Prior to Program Practicum: Ability to Plan Instruction
EDS 502: Functional Behavioral Assessment and Positive Behavior Intervention Plan
1. Description of the assessment and its use in the program . An extremely important skill for
every special educator to have is the ability to examine the function of a challenging behavior
(when working collaboratively with a team) and based on that analysis, develop a positive
behavior support plan to teach the student replacement behaviors. This assignment is
embedded in the course, EDS 503: Positive Behavior Supports which students take during
their first semester. Given that general education teachers typically identify classroom
management as their weakest area, we feel that it is extremely important for special
education teachers to have a lot of expertise in understanding challenging behaviors and how
to instruct students so they acquire replacement behaviors that serve the same function or
purpose as the challenging behavior. Special educators need to address the challenging
behaviors of students on their caseload, but they also are asked to consult with general
education teachers about other behaviors they identify as problematic in their classroom.
Thus, we selected an instructional planning task that is focused on behaviors, not academics,
since our students demonstrate their ability to plan instruction when they plan and implement
instruction in the practicum and intern settings. The rubric scores are: 1=Well below the
standard, 2=Improving, 3=Meets standard, and 4=Exceeds the standard. To meet the
standard on this assignment, candidates must have a rating of 3 on each of the four elements
of this two-part assignment.
2.
Alignment with CEC standards. Because this assignment requires candidates to
examine an individual student’s behavior, hypothesize about the function the behavior is
serving, and develop an individual plan to teach positive replacement behaviors, CEC
standards 7 and 8 are addressed. Assessment 8 is covered insofar as the candidate is
observing and noting specific behaviors and hypothesizing about the function or purpose of
the behavior for the student. Candidates then take this data and develop long-range
individual plans around the child’s behavior that are to be implemented across all settings
(general and special curricula). They specify individual goals that are observable and
measureable in their plan. All of these are part of standard 7, instructional planning.
Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA)
(CEC Standard 8)
You will develop an FBA with one student in mind from your classroom observations. You
should work with a student in the area in which you current work or hope to work in the
future. Permission MUST be obtained from the child’s guardian in order to use the child in this
assignment. A permission letter will be posted on Sakai to use for this purpose.
Once obtaining permission to work with a particular student, you will begin working with
general education teachers, special education teachers, and related support professionals
in creating a working Functional Behavior Assessment. Please keep in mind that the FBA is a
working document that will likely be added to throughout the time you are in the classroom
for observations. In addition, the FBA is a collaborative process that should include input from
all professionals who interact with the child as well their family. Professionals who work with
the student may include psychologists, psychiatrists, physicians, therapists, regular education
teachers, special education teachers, paraeducators, school nurses, administrators, social
workers, school secretaries, occupational therapists, physical therapists, speech and
language pathologists, and behavior intervention specialists.
The FBA should be organized as follows:
STEP 1: Identify and define target behavior. How often it occurs, location, intensity, & duration?
How discrepant is this behavior from peers?
STEP 2: What has been tried previously and for how long?
STEP 3: Collect information across respondents and settings. This is obtained from a variety of
settings including student records, input from previous teachers, other staff, parent and student
interview, as well as direct observation. NOTE: All data collection forms should be turned in as well.
STEP 4: Identify antecedent events and consequences. Identify what triggers the behavior, i.e.,
transition, lack of attention, difficult tasks, environmental conditions such as medical, diet, etc.,
concurrent events, i.e., group instruction, seat work, unstructured activity and consequences, i.e.,
behavior ignored, warning, loss of privilege, etc.
STEP 5: Identify the purpose and function of the inappropriate behavior, i.e., obtain or get
something, escape or avoid something or someone, or to control.
STEP 6: Develop hypothesis about behavior, i.e., summarize the current problem, e.g., when given
a task the student swears at the teacher to avoid complying with direction.
STEP 7: (a) Develop an intervention based on the hypothesis. Remember to consider student
strengths: what does the student do well? Consider intervention strategies that will be a positive
functional alternative behavior to the inappropriate behavior, i.e. , positive behaviors to receive
attention. The goals should be measurable and observable.
(b) Identify steps of the intervention, individuals responsible and where and when
it will occur.
(c) Monitoring - who will monitor the plan, and how often will it be evaluated?
(d) Date to further discuss how the plan is working.
Positive Behavior Intervention Plan (PBIP)
(CEC Standard 7)
Using the information from the FBA, you will create a PBIP for the same student. This
plan should be a written document of the plan and procedures to be followed for all
professionals interacting with the student. The plan should also incorporate the
students’ input into the plan, in particular input with the incentives that are built into the
plan. All goals in the PBIP should be written with language that promotes positive target
behaviors. (i.e. John Doe will keep his body to himself. NOT John Doe will not hit
others.)
This written plan should be a working document that addresses the most concerning
behavior first, and an implementation timeline of when to begin to address other
secondary behaviors. First and foremost, SAFETY is always the most important goal of
any PBIP. Once this target behavior is consistently met, then secondary goals (i.e. Jane
Doe will raise her hand to speak) should be addressed in a systematic, planned
manner.
All support materials (such as daily charts monitoring student behaviors) are also
required to be turned in for the final assignment.
Functional Behavioral Analysis/Positive Behavior Intervention Plan Rubric
Assignment Element with CEC
Standards
Exceeds the standard
(4)
Meets the standard (3)
Improving (2)
Well Below the
Standard (1)
Clear, thorough, and
fully objective
description of the
behavior and settings.
Antecedents and
consequences are very
detailed and logical.
Behaviors and settings
are defined clearly and
objectively. Minimal
subjective wording
used. Antecedents and
consequences are clear
and logical.
Highly detailed data
collection,
representing minimum
of 7 days of
observation, for a total
of at least 5 hours.
Demonstrates
thorough/advanced
knowledge of data
collection methods and
environmental
variables.
Clear data collection,
representing minimum
of 5 days of
observation, for a total
of at least 3 and ½
hours. Demonstrates
knowledge of data
collection and
environmental
variables.
Behaviors and settings
are defined somewhat
objectively. Some
subjective wording
used. Antecedents and
consequences are
adequately described.
Clear data collecting
representing minimum
of 3 days of
observation, for a total
of at least 2 hours.
Demonstrates a
novice/basic
knowledge of data
collection methods and
environmental
variables.
Behaviors are not
defined objectively.
Marginal detail or
specific examples
given. Information
missing or vague.
Sketchy data collection
representing fewer
than 3 days of
observation, for a total
of less than 2 hours.
Demonstrates poor
knowledge of data
collection methods or
environmental
variables.
Clear, well detailed
analysis of function of
behavior.
Demonstrates
thorough/advanced
understanding of
typical vs. atypical
Clear, somewhat
detailed analysis.
Demonstrates
practiced knowledge of
typical vs. atypical
behavior, demands of
the learning
Analysis is written in
generalities.
Demonstrates
basic/novice
knowledge of typical
vs. atypical behavior,
demands of the
Poorly worded analysis.
Demonstrates marginal
knowledge of typical
vs. atypical behavior,
demands of the
learning environment,
and behavioral
Assessment
Standard 8


Special educators collaborate
with colleagues to assure
meaningful assessments and
decision-making. Special
educators conduct formal and
informal assessments of
behavior
Special educators use
assessment information to
identify supports and
adaptations required for
students with ELN to access the
general education curriculum
Instructional Planning
Standard 7

Special educators develop longrange individualized plans
anchored in both general and
special curricula.

Special educators translate
these individualized plans into
carefully selected shorter-range
goals and objectives taking into
behavior, demands of
the learning
environment, and
behavioral functions.
Comprehensive
description of
appropriate
outcomes/replacement
behaviors. Thorough
rationale for each
outcome. Strong ties to
all behavioral
functions.
environment, and
behavioral functions.
Comprehensive
description of
appropriate expected
outcomes/replacement
behaviors. Clear
rationale for each
outcome. Adequate
ties to all behavioral
functions.
learning environment,
and behavioral
functions. General
description of
appropriate expected
outcomes/replacement
behaviors. Basic
rationale for most
outcomes. Adequate
ties to most behavioral
functions.
functions. Some
expected
outcomes/replacement
behaviors are not
appropriate. Weak or
missing rationale for
outcomes. Weak or
missing ties to
behavioral functions.
Demonstrates
advanced
understanding of paths
of intervention. Areas
identified for change
fully reflect data
collected. Well-written
plan; thorough
description of all
components. Timeline
is detailed and
appropriate. Plan is
positive, fully inclusive,
and builds upon
student’s strengths and
interests.
Demonstrates
practiced
understanding of paths
of intervention and
scaffolding of skills.
Areas identified for
change reflect most of
the data collected.
Well-written plan; clear
description of most to
all components.
Timeline is clear and
appropriate. Plan is
positive, mostly
inclusive and builds
upon student’s
strengths and interests.
Demonstrates
novice/basic
understanding of paths
of intervention or
scaffolding of skills.
Areas identified for
change reflect parts of
the data collected.
Adequate plan; general
description of some to
most components.
Timeline is adequate.
Plan is somewhat
positive, inclusive or
vaguely connects to
student’s strengths or
interests.
Demonstrates poor
understanding of paths
of intervention or
scaffolding of skills.
Areas identified for
change do not reflect
data collected. Sketchy
or confusing plan;
missing description of
some components.
Timeline is missing or
inappropriate. Plan is
not positive, not
inclusive or fails to
build upon a student’s
strengths or interests.
Demonstrates
advanced
understanding of task
Demonstrates
practiced
understanding of task
Demonstrates basic
understanding of task
analysis and self-
Demonstrates poor
understanding of task
analysis and self-
account the student’s needs
and abilities, the classroom
environment, and other
relevant cultural and linguistic
factors.
analysis and selfmanagement. Scope
and sequence of subskills are very
reasonable and
appropriate to
accomplish.
Demonstrates
thorough/advanced
knowledge of validity
and integrity. Fully
explains whether plan
was effective. Report is
very well organized
analysis and selfmanagement. Scope
and sequence of subskills are fairly
reasonable and
appropriate to
accomplish.
Demonstrates
practiced knowledge of
validity and integrity.
Clearly explains
whether plan was
effective. Report is well
organized
management. Scope
and sequence of subskills are sometimes
reasonable and
appropriate to
accomplish.
Demonstrates
basic/novice
knowledge of validity
and integrity. Generally
explains whether plan
was effective. Report is
somewhat organized.
management. Scope
and sequence of subskills are not
reasonable or
appropriate to
accomplish.
Demonstrates weak
level of knowledge of
validity and integrity;
inadequately explains
whether plan was
effective. Report is
disorganized, difficult
to follow.