Issue No.5 - Faculty of Education - The University of Hong Kong

Volume 3, No. 1 第三期 第一號 5
Feature Article ( From the Keynote Speech of the IASE Conference)
Identifying and Supporting Students At Risk:
Recommendations for Three-tiered Models of Support
By Dr. Kathleen Lynne Lane, Department of Special Education,
Vanderbilt University
Dr. Kathleen Lynne Lane is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Special Education at the
Vanderbilt University and an investigator in the Vanderbilt Kennedy Center. She is the primary investigator
of Project WRITE, a Goal Area 2 Grant funded through the Institute for Educational Sciences.
Project WRITE will examine the efficacy of writing interventions for students with emotional
and behavioral disorders who are also poor writers. She is also the Principal Investigator of an OSEP
directed project studying positive behavior support at the high school level and the Principal Investigator
of a field-initiated project studying prevention of behavior disorders at the elementary level. She
serves on 5 editorial boards including Exceptional Children, The Journal of Special Education, and
Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. Dr. Lane has authored three books and published over
60 refereed journal articles and book chapters.
Introduction
Up to 20% of school age children have behavior patterns suggestive
of emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD;Walker, Ramsey &
Gresham, 2004). Although most often recognized for their externalizing
behaviors (e.g. coercive and aggressive tendencies; impaired
social interactions), students with EBD may also have internalizing
behaviors (e.g. anxiety, depression, and somatic complaints).
Without the necessary interventions and supports, these youngsters
pose serious challenges to the school system as well as society
as a whole (Kauffman, 2005). For example, students with EBD have
high rates of academic failure and impaired interpersonal relationships
while in school (Trout, Nordness, Pierce & Epstein, 2003;
Wagner & Davis, 2006) and they continue to struggle beyond the
school setting as evidenced by high rates of unemployment, negative
employment experiences and continued need for mental health
services (Bullis & Yovanoff, 2006). Given that students with EBD
struggle academically, socially and behaviorally, it is important that
schools address the multiple needs of students with and at risk for
EBD. It is particularly essential because many students with EBD will
not qualify for special educational services under the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004). In fact,
less than 1% of the school age population is served in the emotionally
disturbed category. Consequently, it is necessary for
schools to be prepared to support students with and at risk for EBD
in the general education setting .
Three-tier Models of Positive Behavior Support
Fortunately, there has been a movement towards emphasizing the
school as an agent of change, within the context of three-tiered
models of positive behavior support (Horner & Sugai, 2000). These
models contain primary, secondary and tertiary levels of prevention.
As part of the primary plan, school-wide expectations are
taught explicitly and students are given an opportunity to practice
and receive reinforcement for meeting these expectations. Students
who are non-responsive go on to receive targeted supports
in the form of secondary or tertiary prevention efforts. These
models contain the necessary components to (a) prevent the
development of behavior problems that may lead to EBD and (b)
respond to existing instances of EBD with secondary and tertiary
prevention efforts (Lane, 2007)
However, many of the three-tier models currently in place are
incomplete in two ways. First, often these models do not employ
validated systematic screenings to identify students requiring
more focused supports. Second, too often the secondary and
tertiary prevention supports employed have not been validated to
meet the academic and behavioral needs of students with EBD.
Moving forward, it is imperative that researchers and practitioners
should work to complete three-tiered models by addressing both
of these absences (Lane, 2007).
Systematic Screenings
Central to the three-tiered model is the identification of “who
needs more” – namely, systematic, data-based identification of
students who are not responding to primary prevention efforts.
Rather than relying primarily on teacher nominations to identify
students with behavioral patterns that warrant additional support,
I recommend that models be modified to included psychometrically-sound,
systematic screening tools. Presently there are a
number of cost effective, feasible, and valid screening tools available
for use at the elementary level such as the followings: Systematic
Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD Walker & Severson,
1992), the Student Risk Screening Scale (Drummond, 1994), and the
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ Goodman, 1997). Yet,
these are but a few screening tools available for use at the middle
and high school levels. The SDQ is one such measure available for
(continued on next page)