RAMP and PBIS: “They Definitely Support One Another”: The Results of a Phenomenological Study (Part One)

Added December 29, 2017

Scholars have explored the impact of comprehensive school counseling programs (CSCP), including those which garnered RAMP (Recognized American School Counselor Association [ASCA] Model Program) designation, on student outcomes. Similarly, a surfeit of empirical examinations of positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) outcomes are extant. While researchers have investigated RAMP and PBIS individually and conceptual articles have suggested models for aligning these two frameworks, scholarly investigations of their interaction are scarce. Researchers in this study conducted a phenomenological inquiry with school counselors (N = 10) who were employed in schools which featured both a RAMP designation and implementation of PBIS with fidelity. Researchers determined four resulting themes regarding school counselors’ lived experiences working in schools with both the RAMP designation and high levels of PBIS implementation: (a) RAMP-PBIS interaction, (b) “the data is amazing,” (c) “part of the [school] culture,” and (d) challenges and benefits.

According to the school counselors in the present study, RAMP and PBIS were often interwoven. These two frameworks were described as functioning “hand-in-hand” and “overlap[ping]”, particularly in relation to data and language. While scholars have conceptually proposed the alignment or integration between CSCPs and PBIS (ASCA, 2014; Goodman-Scott, Betters-Bubon, Donohue, 2016), the present study appears to be the first to empirically describe this integration, and does so using rigorous trustworthiness strategies across multiple participants.

School counselors gave a detailed description of how they used data for programming, evaluation, and using PBIS data in their RAMP. Participants also described varying degrees of using their RAMP to impact PBIS, most notably in regard to data. While CSCP implementation requires school counselor run data-driven school counseling programs (e.g., ASCA, 2012; Young & Kaffenberger, 2011), other researchers have also found that school counselors prescribe less importance to data, and even suggested school counselors can be “fearful about data and accountability” (Hatch & Chen-Hayes, 2008, p. 40). On the other hand, studies on RAMP school counselors found they appreciated using data (Ward, 2009; Young & Kaffenberger, 2011). Further, data is a key component of PBIS (OSEP Center on PBIS, 2015), and scholars discuss school counselors’ involvement in data within PBIS implementation through single-subject case study research and theoretically (e.g., Author, 2016b; Martens & Andreen, 2013). According to previous research and the current study, implementing data-driven frameworks, such as RAMP and PBIS may increase school counselors’ comfort with data. However, this is the first study to examine school counselors in RAMP designated schools also implementing PBIS, resulting in data as a substantial finding emphasized throughout the study. Hence, perhaps implementing RAMP and PBIS simultaneously may compound school counselors’ comfort with and utilization of data.

This sample of school counselors tended to value being a RAMP school, describing the benefits of RAMP positively and enthusiastically. For example, reported advantages to implementing a RAMP included increased credibility with school stakeholders, and appreciating the collaborative group effort needed to earn the RAMP designation. While there exists RAMP-related research on student outcomes (e.g., Ward, 2009; Wilkerson et al., 2013) and a survey on RAMP school counselors’ perceptions regarding data (Young & Kaffenberger, 2011), there exists little research otherwise on school counselors’ experiences with the RAMP designation. Hence, the present study addresses a relative void in the literature, illuminating the perceived benefits and processes of implementing a RAMP.

Next, school counselors are often noted as leaders in their school (ASCA, 2012), and in PBIS implementation (e.g., Goodman-Scott et al., 2016; Goodman-Scott, 2014,). In fact, Martens and Andreen (2013) described school counselors as being in an optimal role to implement PBIS, due to their professional training and flexible schedule. While many of the school counselors in the present study also described their leadership roles in RAMP and PBIS, they also struggled with discomfort in delegating tasks to others. This lack of delegation was often described as overwhelming. The present study provides unique information on school counselors’ experiences with leadership practices regarding RAMP and PBIS, specifically the challenge of delegation.

The school counselors typically spoke positively about PBIS as a school-wide framework that impacted the school culture, especially in regard to promoting a positive school environment and the use of a widely utilized school-wide language. Conveying PBIS as a school-wide approach is consistent with PBIS literature (OSEP Center on PBIS, 2015) and matches school counselors’ proposed role as systemic, proactive change agents who view the school as a system and promote change school-wide (ASCA, 2012). Further, participant attributions of PBIS influence on positive school climate echoes findings in the literature, such the impact of PBIS on improved school organizational health, climate, and safety (e.g., Bradshaw et al., 2009; Horner et al., 2009). In regards to school counseling, Ward (2009) found that RAMP school counselors believed that their program positively impacted school climate, while single-subject case studies also have described school counselors, in conjunction with their PBIS team, positively influencing their school climate (e.g., Cressey et al., 2014). Given the call in the ASCA Ethical Standards (2016) to provide a positive learning environment for all and the link between school climate and student achievement, the current study’s data supporting RAMP and PBIS’s roles in creating this climate is hopeful (Bear, Yang, Pell, & Gaskins, 2014; Carey & Dimmitt, 2012).

Next, according to the school counselors in the current study, school-wide language was a hallmark of PBIS implementation in their schools, and the school counselors noted using the language within their direct and indirect student services. Likewise, staff in schools implementing PBIS are encouraged to use the agreed-on PBIS language (OSEP Center on PBIS, 2015), which also has been reported in school counseling-focused case studies (e.g., Goodman-Scott, 2014; Sherrod et al., 2009). However, the school counselors in the present study went beyond this, specifically describing how they use this common language when working with students, teachers, and families, demonstrating the integration of PBIS concepts into their RAMP, a finding with little previous empirical backing.

Last, according to some participants, PBIS was time consuming to implement. While scholars have reported school counselors spending substantial time on PBIS implementation (e.g., Cressey et al., 2014), others have proposed that longitudinally, PBIS implementation saves the school time overall, such as decreased time spent on student discipline (e.g., Curtis et al., 2010). Further, given the call for school counselors to support the academic missions of their schools (ASCA, 2012), and the research supporting the correlation between PBIS and academic achievement (e.g., Horner et al., 2009), assisting with PBIS implementation could be seen as an effective use of school counselor time, especially when interwoven with a CSCP.

According to the school counselors in this study, there are many benefits to the RAMP designation and PBIS implementation, especially when implemented together. First, school counselors’ emphases on data-driven practices was a substantial finding, and is also a cornerstone of school counseling and PK-12 public education. As school counselors are called to be data-driven leaders in their schools, working in RAMP designated schools also implementing PBIS may strengthen their focus on and comfort with data. School counselors could consider applying for RAMP and encouraging their school to implement PBIS, discussing these frameworks with their department, advisory committee, and other key stakeholders.

School counselors already in schools with the RAMP designation and PBIS implementation might consider being active leaders in both initiatives. When implementing a RAMP and PBIS, school counselors could integrate the two frameworks to mutually support and strengthen the other, with the goal of maximizing their overlap to promote rigor and efficiency. Next, while school counselors can be leaders in their RAMP and PBIS, at the same time, they may want to delegate responsibilities, seeking assistance with school-wide initiatives, such as PBIS, and utilizing burn-out prevention strategies to maintain personal wellness.

Next, as school counselors align their CSCPs with their school’s academic mission (ASCA, 2012), it is logical they could also align their language use. School counselors in PBIS-implementing schools may use the school-wide language, such as student expectations, in their direct and indirect student services. Relatedly, despite the clarion call for cultural responsiveness in design and implementation of both CSCPs and PBIS (Betters-Bubon et al., 2016; Grothaus & Johnson, 2012), it is noteworthy that only two participants briefly mentioned the use of data and language to promote equity and cultural responsiveness. Given the pernicious gaps in educational access and achievement, and the discriminatory practices and policies evident in schools, it is imperative that RAMP and PBIS development and implementation be culturally responsive. Otherwise, this oversight could lead to using effective and efficient frameworks (i.e., RAMP and PBIS) to reinforce inequitable and discriminatory practices.

Utilizing the PBIS language and concepts may be particularly impactful when advocating for students and for appropriate school counselor roles and job activities. School counselors can utilize language familiar to stakeholders, such as the building principal. Similarly, ASCA and other professional school counseling organizations may want to consider incorporating language compatible with PBIS into their National Model and corresponding documents, such as describing student supports according to the three tiers. School counselor educators could prepare students to integrate aspects of CSCPs and PBIS, as is described in detail by Sink (2016). Further, rather than training each set of school professionals in isolation, school counselor preparation and training could include collaborative work with other stakeholders also involved in PBIS, such as teachers, administrators, and school psychologists.

Studies demonstrate several positive student outcomes associated with the RAMP designation (e.g., Ward, 2009; Wilkerson et al., 2013), and PBIS (e.g., Bradshaw et al., 2012; Horner et al., 2009). While there are many benefits to implementing these frameworks singularly, this study is the first to examine dual implementation. The findings both provide validation for previous related studies and conceptual frameworks, and further inform the profession about the positive possibilities of CSCP and PBIS interaction. According to the school counselors in this study, these two frameworks “go hand-in-hand,” and further integrate CSCPs within the foundation of the school, strengthening school counselors’ ability to meet students’ academic, career, and social/emotional needs through a comprehensive school counseling program, such as those with the RAMP designation.

Emily Goodman-Scott, PhD, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA; Tim Grothaus, PhD, Old Dominion University.

Source:

Emily Goodman-Scott, PhD, Tim Grothaus, PhD