Schoolwide positive behavior interventions and supports (SWPBIS) is currently implemented in more than 23,000 schools nationally and internationally. Several reviews have examined the SWPBIS evidence base, including a meta-analysis of single-case design research. However, to date, there has not been a review of group-based experimental research (e.g., randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) on the school-level effects of SWPBIS implementation to reduce disciplinary exclusion, including office discipline referrals and suspensions. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following What Works Clearinghouse procedures to investigate that relationship. We identified four group experimental studies that included disciplinary exclusion as an outcome variable; two RCTs and two quasi-experimental designs. Overall, 90 schools, including both elementary and high schools, were evaluated. A statistically significant large treatment effect (g = −.86) was found for school suspension, but no treatment effect was found for office discipline referrals. Implications for future research are discussed.
*AlgozzineB.WangC.WhiteR.CookeN.MarrM. B.AlgozzineK.. . . Zamora DuranG. (2012). Effects of multi-tier academic and behavior instruction on difficult-to-teach students. Exceptional Children, 79, 45–64. doi:10.1177/001440291207900103
2.
American Academy of Pediatrics. (2013). Out-of-school suspension and expulsion. Elk Grove Village, IL: Author.
3.
BalfanzR.ByrnesV.FoxJ. (2014). Sent home and put off-track: The antecedents, disproportionalities, and consequences of being suspended in the ninth grade. Journal of Applied Research on Children: Informing Policy for Children at Risk, 5, 1–19.
4.
BarrettS. B.BradshawC. P.Lewis-PalmerT. (2008). Maryland statewide PBIS initiative: Systems, evaluation, and next steps. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10, 105–114.
5.
BjerkD. (2012). Re-examining the impact of dropping out on criminal and labor outcome sin early adulthood. Economics of Education Review, 31, 110–122. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.09.003
6.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P. T.RothsteinH. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley.
7.
*BradshawC. P.MitchellM. M.LeafP. J. (2010). Examining the effects of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133–148. doi:10.1177/1098300709334798
8.
BradshawC. P.WaasdorpT. E.LeafP. J. (2012). Effects of school wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on child behavior problems. Pediatrics, 130, e1136–e1145. doi:10.1542/peds.2012-0243
9.
CaldarellaP.ShatzerR. H.GrayK. M.YoungK. R.YoungE. L. (2011). The effects of school-wide positive behavior supports on middle school climate and student outcomes. Research in Middle Level Education, 35, 1–14.
10.
ChildsK. E.KincaidD.Peshak GeorgeH.GageN. A. (2016). The relationship between school-wide implementation of positive behavior intervention and supports and student discipline outcomes. Journal of Positive Behavior Intervention, 18, 89–99. doi:10.1177/1098300715590398
11.
CookB. G.BuysseV.KlingnerJ.LandrumT. J.McWilliamR. A.TankersleyM.TestD. W. (2015). CEC’s standards for classifying the evidence base of practices in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 36, 220–234. doi:10.1177/0741932514557271
12.
CooperH. M. (1979). Statistically combining independent studies: A meta-analysis of sex differences in conformity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 131–146. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.1.131
13.
Council for Exceptional Children. (2014). Council for Exceptional Children: Standards for evidence-based practices in special education. Exceptional Children, 80, 504–511. doi:10.1177/0014402914531388
14.
CroneD. A.HawkenL. S.HornerR. H. (2010). Responding to problem behavior in schools: The Behavior Education Program (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
15.
FabeloT.ThompsonM. D.PlotkinM.CarmichaelD.MarchbanksM. P.IIIBoothE. A. (2011). Breaking schools’ rules: A statewide study of how school discipline relates to students’ success and juvenile justice involvement. New York, NY: Council of State Governments Justice Center and Public Policy Research Institute.
16.
*FlanneryK. B.FenningP.McGrath KatoM.McIntoshK. (2014). Effects of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports and fidelity of implementation on problem behavior in high schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 29, 111–124. doi:10.1037/spq0000039
17.
GageN. A.CookB.ReichowB. (2017). Publication bias in special education meta-analyses. Exceptional Children, 83, 428–445. doi:10.1177/0014402917691016
18.
GageN. A.LarsonA.SugaiG.ChafouleasS. M. (2016). Student perceptions of school climate as predictors of office discipline referrals. American Educational Research Journal, 53, 492–515. doi:10.3102/0002831216637349
19.
GageN. A.LeiteW.ChildsK.KincaidD. (2017). Average treatment effect of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports on school-level academic achievement in Florida. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 19, 158–167. doi:10.1177/1098300717693556
20.
GageN. A.LewisT. J. (2013). Analysis of effect for single-case design research. Journal of Applied Sports Psychology, 25, 46–60. doi:10.1080/10413200.2012.660673
21.
GrayL.LewisL. (2015). Public school safety and discipline: 2013–14 (NCES 2015-051). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
22.
HedgesL. V.OlkinI. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. New York, NY: Academic Press.
23.
HedgesL. V.VeveaJ. L. (1998). Fixed- and random-effects models in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 3, 486–504. .doi:10.1002/9780470743386.ch13
24.
HornerR. H.SugaiG.AndersonC. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality, 42(8), 1–14.
25.
HornerR. H.SugaiG.SmolkowskiK.EberL.NakasatoJ.ToddA. W.EsperanzaJ. (2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133–144. doi:10.1177/1098300709332067
26.
HornerR. H.ToddA. W.Lewis-PalmerT.IrvinL. K.SugaiG.BolandJ. B. (2004). The school-wide evaluation tool (SET): A research instrument for assessing school-wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 3–12. doi:10.1177/10983007040060010201
27.
LipseyM. W.WilsonD. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
28.
LosenD. J.HodsonC.KeithM. A.MorrisonK.BelwayS. (2015). Are we closing the school discipline gap?Los Angeles: UCLA Center for Civil Rights Remedies.
29.
LosenD. J.MartinezT. E. (2013). Out of school and off track: The overuse of suspensions in American middle and high schools. Los Angeles: The Center for Civil Rights Remedies at the Civil Rights Project of the University of California at Los Angeles.
30.
McIntoshK.CampbellA. L.Russell CarterD.ZumboB. D. (2009). Concurrent validity of office discipline referrals and cut points used in schoolwide positive behavior support. Behavioral Disorders, 34, 100–113.
31.
McIntoshK.FilterK. J.BennettJ. L.RyanC.SugaiG. (2010). Principles of sustainable prevention: Designing scale-up of School-wide Positive Behavior Support to promote durable systems. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 5–21.
32.
MitchellB. S.StormontM.GageN. A. (2011). Tier two interventions implemented within the context of a tiered prevention framework. Behavioral Disorders, 36, 241–261.
33.
*NelsonJ. R.MartellaR. M.Marchand-MartellaN. (2002). Maximizing student learning: The Effects of a comprehensive school-based program for preventing problem behaviors. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 136–148. doi:10.1177/10634266020100030201
34.
NoltemeyerA. L.WardR. M.McLoughlinC. (2015). Relationship between school suspension and student outcomes: A meta-analysis. School Psychology Review, 44, 224–240.
35.
OrwinR. G. (1983). A fail-safe N for effect size in meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics, 8, 157–159.
36.
ParkerR. I.BrossartD. F.VannestK. J.LongJ. R.De-AlbaR. G.BaughF. G.SullivanJ. R. (2005). Effect sizes in single case research: How large is large?School Psychology Review, 34, 116–132.
37.
R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available from http://www.R-project.org/
38.
RosenthalR. (1979). The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638–641. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638
39.
RumbergerR. W.LosenD. J. (2017). The hidden costs of California’s harsh school discipline: And the localized economic benefits from suspending fewer high school students. Los Angeles: The Center for Civil Rights Remedies at the Civil Rights Project of the University of California at Los Angeles.
40.
ScottT. M.BarrettS. B. (2004). Using staff and student time engaged in disciplinary procedures to evaluate the impact of school-wide PBS. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 21–27. doi:10.1177/10983007040060010401
41.
ShadishW. R.CookT. D.CampbellD. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized casual inference (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
42.
SimonsenB.EberL.BlackA. C.SugaiG.LewandowskiH.SimsB.MeyersD. (2012). Illinois statewide positive behavioral interventions and supports: Evolution and impact on student outcomes across years. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14, 5–16. doi:10.1177/1098300711412601
43.
SkibaR. J.ArredondoM. I.RauschM. K. (2014). New and developing research on disparities in discipline. Bloomington: The Equity Project at Indiana University. Retrieved from http://rtpcollaborative.indiana.edu/briefing-papers/
44.
SkibaR. J.ChungC. G.TrachokM.BakerT. L.SheyaA.HughesR. L. (2014). Parsing disciplinary disproportionality contributions of infraction, student, and school characteristics to out-of-school suspension and expulsion. American Educational Research Journal, 51, 640–670. doi:10.3102/0002831214541670
45.
SlocumT. A.DetrichR.SpencerT. D. (2012). Evaluating the validity of systematic reviews to identify empirically supported treatments. Education and Treatment of Children, 35, 201–233.
46.
SolomonB. G.KleinS. A.HintzeJ. M.CresseyJ. M.PellerS. L. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-wide positive behavior support: An exploratory study using single-case synthesis. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 105–121. doi:10.1002/pits.20625
47.
SugaiG.SpragueJ. R.HornerR. H.WalkerH. M. (2000). Preventing school violence: The use of office discipline referrals to assess and monitor school-wide discipline interventions. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 82, 94–101. doi:10.1177/106342660000800205
ViechtbauerW. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36, 1–48.
50.
VincentC. G.Swain-BradwayJ.TobinT. J.MayS. (2011). Disciplinary referrals for culturally and linguistically diverse students with and without disabilities: Patterns resulting from school-wide positive behavior support. Exceptionality, 19, 175–190. doi:10.1080/09362835.2011.579936
51.
VincentC. G.TobinT. J. (2011). The relationship between implementation of school-wide positive behavior support (SWPBS) and disciplinary exclusion of students from various ethnic backgrounds with and without disabilities. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 19, 217–232. doi:10.1177/1063426610377329
52.
VogtW. P. (2005). Dictionary of statistics & methodology: A nontechnical guide for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
53.
WardB.GerstenR. (2013). A randomized evaluation of the Safe and Civil Schools Model for Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports at elementary schools in a large urban school district. School Psychology Review, 42, 317–333.
