first section addresses
attachment theory in relation to working with students who have
challenging behaviour. The second section focuses on Reactive
Attachment Disorder, the third on inclusion, the fourth section centers
on strategies and interventions for working with students with difficult
behaviour, the fifth section of this literature review will identify studies
that have been completed around the topic of behaviour and finally,
the last section will describe areas requiring further research.
Positive Behavioural Interventions and Supports
Positive Behavioural Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a
multi-tiered, school-wide approach to creating a positive school
environment while reducing challenging behaviour. PBIS focuses on
the school as a whole, rather than on individual students and their
behaviour. Bradshaw (2013) states that the attitudes and efforts of
15
teachers are essential to the successful implementation of PBIS by
writing that PBIS aims to change adult behaviour and the way adults
interact with students to promote consistency across school contexts
(p. 289). The whole school environment needs to be changed,
including the way we, as teachers, handle behaviour problems. Instead
of just punishing individual students in an effort to change their
behaviour, PBIS considers the reason the behaviours are occurring and
proactively teaches students appropriate behaviours for different
settings. With PBIS focusing on prevention rather than consequences,
Lampron and Gonsoulin (2013) indicate the programs benefits stating
that the strategies that promote youth engagement in programming,
inclusive of education and treatment, serve to promote positive
outcomes for youth and establish a promising and constructive
environment where both staff and youth are successful and safe (p.
164). The most challenging and time-consuming behaviours are
generally observed in a small percentage of students. This small group
of students will make up most of the behaviour challenges seen in
schools. Response to Intervention, a PBIS strategy can help all
students, including the small group who may take up a significant
percentage in terms of effort and resources. These are the students
who may require the supports and interventions available in level two
or three, such as increased academic support and monitoring,
16
intensive individualized supports for academics or behaviour, and
intensive social skills training in addition to level one supports, such as
positive reinforcement and an understanding of school and classroom
expectations. Dunlop (2013) points out that the multi-level framework
for PBIS stresses the importance of not assigning labels to childrena
child is not a tier three child, he is a child receiving tier three
supports, and potentially only for a few subjects or behavioural
challenges (p. 38). Challenging behaviour is often the cause for a
students removal from their classroom, or suspension from the
school. PBIS can help reduce these occurrences, thereby working to
include the students with their peers. With continued feedback on
positive behaviour, individualized interventions and less unnecessary
discipline, PBIS helps to create a safer school environment that is
more conducive to learning. Figure 1. depicts a three level approach to
PBIS with the supports provided at each level (Newcomer, 2006).
17


Figure 1. Positive Behaviour Support Model
Functional Behavioural Assessment
One of the key aspects of prevention in PBIS is conducting a
Functional Behavioural Assessment (FBA). FBA includes a direct
observation and recording of the behaviour, including noting what
happened directly before the behaviour occurred, exactly what the
behaviour looks like, and what the outcome or consequence was. This
can be done through the use of an Antecedent, Behaviour and
Consequence (ABC) chart. Scott, Nelson & Zabala (2003) state that to
be effective in a proactive manner, FBA should be used with students
6
18
at the first sign of misbehavior (p. 216). A FBA will allow teachers to
determine exactly what behaviour is causing problems in the
classroom and decide on something that the student could be doing
instead which would replace their challenging behaviour. Barnhill
(2005) points out the importance of using a FBA in stating that
interventions that are selected without the use of FBA could
strengthen a problem behaviour and not provide alternative
reinforcements for more desirable behaviour (p. 132). While FBA has
typically been conducted by a psychologist, Scott, Nelson & Zahala
indicate a shift to a team approach, such as an IEP team, for
collaboration and responsibility this change requires all adults in the
school to consider their responsibility in the care and treatment of
students with challenging behaviours (p. 218). For this to become a
reality, more training on behaviour, strategies and interventions, as
well as familiarity with the FBA process, is necessary for all teachers.
Our goal with a FBA is to reduce problem behaviours and expert
referrals in an effort to keep students in their mainstream classrooms.
Dukes, Rosenberg & Brady (2008) add to the need for change in the
way we look at respond to behaviour stating that the wide scale use
of punishment procedures highlights the continual emphasis on a
narrow range of behaviour change methods, in spite of the availability
of many empirically validated methods (p. 163).
19
Reading and Behaviour
A correlation exists between behaviour and reading challenges.
Mooney, Benner, Nelson, Lane, and Beckers (2007) state that research
suggests that 31%-81% of students with EBD (Emotional Behavioural
Disorders) have reading delays, with the majority of those deficits
ranging from about one-half year to more than 2 years behind
expected reading levels (p.3). Typically reading is only taught at the
elementary level, and at the secondary school level it would be
unusual to see a teacher focus a lesson on learning how to read. Yet
Spencer, Carter, Boon and Garcia-Simpson indicate it is a
misconception to think that reading can only be addressed in a
language arts, English or reading class and that to effectively teach
content, it would be impossible not to teach reading (2008, p. 7).
Knowing the importance of reading, it is evident that reading
instruction should not stop with a particular grade or subject. Reading
needs to be addressed by all teachers.
Response to Intervention
Response to Intervention (RTI) is a multi-level approach
designed to provide the supports required by each student to achieve
academic and behavioural success. Typically the RTI model has three
tiers with the primary intervention consisting of the general education
program; secondary intervention involving fixed-duration, targeted,
20
evidence-based small group interventions; and the tertiary
intervention involving individualized and intensive services (Bradley,
Danielson & Doolittle, 2005, p. 486). Figure 2. Shows the three tiered
RTI model. In earlier grades, prevention is often the goal of RTI,
however, Vaugh & Fletcher (2012) indicate that by the time students
are in fourth grade and certainly by secondary school, the intention of
prevention is no longer really feasible (p. 248). For this reason,
students may require a more intense level of intervention than moving
consecutively through the levels would provide. Moreover, Prewett,
Mellard, Deshler, Allen, Alexander & Stern (2012) also indicate that
there is an uncertainty about the success of RTI in secondary schools,
yet by conducting a study they found that RTI has the potential to be
a practical and effective school-wide framework for ensuring academic
and behavioural success for students. Issues such as school
scheduling, class size, collaboration time and professional development
for teachers need to be addressed for successful implementation.
Fuchs, Fuchs & Compton (2012) suggest that in regards to RTI,
prevention should be thought of as working with students to help
them steer clear of school dropout, unemployment, incarceration, poor
health, and other life-limiting sequelae of inadequate academic
performance (p. 270). While RTI is gaining in use across many
districts in Canada and the United States, implementing it can be quite
21
difficult. Castro-Villarreal, Rodriguez & Moore (2014) note that for a
model so complex to be successful, training, support, leadership and
coordination from a team of educators is required.


Figure 2. Response to Intervention Model
Attachment Theory
John Bowlbys Attachment Theory developed as a result of his
work for the World Health Organization on the mental health of
homeless children (Bowlby, 1969). Bowlby explains that as part of
typical emotional development, children need to form an attachment
to a primary caregiver, generally a parent, who they use as a secure
base (Bowlby, 1958; Bowlby, 1973; McDevitt & Ormrod, 2007).
Children who do not form this primary attachment can experience
22
effects that continue throughout their lives. Such long-term effects are
indicated by Bowlby (1973) as he explains that adult personality is
seen as a product of an individuals interactions with key figures during
all his years of immaturity, especially of his interactions with
attachment figures (p. 208). Attachment theory can be used as a
possible method for explaining why some students display more
challenging behaviour than others.
Gordon Neufelds more recent work with attachment theory
supports earlier views as he indicates that in regards to diagnosed
children, it is not the oppositionality the counterwill that is out of
order but the childs attachments. These children are only being true
to their instinct in defying people to whom they do not feel connected
(2004, p. 77). As well, from discussions with students, O'Connor,
Hodkinson, Burton & Torstensson (2011) found that in regards to
behaviour, students felt it did not matter so much what interventions
teachers used; what mattered was the relationships between the
teachers and the students. This indicates the need for teachers to work
on developing a relationship and creating mutual respect with their
students. Parker and Forrest (1993) state, Attachment-disordered
children are often bright but tend to act out, bully, frighten, or even
harm other children at the school. Parker and Forrest (1993) go on to
indicate that many adopted children or those in foster care may
23
experience this disorder if they had never been attached to a primary
caregiver; Foster home programs are finding that these unattached
children cannot be cared for with average or even above average
parenting skills. Further, that students with attachment disorders may
also display inappropriate behaviour. Possible symptoms that are
indicated can include but are not limited to, cruelty, lack of control,
and lack of long term friends. Hornor (2007), who has also completed
much research on attachment disorder, supports the need for
developing a secure base. She states that it is essential to an
individuals mental health. Attachment relationships provide the
framework for the formation of an individuals sense of self and others
that guide their emotional and behavioural reactions and set the
course toward interpersonal competence or incompetence.
Reactive Attachment Disorder
Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD) is characterized as
disturbed and developmentally inappropriate social relatedness
usually beginning before age 5 (Hornor, 2007). Mikic and Terradas
indicate that it is not unusual for children with RAD to develop a false
self in order to protect themselves (2014, p. 44). In regards to
Reactive Attachment Disorder and education, Chapman (2002) points
out that in the classroom she successfully used immediate, simple,
achievable task[s] to focus children away from possible triggers to
24
their insecurities (p.94) As seen when looking at attachment theory,
children in foster care are not only at a greater risk for not forming a
secure attachment base, but their risk for having Reactive Attachment
Disorder increases as well. Issues that exist in the diagnoses RAD are
a lack of assessment tools and the fact that symptoms are often quite
similar to other disorders or behaviours (Fritz, 2013; Hornor, 2007).
Moreover, the name itself is often a source of confusion. Minnis,
Marwick, Arthur and McLaughlin (2006) suggest that a name change
could be beneficial as RAD is a social impairment syndrome rather
than a core disorder of attachment. For students with RAD, Cline
(2008) indicates that their behaviour serves a purpose, which is
empowerment. By creating incredible chaos, these kids are able to
empower themselves (Cline, 2008, p. 54).

Chapter 3: Literature Review for Inclusion of Children with
Behaviour Designations
Inclusion
British Columbias Special Education policy (2011) states that
inclusion goes beyond placement to include meaningful participation
and the promotion of interaction with others (p. V). However,
teachers are faced with the ongoing challenge of trying to include
students with behavioural, emotional or social difficulties in a regular
25
classroom. Studies involving teachers have indicated that there is
insufficient training for teachers in the area of special needs to engage
these students and reduce behaviour disruptions (Goodman & Burton,
2010; Jull, 2009). Furthermore, teachers often question whether
relying on additional support staff adheres to the definition of
inclusion. Goodman, 2010 and McNamara & Moreton, 2001 indicate
that the current practice of placing students with behavioral
designations in support classes or working with paraprofessionals
actually works to exclude rather than include the students. Inclusion
does not automatically happen just by attending a school; Goodman
states, if the majority of a pupil's education is received outside of
mainstream classes in isolation from peers, then it seems s/he is more
excluded than included (2014, p. 235 ). Moreover, Jull (2009) states
that in removing a student from their peers and classroom that,
schools might exclude students at the very moment when academic
and social support is most needed (p. 493) thereby indicating the
importance for finding ways to include our students with behavioural
designations in their mainstream classrooms. As teachers, it is
essential to ensure that all students are included. While a student may
be able to learn in a support room, the social aspect of education,
being with peers and able to learn from each other, is lacking. In
addition, students miss the opportunity to learn socialization skills that
26
can help them throughout their lives. King and Newnham (2008) point
out that intervention activities targeted for certain students can
actually end up benefitting the class as a whole. They state that the
class could receive benefit from exercises aimed at building and
strengthening the internal feeling of trust equals confident
anticipation which combines the idea of relying appropriately on peers
and leads to an internalization of this trust in oneself(King &
Newnham, 2008). When students are part of an inclusive classroom,
they are able to learn from each other as well as from the teacher.
Therefore, it is important to consider some strategies that could be
used in a mainstream classroom to include students with behaviour
designation.
Strategies and Interventions
With the focus on including students with challenging behaviour
in their regular classrooms, research indicates that there are strategies
that have been shown to provide useful support. Two of the strategies
that teachers have found successful are having students learn to self-
monitor (SM) and using Collaborative and Proactive Solutions (CPS)
with their students. Both of these interventions can be used in
mainstream classrooms and do not require the student to be excluded
from their peers.
27
Self-monitoring is an intervention used by educators to target
and improve behaviour. Students with challenging behaviour benefit
from being taught how to self-monitor performance and attention in
order to assess their behaviour and compare it to a target behaviour
(Andrew, Wills Lloyd & Kennedy, 2012). Self-monitoring has been
shown to work with students of different ages and abilities. The
strategy has also been a success for students with special needs.
Gulchak (2008) conducted a study involving the use of technology with
self-monitoring. Students were provided with and taught how to use
hand-held devices to monitor their behaviour rather than using paper.
Results of the study found that on-task behavior increased from a
mean of 64% during baseline to a mean of 98% at the conclusion of
the study (p. 576). Further studies on self-monitoring and their
success with students point out that self-monitoring can be done
easily, and in a variety of different ways, by using checklists, mood
pictures and technology (Jull, 2009). Self-monitoring gives students
some accountability and control over their own classroom behaviour.
Ross Greene (2008) explores his belief that students with
challenging behaviour lack important thinking skills. He indicates the
frustration that is felt by all with how ineffective schools are in dealing
with behaviour problems. As a strategy for working with students who
have difficult behaviour, Greene introduces Collaborative Problem
28
Solving (now known as Collaborative and Proactive Solutions). Greene
specifically notes that kids do well if they can, if they are
developmentally able to handle the situations and expectations placed
upon them. He indicates that there are three plans that can be used,
Plan A: adults imposing their will, Plan B: Collaborative and Proactive
Solutions and Plan C: dropping an expectation completely. Plan A is
typically what had been used by schools in the past. With Plan A,
adults make the decisions on consequences and rewards. In Plan B,
the adult works with the student, sharing their concerns while
demonstrating empathy for the students allowing both to work
together to decide on a mutually agreed upon solution. Plan C involves
putting the problem aside, at least for a certain period of time, rather
than focusing on a resolution. Greenes work exemplifies how using
Plan B is most beneficial to resolving difficult situations and building a
relationship, which as discussed earlier, is essential in working with
students who have behaviour designations.
Current Studies
Many studies have been done to explain why students display
challenging behaviour, or to discover the effectiveness specific
interventions have had with this group of students. Arbuthnot &
Gordon (1986) investigated the correlation between moral reasoning
and behaviour and the contribution cognitive development has to
29
behavioural disorders. The study consisted of 48 students in grades 7-
10 who were identified by their teachers as having behaviour disorders
and a high risk of delinquency. This particular study assessed the
effects of a sociomoral reasoning development program for
adolescents at high risk of having behaviour disorders with the
hypothesis that results would produce an advance in the moral
reasoning stage of the students as well as a significant improvement in
behaviour as evaluated by teachers. Students in the treatment group
attended moral dilemma discussions, active listening and
communication sessions, focused on rapport building and were
individually interviewed. Results found that sociomoral reasoning
increased in the treatment group. This same group also had a decline
in referrals for behaviour and an increase in GPA in social sciences and
humanities.
In 2011, O'connor, Hodkinson, Burton & Torstensson invited
students with behaviour difficulties or social emotional disorders to
participate in a study group to discuss their views on the behaviour
policy in place at their school. A school of approximately 50 males with
social emotional or behaviour disorders was chosen to participate in a
case study. Six students between the ages of 13-16 volunteered to be
a part of the study that included seven 45-minute meetings. Students
discussed a variety of topics and were interviewed individually and in
30
groups to understand their perspectives on behaviour management.
Discussions with the students found that they felt that relationships
with their teachers were most important in determining behaviour.
As self-monitoring has been suggested as a strategy for working
with students who have behaviour designations, Andrew, Wills Lloyd &
Kennedy (2012) reviewed eleven studies where researchers focused
on the use of self-monitoring. Participants in the studies were between
8-14 years old. In each study the methods used and background data
of those involved were looked at and then grouped into four
categories. The studies explored the use of self-monitoring in
combination with other interventions. All studies found that on-task
behaviour and academic performance increased with the use of self-
monitoring.
While the first three studies were all student focused, research
has been done to study both teachers and students as is shown with
Wentzels work on the relationship between behaviour and academic
performance. Teachers often find that disruptive behaviour distracts
students from engaging in the learning process leading them to focus
more on instruction on appropriate classroom behaviour rather than
academic instruction. In exploring the possibility that behaviour may
have an impact on the grades a student receives, Wentzel (1993)
investigated the correlation between behaviour and academic outcome
31
as well as the effect of teacher preferences on academic achievement.
Participating in the study were 423 sixth and seventh grade students
and eleven teachers. Questionnaires were given to students and
teachers separately, and all were told that their answers would be
confidential. GPA was assessed as well as pro-social, anti-social and
academic behaviour. Teachers were asked to use a rating scale to
indicate whether they would prefer to have the student in their class
again. The findings of the study suggest that students who display
responsible behaviour tend to also display academically oriented
behaviour and that pro-social and anti-social behaviour are related to
GPA, but that teacher preferences were not. This suggests that there is
a connection between behaviour and academic performance as well as
need for students to develop their social skills.
Studies were also conducted on teachers alone, as completed by
Goodman & Burton (2010). Participating in the study were eight
secondary school teachers and one primary teacher. The teachers
were interviewed about such topics as strategies, experiences,
interventions, strategies for creating respect, training, collaboration,
and perceptions on the inclusion policy. A primary teacher was
included to speak about the strategies used in elementary schools as it
was felt that these strategies might be transferrable to secondary
schools as well. Teachers reported a positive impact on behaviour by
32
using the strategies that were discussed, and that observation of other
coworkers was beneficial to them.
Areas Requiring Further Research
After reviewing studies, Andrew, Wills Lloyd & Kennedy (2012)
were left with the challenge of how teachers would implement a multi-
component self-monitoring procedure and how researchers could
assess its effects. This review indicates that more research is needed
to compare combining interventions with self-monitoring of
performance and self-monitoring of attention. Moreover, while self-
monitoring has been suggested as a solution to help students and
teachers in dealing with behaviour issues, Jull (2009) indicates that
limited studies have actually been done on the benefits of self-
monitoring for all students, not just those targeted. In addition to
research on self-monitoring, more research is needed to examine
whether social situational factors contribute to sustaining development
as well as an exploration of behaviours and relationship skills to
discover the impact on group and individual outcomes Arbuthnot &
Gordon (1986). Wentzel (1993) points out gaps where more research
is needed by indicating that few studies have been done to examine
academic behaviour in relation to social conduct. Future studies are
needed to examine behaviour of students in relation to teacher
expectations and attitudes towards students and achievement. In
33
regards to conducting FBAs, Gage, Lewis & Stichter (2012) point out
teacher unfamiliarity with the FBA process by stating that educators
may need more support and training at the pre- and in-service
levelsthese assessments are being conducted in general education
settings; therefore, general educators should have the requisite
knowledge to support the process or conduct stand-alone FBA
assessments (p. 72). Further, to help students achieve their academic
potential; classroom socialization processes as well as FBAs should be
examined. Greene (2008) acknowledges that there is no solution for
every behavioural challenge that teachers may come across.
Furthermore, implementing Collaborative and Proactive Solutions
would require change, which is something that teachers are often
reluctant to do. In RTI as well, we see areas that require further
research. Fuchs, Fuchs & Compton (2012) indicate concerns with RTI
in writing that in RTI because of its relative newness, there are
serious inefficiencies in its application (p. 264) and that often
screening is not done frequently enough to identify struggling learners.
In an RTI wait-to-fail model, children participate in 10 to 30 weeks of
small-group tutoring, despite that their unresponsiveness to it can be
determined before tutoring begins (Fuchs, Fuchs & Compton, 2012, p.
269). In the RTI model that exists currently, students are often moved
successively through the levels rather moved directly to the level that
34
would be most beneficial to them. This indicates a need for multi-stage
screening process to be put in place. Moreover, research has indicated
that there are barriers to successful implementation including teacher
buy-in, lack of adequate training, and lack of resources or knowledge
of interventions to use (Castro-Villarreal, Rodriguez & Moore, 2014). In
regards to attachment, Parker & Forrest (1993) indicate that further
research is needed in order to have a better understanding of and
create attachment models that can be used by professionals. Ferguson
,
Follan
,
Macinnes
,
Furnivall and Minnis (2011) point out that in regards
to Reactive Attachment Disorder, many teachers may lack confidence
in this area of work as they have little or no baseline mental health
training and they consequently feel overwhelmed and unsupported. In
fact, little research in the area of RAD and school-aged children exists.
Floyd, Hester, Griffin, Golden & Canter (2008) also write of the lacking
knowledge in this area stating that little empirical research and
literature have provided treatment of psychopathological disorders,
such as RAD within the school environment. To this extent, it is clear
that educators require more information on mental health and reactive
attachment disorder so that they are better able to support all of their
students.
Summary
35
This chapter has addressed issues teachers face in trying to
include students with behavioural designations by exploring current
peer-reviewed research in the field. Attachment theory was studied to
attempt to explain possible functions of behaviour in order to have an
understanding of the reasons some students display challenging
behaviour in high school classrooms. As inclusion is the focus of this
research, methods of inclusion and areas that are lacking were looked
at. An exploration of strategies that could be used and those that have
been shown to be beneficial to students and teachers for creating
positive behaviour are shown. Current research has been included as
well to demonstrate what has worked, and what still needs further
review in order to create classrooms and programs that successfully
include students with challenging behaviour.
Throughout my research, my goal was to discover effective
programs that work to include behaviour designated students in
mainstream high school classrooms. I reviewed many articles and
looked at current studies that have been done on the inclusion of
students with behaviour designations in mainstream classrooms.
However, all studies have indicated that there are areas of research
that still need to be addressed. The articles and studies that I reviewed
confirmed my feelings that gaps that exist in the area of teaching
students with challenging behaviour without removing them from their
36
classrooms. As well, that many teachers did not have the knowledge
and supports to adequately work with these students. In an effort to
address these gaps, I decided to work on a website so that the
information I discovered could be shared easily with others.
On my website, titled A Resource for Secondary Teachers, I
have addressed and defined many topics and programs that can help
to provide inclusion for students with challenging behaviour. On it I
compiled a list of agencies, resource and services that teachers can
access. By creating a website of resources and information, teachers
will have one central place that they can go to find interventions and
support for their students. I hope to continue to develop and add to
this website over time. One of the ways of doing so is through the use
of discussion forums. There are three different forums; the first will be
an open discussion board for users to post and discuss anything of
interest to them. The second forum will have a directed focus with a
topic of the week and the third will be a place to post information from
specialists or researchers. These forums will allow myself and other
users to interact with each other by posting questions, adding new or
additional information, or sharing effective practices. The stories
shared by others in the teaching field can provide insight into different
strategies and interventions that have shown to be of use to them.
37
The website also includes a section dedicated to the students
themselves. This is a place for students to find the supports they may
be looking for, or can be used by teachers to point students in an
appropriate direction. Developing a website that is specifically targeted
for secondary teachers can help fill the gaps that have been identified
by prior research. The website addresses socialization, strategies that
can be used alone or in combination, and information that can be
useful to understand when working with students who have
challenging behaviour.
To access this resource, please visit following link:
http://behaviourandinclusion.weebly.com/related-services.html











38
References
Andrew, B., Wills Lloyd, J., & Kennedy, M. J. (2012). Targets of self
monitoring. In B. Cook, M. Tankersely & T. J. Landrum (Eds.),
Classroom behaviour contexts and interventions (1-21). Bingley,
UK: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
Arbuthnot, J., & Gordon, D. A. (1986). Behavioral and cognitive effects
of a moral reasoning development intervention for high-risk
behavior-disordered adolescents. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 54(2), 208-216.
Barnhill, G. (2005). Functional Behavioral Assessment in schools:
Intervention in School and Clinic, 40(3), 131-143.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss. New York, NY: Basic Books,
Inc.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and Loss Volume 2. New York, NY:
Basic Books, Inc.
Bowlby, J. (1958). The Nature of the Childs Tie to His Mother:
International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, (39), 350-373.
Bradley, R., Danielson, L., & Doolittle, J. (2005). Response to
intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(6), 485-486.
doi:http://ldx.sagepub.com.ezproxy.viu.ca/content/38/6/485.ful
.pdf+html
Bradshaw, C. (2013). Preventing bullying through positive behavioral
39
interventions and supports (PBIS): A multi-tiered approach to
prevention and integration. Theory into Practice, 52(4), 288-295.
British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2011). Special Education
Services: A Manual of Policies, Procedures and Guidelines. British
Columbia, Canada.
Castro-Villarreal, F., Rodriguez, B., & Moore, S. (2014). Teachers'
perceptions and attitudes about response to intervention (RTI) in
their schools: A qualitative analysis. Teacher and Teacher
Education, 40, 104-112. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2014.02.004
Chapman, S. (2002). Reactive attachment disorder. British Journal of
Special Education, 29(2), 91-95.
Cline, L. (2008). My side. reaching kids with reactive attachment
disorder. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health
Services, 46(1), 53-58.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011). Research Methods in
Education 7E. New York: NY: Routledge.
Connelly, F.M., & Clandinin, D.J. (1990). Stories of experience and
narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19 (2), 2-14.
Dukes, C., Rosenberg, H., & Brady, M. (2008). Effects of training in
Functional Behavioral Assessment. International Journal of
Special Education, 23(1), 163-173.
Dunlop, T. (2013). Why it works: You can't just 'PBIS' someone.
40
Education Digest, 79(4), 38-40.
Ferguson, L., Follan, M., Macinnes, M., Furnivall, J., & Minnis, H.
(2011). Residential childcare workers knowledge of
reactive attachment disorder. Child and Adolescent Mental
Health, 16(2), 101-109.
Floyd, K. K., Hester, P., Griffin, H. C., Golden, J., & Smith Canter, L.
L.soci(2008). Reactive Attachment Disorder: Challenges for Early
Identification and Intervention Within The Schools. International
Journal of Special Education, 23(2), 47-55. Retrieved from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ814399.pdf
Fritz, G. (2013). Reactive attachment disorder: What parents and
caregivers should know. The Brown University Child and
Adolescent Behaviour Letter, 29(3), 1-11.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., & Compton, D. (2012). Smart RTI: A next
generation approach to multilevel prevention. Council for
Exceptional Children, 78(3), 263-279.
Gage, N., Lewis, T., & Stichter, J. (2012). Functional behavioral
assessment-based interventions for students with or at risk for
emotional and/or behavioural disorders in school: A hierarchical
linear modeling meta-analysis. Journal of the Council for
Children with Behavioral Disorders, 37(2), 55-75.
41
Goodman, R. L., & Burton, D. M. (2010). The inclusion of students with
BESD in mainstream schools: Teachers' experiences of and
recommendations for creating a successful inclusive
environment. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 15(3), 223-
237.
Greene, R. W. (2008). Lost at School. New York, NY: Scribner.
Gulchak, D. (2008). Using a mobile handheld computer to teach a
student with an emotional and behavioural disorder to self-
monitor attention. Education and Treatment of Children, 31(4),
567-581.
Hornor, G. (2008). Reactive attachment disorder. Journal of Pediatric
Health Care, 22(4), 234-239.
Jull, S. K. (2009). Student Behaviour Self-Monitoring: Enabling
Inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 13(5),
489-500.
King, M. G., & Newnham, K. (2008). Attachment Disorder, Basic Trust,
and Educational Psychology. Australian Journal of Educational
and Developmental Psychology, 8, 27-35. Retrieved from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ815645.pdf
Lampron, S., & Gonsoulin, S. (2013). PBIS in restrictive settings: The
time is now. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(3), 161-
174.
42
McDevitt, T. M., & Ellis Ormrod, J. (2007). Emotional Development.
Child development and education (Third ed., pp. 403-439).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
McNamara, S., & Moreton, G. (2001). Changing behaviour: Teaching
children with emotional and behavioural difficulties in primary
and secondary classrooms (Second ed.). New York: NY: David
Fulton Publishers.
Mikic, N., & Terradas, M. (2014). Mentalization and attachment
representations: A theoretical contribution to the understanding
of reactive attachment disorder. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic,
78(1), 34-56.
Minnis, H., Marwick, H., Arthur, J., & McLaughlin, A. (2006). Reactive
attachment disorder-A theoretical model beyond attachment.
European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 15(6), 336-342.
Mooney, P., Benner, G., Nelson, J., Lane, K., & Beckers, G. (2007).
Standard protocol and individualized remedial reading
interventions for secondary students with emotional and
behavioral disorders. Beyond Behavior, 17(1), 3-10.
Neufeld, G., & Mate, G. (2004). Hold on to Your Kids. Toronto: ON:
Random House.
O'connor, M., Hodkinson, A., Burton, D., & Torstensson, G. (2011).
Pupil Voice: Listening to and hearing the educational experiences
43
of young people with behavioural, emotional and social
difficulties (BESD). Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 16(3),
289-302.
Parker, K. C., & Forrest, D. (1993). Attachment Disorder: An
emerging concern for school counselors. Guidance & Counseling,
27(3), 209-215.
Prewett, S., Mellard, D., Deshler, D., Allen, J., Alexander, R., & Stern,
A. (2012). Response to intervention in middle schools: Practices
and outcomes. Learning Disabilities, 27(3), 136-147.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2012.00359.x
Scott, T. M., Nelson, C. M., & Zabala, J. (2003). Functional behavior
assessment training in public schools: Facilitating systematic
change. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5(4), 216-
224.
Spencer, V., Carter, B., Boon, R., & Garcia-Simpson, C. (2008). If you
teach - you teach reading. International Journal of Special
Education, 23(2), 1-10.
Vaughn, S., & Fletcher, J. (2012). Response to intervention with
secondary school students with reading disabilities. Journal of
44
Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 244-256.
doi:http://ldx.sagepub.com.ezproxy.viu.ca/content/45/3/244.ful
.pdf+html
Wentzel, K. R. (1993). Does being good make the grade? Social
behaviour and academic competence in middle school. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 85(2), 357-364.