All Aboard: Using Positive Behavior Supports on the School Bus

Abstract

Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) provides effective behavior management in many schools, yet such systematic approaches to behavior management are generally not implemented aboard school buses. This article describes guidance for the expansion of PBIS onto school buses. Research supporting the use of PBIS in school and transportation settings is described. Steps for implementing PBIS on school buses are provided in relation to an example of the practice in a small school district.

Keywords

behavior support strategies tiered intervention models professional development school bus elementary and middle school age group

It’s been two years since the implementation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in a rural school district serving approximately 7,500 students in Tennessee. Incidents of minor office discipline referrals have decreased, teachers have increased their awareness of classroom management strategies, and students enjoy the recognition of meeting schoolwide expectations. Evidence of the PBIS framework’s existence is visible on entering each school in the form of posted expectations, bulletin boards promoting PBIS rewards, and data walls. The district has invested in assessment and training to sustain these gains over the long term. Administrators are reporting improvement in school atmosphere.

One area in which the district has not shown improvement, however, is school bus behavior. The most recent monthly data meetings between school PBIS teams and Mrs. Hendrickson, the district PBIS coach, revealed that the majority of district schools needed to address behavioral issues occurring on school buses. Reports from teachers and students suggested that expectations varied considerably across buses, resulting in a general inconsistency in consequences for behavior (e.g., referrals). School bus drivers also reported feelings of uncertainty regarding how best to manage inappropriate bus behavior, and possessed little information regarding school behavior management expectations and procedures.

The daily school experience for many students begins and ends with a seat on the bus. In rural areas, the bus ride can last more than 1 hr one way (Howley, 2001). Yet busing can be treated as something removed from the daily school experience. Behavior problems on the bus can affect student performance inside of school and increase the likelihood of accidents during transit. The recent movement toward PBIS, a framework of behavioral intervention designed to address the needs of all students, has resulted in positive outcomes for students with a variety of behavioral needs. Nonetheless, schools have been slow to implement systematic behavior management programs within their transportation systems. In the absence of effective management, behaviors are dealt with in a reactive manner through such actions as suspension or they are not dealt with at all.

This article provides discussion and guidance for the implementation of universal, or Tier 1, PBIS on school buses. We first describe the research supporting PBIS and bus-based behavior management. Then, we describe a system for creating and maintaining PBIS within student transport services. Throughout, we refer to school bus PBIS implemented in a rural school district through the efforts of Mrs. Hendrickson in a demonstration of how behavioral management programs can extend beyond the classroom. The purpose of this article is to provide school leadership and educators with the information needed to integrate the bus setting—often unregulated—into existing PBIS frameworks.

The Need for PBIS on School Buses

Approximately 25 million children—55% of K–12 students—rely on school buses for transportation to and from school (Cook & Shinkle, 2012). Nonetheless, school transportation settings in many districts lack systematic approaches to behavior management (Newcomer, Colvin, & Lewis, 2009). According to bus drivers, student behaviors represent the most common distraction for them while they drive (Transportation Research Board [TRB], 2010). National surveys have indicated that school bus drivers (TRB, 2010) and other support personnel often do not receive training in addressing behavioral issues (Bradshaw, Waasdorp, O’Brennan, Gulemetova, & Henderson, 2011). Drivers also report feeling less obligated to intervene in bullying and aggression than teachers.

Although the risks of bodily injury as a result of crashes are small (Cook & Shinkle, 2012), parents and bus riders often have a dim view of school transportation (Henderson, 2009). Fears are often prompted by risk factors associated with school buses, such as limited adult supervision, a high concentration of students, and student bullying (Raskauskas, 2004). Reports regarding aggression and other violent incidents, which can occur more than twice a day by some estimates, suggest that such concerns are well founded. Data-based behavioral intervention systems that appear within hallways and classrooms have a place on the school bus (Hirsch, Lewis-Palmer, Sugai, & Schnacker, 2004).

PBIS

PBIS is a multitiered model of prevention and behavioral intervention that directs support to students with and without exceptionalities based on their level of need (Wehby & Kern, 2014). Evidence supports the use of PBIS as a means of addressing student behavioral and academic performance across a range of settings (Horner, Sugai, & Anderson, 2010). Typical levels of behavior support include universal (i.e., Tier 1), targeted (i.e., Tier 2), and intensive (i.e., Tier 3) services (Horner et al., 2009). Tier 1 PBIS behavior management includes less-intensive techniques such as active supervision, explicit expectations, and positive consequences (e.g., praise). Effectively administered Tier 1 supports are an essential element of PBIS, as they minimize the likelihood that students are mistakenly identified with emotional disturbance or other behavioral issues. Rural schools often find creative methods for proactively addressing behavior using frameworks such as PBIS, which might include rewards such as lunch with the principal and/or student birthday celebrations (Fitzgerald, Geraci, & Swanson, 2014). Tier 2 supports involve more consistent monitoring of student behaviors (e.g., using check-in/check-out programs) accompanied by consequences for specific students deemed at risk for not meeting behavioral expectations (e.g., behavior contracts). Interventions at Tier 3 identify factors that motivate inappropriate student behavior for students with more significant and identified behavioral needs and create plans designed to encourage appropriate behaviors. Although PBIS is applied in various types of schools, rural schools often rely on school personnel to take on the role of PBIS coaches and in-house trainers (Cavanaugh & Swan, 2015).

Research supports the use of PBIS and related behavioral interventions on school buses at the universal and intensive levels (Newcomer et al., 2009). Putnam, Handler, Ramirez-Platt, and Luiselli (2003) employed a universal bus–PBIS approach and demonstrated that student instruction in appropriate behavior, bus driver training in monitoring, and implementation of a rewards system produced modest reductions in bus office referrals among the student population at an elementary school. Collins and Ryan (2016) successfully reduced bus discipline referrals using a PBIS framework that encompassed driver training, teaching expectations, contingency contracting, and an interdependent group contingency in which the group of students earned points for appropriate behavior. Similar universal interventions involving rewarding appropriate behaviors with music and praise have decreased disruptive behavior (e.g., excessive noise) and increased prosocial behaviors on buses (King, Kennedy, & Ward, in press). Likewise, individualized intervention such as using rewards and other consequence-based contingencies have proven effective for students with severe behavioral issues (Chiang, Iwata, & Dorsey, 1979). The interventions featured in many of the studies were administered by participating bus drivers (Bronaugh, 2008; Putnam et al., 2003), suggesting that introducing behavior management frameworks to school buses is both feasible and beneficial for many schools.

Implementing PBIS for School Transportation

While expanding PBIS to transportation settings is similar to the process of introducing PBIS to an entire school (McIntosh, Horner, & Sugai, 2009), a key difference is that district administrators and school bus drivers—rather than teachers—are the personnel primarily responsible for implementing PBIS in transportation settings. In our example, Mrs. Hendrickson, the district level coach, assumed much of the responsibility for the expansion of PBIS onto school buses; however, other stakeholders (e.g., administrators, teachers) could lead this process. To increase the likelihood of buy-in, leadership can encourage drivers and other support personnel to identify relevant objectives for PBIS and share their experiences with managing behaviors. Specific steps include (a) establishing data-based goals, (b) describing PBIS and obtaining a commitment, (c) developing a behavior management system, (d) training and implementation, and (e) evaluating the results of implementation.

Step 1: Establish Data-Based Goals

PBIS frameworks are established by linking proposed changes in practice to relevant goals, objectives, and needs. Coaches must identify data to support the necessity for change when considering a new practice, especially when a specific framework has never been established. Such evidence may consist of needs assessment data, employee surveys, office discipline referral data, and observations. Collecting needs assessment data entails systematically surveying the target audience to identify what is missing between current services and preferred results (Kaufman, 1994). A needs assessment may focus on broad concerns such as school bus bullying or behavior management techniques. Once the larger needs are established, coaches can begin working with the bus service providers to address specific objectives and goals. Given that many drivers are concerned with distracting behavior and lack of behavior intervention training (TRB, 2010), a simple bus driver survey will allow coaches to qualitatively establish the need to address more specific change on the bus along with the potential for identifying prospective behavioral goals (TRB, 2010). Finally, PBIS coaches can use school bus discipline referrals or observations to quantify the need for behavior change. Such data may provide critical information about antecedent events, consequences, timing, or personnel.

Reviewing data on a districtwide level allows coaches to target certain behaviors that tend to be problematic throughout the system and establish criteria for measurable objectives. Assessing districtwide needs, surveying bus drivers, and reviewing the bus discipline data allow coaches to triangulate the information while developing observable and measurable goals. Once this information is collected and analyzed, PBIS coaches can work with administrators to prioritize the needs of the district. One to five goals should be selected, and the PBIS coach can work with the administrator to determine how the PBIS framework can best meet that goal (Sugai & Horner, 2009). This process is resource intensive, however, and may be easier for individual coaches in rural areas working with relatively small districts.

Mrs. Hendrickson conducted a school bus behavior management needs assessment with the PBIS district administration team. Results indicated a gap between the current training offered and the need for intervention in district transportation services. The administration team agreed that the combination of what were perceived as high levels of office referrals and inconsistent application of disciplinary procedures constituted a problem. Team members advised Mrs. Hendrickson to review the data with the school bus superintendent.

The meeting with the school bus superintendent focused on data from various schools within the district. Data indicated that school buses were among the most frequent locations for office discipline referrals throughout the district. The superintendent acknowledged the importance of lowering referrals on buses, and agreed that introducing the behavior management system used throughout the district to school buses could potentially resolve the issue. The team agreed that a behavior management system could be developed and initially implemented in half of the schools in the district as a pilot. Together, the team created a broad goal to reduce the overall number of school bus discipline reports by 15% within 1 year. If the initial goal was met, the team planned to implement the system districtwide the following year. Mrs. Hendrickson informed the leadership team that goals may be added based on feedback from transportation service personnel.

Step 2: Describe PBIS to Key Stakeholders and Establish a Commitment

After establishing goals, the district or school PBIS coach provides transport service providers with an overview of PBIS and secures commitment before any steps are taken to develop the bus behavior management system. Visuals such as graphs may be used to provide a rationale for behavior change. Adults responsible for managing the transportation environment need to understand key elements of the PBIS framework used within the schools for which they serve. Moreover, establishing a bus–PBIS framework requires commitment from key stakeholders such as transportation superintendents, principals, teachers, and school bus drivers and assistants prior to moving forward.

Exposure to PBIS concepts provides the background knowledge needed for future trainings and raises awareness of current behavior management strategies and behavioral concerns within the school bus system. The PBIS coach may also facilitate reflection and discussion among the bus drivers that underscores the need for PBIS in general and in the context of student transportation services. The introduction to PBIS can be brief and occur in the stakeholders’ natural environment (i.e., bus garage, transportation training room).

Incorporating stakeholder opinion into their ultimate understanding of PBIS is an important aspect of establishing buy-in to the goals and efforts involved in changing school policy. According to George, Kincaid, and Pollard-Sage (2009), stakeholder input can promote staff commitment and increase the likelihood of accurate program implementation. Stakeholders must commit to receiving training, implementing the behavior management practices, and receiving feedback from PBIS coaches. After the overview, PBIS coaches can survey stakeholders to determine commitment. If a majority of responsible parties are willing to commit, the team may move forward (Sugai & Horner, 2009).

Mrs. Hendrickson met with bus drivers from the district and discussed the need for PBIS and features of typical behavior management systems. Mrs. Hendrickson also presented picture examples of PBIS from within the district’s schools, including behavior expectations posters, rewards, tickets, data walls, and methods used for teaching the expectations. Mrs. Hendrickson ended her initial meeting with the bus drivers by summing up the steps and process that a commitment would entail. She surveyed the drivers and determined that 83% were willing to use PBIS on their bus. Encouraged, Mrs. Hendrickson decided to move forward with developing a PBIS bus plan.

Step 3: Develop a PBIS Plan

Developing a school bus behavior system is similar to the key steps involved in the schoolwide framework. The first step involves creating explicit expectations for student behavior. These expectations are most likely to be effective if they are linked to needs identified through previous data collection efforts. The second step involves establishing consequences for student behavior. Establishing common expectations and consequences for student behaviors across an entire range of settings is one of the key features separating PBIS from isolated classroom management systems.

Behavioral data collected by the district revealed to Mrs. Hendrickson that students were most often receiving office discipline reports for safety concerns, disrespect, and being irresponsible. Mrs. Hendrickson decided to create three expectations: Be Safe, Be Respectful, and Be Responsible. After conferring with bus drivers, Mrs. Hendrickson linked each of the three expectations to observable behaviors. Figure 1 displays this list of student expectations, known as “The Three Bs,” which was posted in all participating school buses.

Figure 1.

Behavioral expectations posted in district school buses.

Mrs. Hendrickson noted that bus drivers were already instructed to complete discipline referral forms for rule violations. However, drivers generally did not administer positive consequences to students who met behavioral expectations. Mrs. Hendrickson coordinated efforts with participating schools to review examples and nonexamples of appropriate bus behaviors with students. Bus drivers would be instructed to deliver positive praise to students who met behavioral expectations. In addition, Mrs. Hendrickson planned to expand the district’s PBIS token economy system to bus settings. That way, students could earn “Bucks” for good behavior before, during, and after school. Mrs. Hendrickson consulted with the leadership teams at schools within the district to discuss how best to integrate the recommended changes into their existing PBIS frameworks. Through these meetings, Mrs. Hendrickson was able to ensure that the schools would acknowledge the new Bus Bucks, have a convenient system for processing school bus referrals, and provide assistance in helping bus drivers implement the plan with fidelity.

Step 4: PBIS Training and Booster Sessions

Effective training in the context of PBIS provides staff with brief, informative presentations coupled with multiple opportunities to participate in activities led by an experienced behavior coach (Freeman et al., 2009). For best results, a behavior skills training (BST; Parsons, Rollyson, & Reid, 2012) package is recommended. BST refers to a research-based protocol in which the trainer (a) describes a skill verbally and in written format, (b) models the target skill to the trainees, (c) asks the trainee to demonstrate the skill, (d) provides feedback on trainee performance, and (e) repeats the steps until a mastery criterion is reached (Parsons et al., 2012). In addition, many of the resources required in maintaining a fully functioning school-based PBIS, such as use of school and district coaches, are necessary for extending PBIS into transport services. If bus driver surveys were conducted prior to creating the PBIS framework, driver concerns need to be addressed during the training as well. To strengthen buy-in, drivers need to be allowed to provide feedback and participate in framework revisions. Booster sessions may also be needed throughout the year to address individual concerns that may arise.

Mrs. Hendrickson’s bus driver training consisted of an initial session, in which coaches introduced technical aspects of the behavior intervention and guided drivers through activities designed to provide management experience in the summer prior to implementation. Booster sessions addressing similar content were held throughout the year (see Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Checklist used by coaches and practitioners to introduce and train school bus drivers on districtwide PBIS framework.

The first training session and booster sessions built on concepts addressed in the initial driver meeting. Mrs. Hendrickson delivered all training in accordance with a fidelity checklist. Drivers received a “Bus Binder” including copies of bus expectations, Bus Bucks, and written guidelines for the delivery of positive consequences. To facilitate role-playing and other guided activities, initial training sessions generally involved the drivers who were limited to one school or a small portion of schools in a community. The initial session followed a BST framework that defined PBIS for the drivers, explained the expectations and rules associated with the management system, discussed and modeled the PBIS framework, and allowed the drivers to have some experience with administering consequences for appropriate behavior while receiving feedback from the coach until a mastery criterion was reached by each driver.

Due to the inconsistency in bus management, training focused on (a) classifying behaviors typically observed by drivers and (b) setting guidelines for driver reactions to behaviors. The Reaction Plan disseminated by trainers included examples of minor (e.g., chewing gum) and major (e.g., fighting) infractions. The Reaction Plan (see Figure 3 for an example) also addressed concerns identified by bus drivers on a national level along with the county’s policy for obligated intervention. A chart describing appropriate driver responses to student behavior provided clear instruction on when drivers should refer students to the office and when more immediate consequences would be appropriate.

Figure 3.

Reaction plan describing how specific behaviors should be managed by drivers and associated student consequences.

Implementation began on the first day of school. Bus-based implementation consisted of posting “The Three Bs” on every school bus and providing drivers with Bus Bucks. With assistance from Mrs. Hendrickson, participating schools (a) reviewed bus behavior expectations with their students during orientation, (b) scheduled booster sessions for drivers, and (c) included data on bus referrals during the PBIS team meetings. After teachers, administrators, or bus drivers reviewed bus expectations with students, drivers began handing out Bus Bucks and provided behavior-specific praise to students who met expectations during the route. As the program began, bus–PBIS implementation fidelity data were collected through driver self-report.

Step 5: Evaluate Progress

Data collection is vital to both the effectiveness and long-term viability of PBIS. Regardless of whether a practice is research- or evidence-based, evaluating results of a practice allows staff to identify what does and does not work, and provides a means of making the implementation of PBIS a priority (McIntosh et al., 2009). Coaches can emphasize the importance of data collection and usage, and can offer feedback to drivers throughout the data-monitoring phase. Allowing staff involvement in data review and decision making may increase staff buy-in along with insight to internal issues that may need to be addressed (George et al., 2009).

Mrs. Hendrickson repeatedly emphasized the review of data related to the effectiveness of the bus–PBIS system during conversations with individual PBIS teams, which reviewed data on a monthly basis. In addition, the district-level PBIS team reviewed changes in bus-referral patterns for the three participating elementary schools and two high schools that adopted the bus behavior management program following the first year of implementation. A comparison of pre–post levels of discipline referrals for participating schools appears in Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Number of bus behavior referrals per 100 students at rural district high and elementary schools for 1 year prior to and following implementation of bus behavior management.

The district leadership team was generally pleased with the changes in referrals. Bus referrals decreased at high schools in the district (n =2), with an average decrease of 50%. Of the three participating elementary schools, two exhibited minor decreases in bus referrals (⩽ 10%). However, referrals at one of the schools increased by 71%. The leadership team felt the results justified the expansion of the program throughout the district. An administrator on the team felt the consistency between buses and schools was helpful, commenting, “It teaches our students that we have high behavioral expectations for them outside of our building.” However, the team requested that Mrs. Hendrickson monitor implementation where referrals increased and consider possible adjustments with the school PBIS teams.

Realizing the importance of integrating the feedback of participating bus drivers into PBIS, Mrs. Hendrickson collected data regarding driver satisfaction with the program from participating drivers (n = 40). Driver feedback was generally positive, with many reporting that tickets were an enjoyable reward (95%) that was effective for a variety of students (89%). Nearly all of the drivers agreed to continue using the intervention on their own buses (95%). However, 25% of drivers indicated that they had difficulty handing out tickets. Combined with concerns of the district PBIS leadership team concerning fidelity, the results of the survey provided Mrs. Hendrickson with a clear direction for the ongoing development of bus-based PBIS.

Conclusion

In this article, we reviewed evidence regarding both the need for and effectiveness of bus-based behavior management systems. We also provided a step-by-step example of the implementation of bus PBIS in a school district. Features of the behavior management system will vary across school systems, and we encourage practitioners to adjust the makeup of their systems based on the needs of participating stakeholders. Nonetheless, attempts to expand PBIS beyond the school into transportation services will generally entail the steps described here. Participants must agree on goals of the intervention that are linked to objective measures. Drivers should have the opportunity to learn about PBIS and commit to the expansion of behavior management onto buses. These crucial steps will be followed by the development, dissemination, and evaluation of a plan of action. Using the procedures of PBIS, schools can enhance student safety in transportation settings. A listing of additional resources for those interested in developing a bus–PBIS system is included in Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Resources for developing school bus interventions.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Bradshaw

C. P.

Waasdorp

T. E.

O’Brennan

L. M.

Gulemetova

Henderson

R. D.

(2011). Findings from the National Education Association’s nationwide study of bullying: Teachers’ and education support professionals’ perspectives. Atlanta, GA: National Education Association.

Bronaugh

L. J.

(2008). Driving under the influence of positive behavior support: A behavior management program for students who ride the school bus (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. UMI No. 3325646

Cavanaugh

Swan

. (2015). Building SWPBIS capacity in rural schools through building-based coaching: Early findings from a district-based model. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 34, 29–39.

Chiang

S. J.

Iwata

B. A.

Dorsey

M. F.

(1979). Elimination of disruptive bus riding behavior via token reinforcement on a “distance-based” schedule. Education and Treatment of Children, 22, 101–109.

Collins

Ryan

J. B

. (2016). Extension of positive behavioral interventions and supports from the school to the bus: A case study. The Journal of At-risk Issues, 19(1), 29.

Cook

Shinkle

(2012). Transportation review: School bus safety. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/documents/transportation/Schoolbus_tranrev0810.pdf

Fitzgerald

C. B.

Geraci

L. M.

Swanson

(2014). Scaling up in rural schools using positive behavioral interventions and supports. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 33(1), 18–22.

Freeman

Lohrmann

Irvin

L. K.

Kincaid

Vossler

Ferro

(2009). Systems change and the complementary roles of in-service and preservice training in schoolwide positive behavior support. In Sailor

Dunlap

Sugai

Horner

(Eds.), Handbook of positive behavior supports (pp. 603–629). New York, NY: Springer.

George

Kincaid

Pollard-Sage

(2009). Primary-tier interventions and supports. In Sailor

Dunlap

Sugai

Horner

(Eds.), Handbook of positive behavior supports (pp. 375–394). New York, NY: Springer.

10.

Henderson

B. B.

(2009). The school bus: A neglected children’s environment. Journal of Rural Community Psychology, E12(1), 1-11. Retrieved from http://www.thepoundsperspective.net/uploads/3/1/3/7/3137766/the_school_bus_-_a_neglected_childrens_environment.pdf

11.

Hirsch

E. J.

Lewis-Palmer

Sugai

Schnacker

(2004). Using school bus discipline referral data in decision making: Two case studies. Preventing School Failure, 48, 4–9.

12.

Horner

R. H.

Sugai

Anderson

C. M.

(2010). Examining the evidence base for School-wide Positive Behavior Support. Focus on Exceptional Children, 42, 1–14.

13.

Horner

R. H.

Sugai

Smolkowski

Eber

Nakasato

Todd

Esperanza

(2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133–145.

14.

Howley

(2001). The rural bus ride in five states: A report to the rural school and community trust. ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. Retrieved from http://www.ruraledu.org/user_uploads/file/Rural_School_Bus_Ride.pdf

15.

Kaufman

(1994). Needs Assessment and Analysis. In Tracey

W. R.

(Ed.), Human resources management & development handbook (2nd ed., pp. 1160–1175). New York, NY: American Management Association.

16.

King

S. A.

Kennedy

K. K.

Ward

. (in press). Behavior interventions on school buses: A systematic review. Education and Treatment of Children.

17.

McIntosh

Horner

R. H.

Sugai

(2009). Sustainability of systems-level evidence-based practices in schools: Current knowledge and future directions. In Sailor

Dunlap

Sugai

Horner

(Eds.), Handbook of positive behavior supports (pp. 327–352). New York, NY: Springer.

18.

Newcomer

Colvin

Lewis

T. J.

(2009). Behavior supports in nonclassroom settings. In Sailor

Dunlap

Sugai

Horner

(Eds.), Handbook of positive behavior supports (pp. 497–520). New York, NY: Springer.

19.

Parsons

M. B.

Rollyson

J. H.

Reid

D. H.

(2012). Evidence-based staff training: A guide for practitioners. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 5, 2–11.

20.

Putnam

R. F.

Handler

M. W.

Ramirez-Platt

C. M.

Luiselli

J. K.

(2003). Improving student bus-riding behavior through a whole-school intervention. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 583–590.

21.

Raskauskas

(2004). Bullying on the school bus: A video analysis. Journal of School Violence, 3, 93–107.

22.

Sugai

Horner

R. H.

(2009). Schoolwide positive behavior support. In Sailor

Dunlap

Sugai

Horner

(Eds.), Handbook of positive behavior supports (pp. 307–326). New York, NY: Springer.

23.

Transportation Research Board. (2010). Special safety concerns of the school bus industry: A synthesis of safety practice. Washington, DC: Author.

24.

Wehby

J. H.

Kern

(2014). Intensive behavior intervention: What is it, what is its evidence base, and why do we need to implement now? Teaching Exceptional Children, 46, 38–44.