Abstract
Mrs. Danner, an experienced special education teacher, co-teaches in a fourth-grade general education classroom of 25 students. As a leader on her school’s student support team, Mrs. Danner feels highly skilled in the area of student behavior support. This year, she has been particularly proud of the progress made by her student, Tobias, who receives special education services under the category of emotional disturbance. According to Tobias’s behavior support plan (BSP), he has a history of making verbal outbursts toward his teachers that function to obtain teacher attention, such as “I hate this!” Mrs. Danner and her team have implemented the strategies outlined in the BSP, including teaching Tobias to recruit attention, responding to Tobias’s appropriate requests with positive attention, and providing him with behavior-specific praise when following behavioral expectations. Tobias has made significant academic and behavioral progress while in her classroom.
Recently, however, Tobias’s verbal outbursts have increased and Mrs. Danner is concerned that his progress has been slowed by a number of factors outside her control. For example, Tobias sometimes has trouble keeping his eyes open in the morning, and Mrs. Danner wonders if he did not sleep well. On these days, the strategies outlined in the BSP not only are ineffective but appear to trigger his verbal outbursts. Other days, Tobias complains that he is hungry and seems to spend more time off task and out of his seat. Still other days, he reports having had a fight before school. Mrs. Danner is frustrated that she is unable to make the progress she could with Tobias’s behavior due to out-of-school factors that she cannot control. She wonders if there is a way to address these issues in the classroom.
The situation faced by Mrs. Danner can frustrate and exhaust even the most dedicated teacher. When student behavior problems persist despite effective classroom management and vary in intensity depending on factors outside of teacher control, teachers are often left feeling discouraged and ineffective (Clunies-Ross, Little, & Kienhuis, 2008). Teachers may know how to handle behavior problems associated with classroom-based antecedents (i.e., events that occur immediately before, or “trigger,” challenging behavior) and consequences (i.e., events that occur immediately after, and reinforce, challenging behavior; Borgmeier, Loman, & Strickland-Cohen, 2017) but not those affected by events that took place hours before the student came to school. In these cases, understanding and intervening on behavior problems based solely on their immediate antecedents and consequences may be less effective. One productive way of addressing these out-of-school factors, and returning a sense of control over student behavior, is to view them as distal setting events (Alberto & Troutman, 2013).
Setting Events
The concept of setting events and their effects on behavior has an extensive research base in applied behavior analysis (Friman & Hawkins, 2006). Specifically, a setting event is a circumstance or occasion that makes an antecedent more likely to trigger problem behavior (Dunlap, Sailor, Horner, & Sugai, 2009) and changes the value or effectiveness of consequences to problem behavior (Laraway, Snycerski, Michael, & Poling, 2003). For example, when a student is in pain (e.g., headache), work and other demands may become more aversive, making avoiding such demands more reinforcing (Carr, Smith, Giacin, Whelan, & Pancari, 2003). If a student engages in problem behavior in order to escape or avoid demands, the presence of a headache may increase the frequency or severity of those escape behaviors. In this case, having a headache could be considered a setting event that makes it more likely that a student will respond to teacher demands with problem behavior to escape or avoid work. Alternatively, receiving low levels of attention may increase the value of attention as a reinforcer (O’Reilly et al., 2008). If a student engages in problem behavior in order to obtain peer or teacher attention, problem behavior may increase in frequency or intensity after periods of time in which the student has received little attention (McGinnis, Houchins-Juárez, McDaniel, & Kennedy, 2010).
Setting events can occur inside the classroom. Something as simple as a large group activity (Boyd, Conroy, Asmus, McKenney, & Mancil, 2008) or an ineffective seating arrangement (Wannarka & Ruhl, 2008) can be a setting event that increases a student’s problem behavior. Teachers have a variety of classwide and individual strategies to use for setting events that occur inside of school, as these factors are typically under the direct control of the teacher (see Iovannone, Anderson, & Scott, 2017). However, distal setting events, setting events that occur outside of school and are not observable and measurable by the classroom teacher (Alberto & Troutman, 2013), are more challenging to address. In these cases, being able to identify what the event is, that the distal setting event has occurred, how the setting event may affect student behavior, and what strategies will be most effective in response to the setting event can help a school team improve student behavior even when factors outside of teacher control are contributing to the problem.
A setting event is a circumstance or occasion that makes an antecedent more likely to trigger problem behavior.
Addressing Distal Setting Events in the Classroom
Teachers can assess the potential influence of distal setting events on student behavior and use that information to develop relevant intervention strategies. How setting events influence challenging behavior should be assessed as part of a functional behavior assessment (FBA; Alberto & Troutman, 2013). Teachers and other school personnel can use six steps during the FBA process to assess and plan for setting events (see Carr et al., 2003; Dadson & Horner, 1993; Smith, Carr, & Moskowitz, 2016). Additionally, if a student has a preexisting FBA and BSP that do not account for setting events, and the teaching team suspects setting events are interfering with the student’s behavioral progress, these steps can be completed and incorporated into the existing BSP. This information can provide additional guidance to the classroom team as to how to respond on days when the setting event has occurred.
Step 1: Identify and Define Relevant Distal Setting Events
The first step is to identify and define distal setting events hypothesized to affect the student’s behavior. Potentially relevant distal setting events can be identified by interviewing those who regularly interact with the student, such as parents and other caregivers, general educators, special educators, paraeducators, related service professionals, bus drivers, cafeteria staff, and other school staff. Standardized behavioral interviews are available (e.g., Functional Assessment Checklist for Teachers and Staff; Anderson & Borgmeier, 2007; March et al., 1999). See Figure 1 for examples of interview questions that may assist in identifying relevant distal setting events.
Questions to ask when identifying potential distal setting events
Once potential distal setting events have been identified, a system must be put in place to identify when they have occurred (Dadson & Horner, 1993). This step is crucial; without objective confirmation of the distal setting event, team observations may be subjective and unreliable. For example, once the student has started engaging in difficult behavior, team members may assume the student experienced a setting event before school. Such assumptions are not based on observation and are more likely to be incorrect or misleading. Individuals in a position to observe the relevant distal setting event, which may include caregivers, paraprofessionals, or other school staff, can be asked to call, text, e-mail, or tell the teacher on days when a distal setting event has taken place.
Mrs. Danner, who had developed a positive relationship with Tobias’s mother, calls her in an attempt to better understand the distal setting events that might be affecting his disruptive behavior in school. During their conversation, she asks his mother, Antonia, the questions in Figure 1. Antonia agrees that his sleeping and eating are challenges and sometimes affect his behavior. In fact, she had made extra efforts to establish a consistent nighttime and morning routine to help Tobias sleep and eat better. Unfortunately, Tobias still has occasional nights (Antonia estimates about one per week) when he is up often and sleeps less than 8 hours. In the morning, Antonia makes sure to set out a nutritious breakfast and encourages him to eat, but he sometimes (about twice per month) refuses, saying he is not hungry or his stomach hurts. Mrs. Danner asks whether he ever appeared to leave home angry or have an altercation with a family member in the morning, but Antonia says she has not seen that occur. Mrs. Danner and Antonia agree that when Tobias sleeps for less than 8 hours or skips breakfast, his behavior is usually more challenging during the day. Antonia agrees to text Mrs. Danner to alert her any time either of these two events occurs before school. In a further effort to figure out what leads to Tobias coming in angry, Mrs. Danner asks the setting event questions of all school staff who see him in the morning before he arrived in her room. The bus monitor tells her that older students sometimes (about once per week) tease Tobias on the bus. On these days, Tobias gets off the bus looking angry. Mrs. Danner asks the bus monitor to change the students’ seating to minimize interactions between Tobias and these students and to call her upon arrival if Tobias was teased at all during the bus ride.
Step 2: Collect Data on Distal Setting Events and Student Behavior
Once relevant distal setting events have been identified and defined, the next step is to collect data on the presence of the events and their association with changes in a student’s challenging behavior. These data can be collected by adding a column for setting events to a traditional antecedent-behavior-consequence (ABC) data collection form. Teachers can use this form to record events that occurred immediately prior to and immediately after problem behavior to develop hypotheses regarding the function of problem behavior (Borgmeier et al., 2017). The Setting Events column precedes the Antecedent column (see Figure 2). Each day, members of the classroom team note whether the specified distal setting event has occurred as reported by someone in a position to observe the setting event. The best communication method, which may include e-mail, phone calls, or a home–school notebook, should be selected on a case-by-case basis depending on school policy, confidentiality, and the communication preferences of important stakeholders. Team members may then collect traditional ABC data on behavioral incidents, tally instances of challenging behavior, and note the severity of the student’s behavior during the day or a specified time period (see Music, Riley-Tillman, & Chafouleas, 2009, for information on using direct behavior ratings to collect data on frequency and severity). Once at least 3 days of data (Riley-Tillman, Burns, & Gibbons, 2013) have been collected when the setting event both did and did not occur (6 days minimum), team members can compare data on student behavior when the distal setting event has occurred with student behavior when the setting event has not occurred to see how the distal setting event may be affecting student behavior.
A selection of antecedent-behavior-consequence data for Tobias’ distal setting events
To determine whether these distal setting events were associated with changes in Tobias’s behavior, Mrs. Danner adds a column to her usual ABC data collection form for setting events (see Figure 2 for a selection of Mrs. Danner’s data collection). Every morning, based on her communication with Antonia and the bus monitor, Mrs. Danner records whether each defined distal setting event was reported for Tobias. Mrs. Danner then tallies and collects ABC data on Tobias’s disruptive behaviors across the day and completes an overall estimate of his degree of challenging behavior that day. Mrs. Danner collects data on this form until she has at least 3 days of data related to each distal setting event and is ready to analyze the data for patterns.
Step 3: Analyze Distal Setting Event Data for Patterns
The classroom team should analyze the collected data for patterns that may indicate whether and how particular distal setting events may influence a student’s behavior (Lewis, Hatton, Jorgensen, & Maynard, 2017). To conduct this analysis, a teacher should look for differences in student behavior on days when the setting event has occurred versus days when it has not. For example, the team may find that when a specific distal setting event has been reported, a student’s challenging behavior is more frequent, more severe, or associated with different antecedents and consequences. When a different data pattern is associated with a specific setting event, the classroom team has evidence that the setting event is associated with increased challenging behavior. The team can then develop a hypothesis for how the setting event may influence the student’s challenging behavior. This will assist the team in selecting intervention strategies.
Mrs. Danner reviews the data on Tobias’s distal setting events and disruptive behavior by looking for differences in his frequency, intensity, or ABC data on days when each setting event had occurred versus when it had not. She notes that despite what the classroom team had originally thought, Tobias’s disruptive behavior is not more frequent or severe when he comes in after skipping breakfast or having an altercation. However, it is more frequent and more severe when he has slept for less than 8 hours. Additionally, different ABC patterns are observed on these days—specifically, when he has slept less than 8 hours and is presented with work, he often has verbal outbursts, which frequently lead to his delaying or getting out of work. In contrast, on days when Tobias slept more than 8 hours, he rarely responds to work with problem behavior. Overall, the data suggest that Tobias is more likely to engage in disruptive behavior to escape demands the morning after sleeping less than 8 hours, and Mrs. Danner notes this in his FBA and BSP as her hypothesis regarding how this distal setting event may influence his disruptive behavior.
Step 4: Use the Data to Select Setting Event Intervention Strategies
Once a hypothesis has been developed regarding how a distal setting event may affect a student’s disruptive behavior, the classroom team can begin to identify hypothesis-based intervention strategies to use when the setting event has occurred (see Hirsch, Bruhn, Lloyd, & Katsiyannis, 2017, for a general overview of the FBA-BSP process). Figure 3 provides a list of common distal setting events, potential effects on student behavior, and relevant intervention strategies. It is important to remember that a setting event does not imply a specific behavioral function, and an individualized assessment must occur to understand how a given setting event may influence an individual student’s behavior. Similarly, the same setting event may affect behavior differently in different students (Luiselli, 2006). Ultimately, Steps 1 through 3 will help a classroom team determine how a setting event may affect one student’s behavior. Once this assessment is complete and the team has a hypothesis as to how the setting event may influence student behavior, the classroom team can identify intervention strategies based on that hypothesis.
Distal setting events, potential effects on student behavior, and intervention strategies
Effective strategies for addressing a distal setting event include counteracting the effects of the setting event as well as taking a function-based approach to changing antecedents and consequences for problem behavior and teaching replacement behaviors. When feasible, counteracting the effects of or neutralizing (Horner, Day, & Day, 1997; Iovannone et al., 2017) a setting event may prevent problem behavior by reducing or eliminating the conditions associated with increased problem behavior (e.g., hunger, lack of sleep, pain, increased arousal level). Neutralizing strategies can be implemented once the team has learned that the setting event has occurred but before the student has engaged in any problem behavior. Intuitive examples include providing food to a student who has not eaten, rest to a student who has not slept well, remedies to a student who is in pain, or time with the school counselor to a student who has experienced an altercation (Wood, Kisinger, Brosh, Fisher, & Muharib, 2018). Teachers should first consult school policy and important stakeholders regarding the feasibility and acceptability of implementing such strategies. When appropriate, students can be taught to self-monitor for the occurrence of distal setting events and request or independently access neutralizing strategies (Rafferty, 2010).
Some distal setting events may be more associated with increases in problem behavior that serve specific behavioral functions. Function-based interventions effectively change behavior through detailed analysis of why the behavior occurs (Lane, Kalberg, & Shepcaro, 2009). For example, lack of sleep has been found to increase problem behavior that serves to escape work and other demands (Smith et al., 2016). In this case, changing antecedents by providing choice or altering features of work or demands, teaching appropriate ways to request breaks and assistance, or providing breaks as a consequence for appropriate behavior may decrease problem behavior (see Geiger, Carr, & LeBlanc, 2010). Alternatively, some distal setting events have been found to increase problem behavior that serves to get attention or tangible items. For example, a student who has experienced a conflict may be more likely to engage in problem behavior to obtain adult attention (Iovannone et al., 2017). In this case, altering antecedents by providing more frequent attention prior to problem behavior, teaching appropriate ways to request attention, or providing attention as a consequence for appropriate behavior may decrease problem behavior (see Coy & Kostewicz, 2018; Wood et al., 2018).
Effective strategies for addressing a distal setting event include counteracting the effects of the setting event as well as taking a function-based approach to changing antecedents and consequences.
Mrs. Danner hypothesizes that coming to school after having slept less than 8 hours increases the aversiveness of demands on Tobias as well as the value of escape and avoidance as reinforcers for problem behavior. Overall, she hypothesizes that on these days, Tobias’s disruptive behavior functions to escape or avoid work and demands. To reduce the likelihood that work and demands will trigger problem behavior, she identifies several antecedent- and function-based strategies the classroom team can implement on days when this setting event has been reported. These include receiving a rest opportunity in the cool-down corner upon arrival, breaks (as opposed to teacher attention) as reinforcers, and calling on him less often. Mrs. Danner adds a goal to his BSP for teaching Tobias to request breaks. She also notes in his BSP that less effective strategies on days he has not slept well include praise and engaging in social conversations with teachers, so the classroom team should avoid these strategies. Mrs. Danner calls Antonia to discuss her assessment and resulting strategy ideas, and they agree to have a team meeting to talk further.
Step 5: Implement Distal Setting Event Strategies With Fidelity
Often, teaching teams end the process of developing function-based behavior strategies with their identification, as in Step 4; however, research shows that teaching teams need to plan for implementation (Hagermoser Sanetti, Williamson, Long, & Kratochwill, 2017; Hirsch et al., 2017). When this step does not occur, different team members implement strategies differently, resulting in a waste of teacher resources and time. Effective strategies for improving implementation include (a) sharing information with all relevant staff members; (b) listening to and incorporating others’ input into the behavior plan; (c) deciding on a plan for implementation, including who will be responsible for implementing each aspect of the plan; (d) collecting data on implementation; and (e) creating strategy cheat sheets or a breakdown of the plan into simple steps and providing these to team members.
Mrs. Danner meets with Tobias’s team, including his mother, general educator, paraeducator, and speech therapist, to review the data they have collected and complete a setting events planning worksheet (see Figure 4 for a blank setting events planning worksheet and Figure 5 for Tobias’s completed worksheet). She discusses the hypothesis that coming in after sleeping less than 8 hours makes it more likely that Tobias will engage in problem behavior to avoid or escape demands. The other members of the team agree with this assessment and share examples of when they have seen Tobias behave this way. Mrs. Danner shares her ideas of strategies to use in response to the setting event and asks the team for more ideas. She notes additional ideas and discusses their incorporation into his BSP. She then discusses the plan for implementing these strategies. Antonia agrees to contact Mrs. Danner in the morning if Tobias has slept less than 8 hours, and Mrs. Danner agrees to communicate this information to the other team members. Upon his arrival, Tobias’s paraeducator, Michelle, will direct Tobias to the cool-down corner for an antecedent rest opportunity. Michelle will prompt Tobias to request a break after completion of each chunk on his work checklist and systematically fade these prompts over time. All staff team members will initially reinforce every break requested by Tobias. Finally, all team members will avoid calling on Tobias or bringing him unnecessary attention (including praise). Mrs. Danner agrees to make a laminated cheat sheet of these strategies (included in Figure 6) for each team member to help everyone remember the plan. She also agrees to continue collecting data on Tobias’s behavior as well as data on whether the plan is being implemented consistently.
Setting event planning worksheet
Tobias’s completed setting event planning worksheet
Tobias’s setting event cheat sheet and procedural fidelity
Step 6: Monitor Progress
The final step in the process of addressing distal setting events in the classroom is to monitor student progress and make data-based decisions on whether to continue the new strategies as they are, modify them to increase effectiveness, or try something different. Classroom teams can accomplish this step by continuing to collect the data described in Step 2 and reviewing the data from before and after implementation of the setting event-based strategies. Additionally, data should be collected on the degree to which these strategies are being implemented as planned, also known as the fidelity of implementation (Hirsh et al., 2017). Fidelity data can be collected by noting whether each component of the setting event strategy was implemented in the daily plan cheat sheet (see Figure 6). If fidelity data show that the plan is not being consistently implemented, the team should discuss what changes can be made to improve implementation. The plan must be consistently implemented to allow for an analysis of whether it is helping the student and should be continued or changed.
Mrs. Danner continues to collect data to see whether Tobias’s behavior improved when the setting event strategy was implemented. Happily, she notes that after a week of implementation, Tobias has fewer and less intense outbursts on days when he has slept less than 8 hours. She also notes in her fidelity data times when the setting event strategy was not implemented successfully and that his outbursts increased during these times. She has another team meeting and shares these data. All team members agree that the strategies are helping and to continue implementing them according to the fading schedule. The team discusses reasons why the plan was not always fully implemented and find the primary issue is ineffective communication of a setting event between Mrs. Danner and the rest of the school team. They decide to improve this step by having Mrs. Danner send a group e-mail each morning regarding the status of the setting event.
Mrs. Danner feels very positive that she has found a way to help with Tobias’s behavior, even when it is affected by events that happen outside of school. She begins thinking of other students who may be affected by distal setting events and how she could extend this process to address their behavior, as well. She sees that she can work on behavior influenced by factors out of her control, and this realization makes her feel like a more effective teacher.
