Impacts of State-Mandated PBIS Implementation on Behavior and Achievement Outcomes

Introduction: Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS; Sugai & Horner, 2006) is one of the most widely disseminated school-based prevention models, with over 25,000 schools nationwide trained in the universal elements of this three-tiered preventive intervention framework. PBIS aims to prevent student behavior problems and promote a positive school environment through the articulation of positive expectations and data-based decision-making. A series of randomized controlled trials have demonstrated positive impacts on school climate, suspensions, academic performance, and student behavioral and mental health outcomes. Most states in the U.S. have scaled-up PBIS, using a variety of different approaches to incentivize adoption. One such approach used by Maryland leveraged state policy, requiring that any school with a habitually truant rate exceeding 8% to be trained in PBIS. Prior to this mandate, schools in the state had just volunteered for training and had to meet a series of readiness and buy-in criteria (e.g., forming a PBIS team, provide a 3-year commitment, solicit buy-in from 80% of staff). However, readiness and buy-in may be different for schools mandated to implement PBIS, which in turn could affect implementation and outcomes.

Method: This paper aimed to examine whether Maryland schools mandated to be trained in PBIS experienced different student behavioral and academic outcomes than those not mandated. Propensity score weights for every school were generated and propensity score sub-classification was used to balance the samples. Mediation models allowed for the examination of the direct effect of mandate status on outcomes as well as the mediating pathway via PBIS implementation.

Results: Drawing upon archival data collected by the state, we determined that 363 schools were ever affected by the mandate. Using propensity score weights, these all schools in the state were matched. With regard to outcomes achieved, analyses indicated there were no significant main effects for the mandate or mediated effects for PBIS on outcomes. Preliminary moderation analyses indicate that there are impacts of the mandate within specific subclasses, most of which suggest iatrogenic effects of the policy.

Conclusions: These results suggested that the state mandate to implement PBIS as a result of elevated truancy rates did not demonstrate the intended goals of reducing discipline problems or improving achievement. Variation in PBIS adoption will be further examined as a source of variation in policy impacts on student outcomes. Implications of these findings for future policy implementation and evaluations efforts are considered.