Behavior Modification

Still shot snagged from WFAA video

Shelly Slater of Dallas (TX, US) television station WFAA published a story entitled “Video shows Dallas bus driver choking student” that alleges that bus driver Janet Pitts assaulted a student named Xavier Nava in January of 2007. Ms. Slater reported that Ms. Pitts was removed from her position by the Dallas schools, reinstated, and then resigned voluntarily before the news story ran.

Of course, an incident in which a driver attacks a student should never happen. To be sure, students with—and without—disabilities may display aggressive behavior during bus rides, but there are better ways to deal with such outbursts than apparently happened on Ms. Pitts’ bus. Schools that seek to prevent such incidents should, indeed, have monitors on buses where problems are relatively more likely to arise (e.g., those ridden by students who have behaved aggressively in the past).

But they should also do much more. The behavioral technology for prevent such events exists. It simply needs to be put into practice. Ms. Slater reported that, “At the cost of a million dollars, Dallas County does plan to upgrade each bus with better technology. It’s something the superintendent says is a must after an incident like Xavier’s.” What good will video surveillance do? Would it act as a deterrent? Not likely.

It’s not better video technology that’s needed. It’s better behavior management that’s needed. At half the cost, I suspect the Dallas local education agency could secure a tremendous program of behavior management—say, something like the one described by Putnam and colleagues five years ago:

Putnam, R. F., Handler, M. W., Ramirez-Platt, C. M., & Luiselli, J. K. (2003). Improving student bus-riding behavior through a whole-school intervention. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 583-590.

We describe a multicomponent intervention to improve bus-riding behavior of students attending an urban public school. The intervention was developed with technical assistance consultation that emphasized collaboration among students, school personnel, and bus drivers. The primary intervention procedures were identifying appropriate behaviors during transportation (‘‘bus rules’’), training bus drivers to deliver positive reinforcement, and rewarding student performance through a weekly school-based lottery. Disruptive bus behaviors, as measured by discipline referrals and suspensions, decreased with intervention relative to baseline phases in an ABAB reversal design. These positive results were maintained over the long term, with school personnel assuming responsibility for intervention in the absence of ongoing consultation.

Although the procedures described by Putnam et al. probably would not constitute a complete solution to the problems the Dallas LEA (and other LEAs) have with bus-riding behavior, they show clearly that something humane and positive can be done. And that such procedures can substantially reduce problems with students’ behavior on buses.

Link to Ms. Slater’s story. Warning, the video includes some images that may alarm some readers. Link to a free copy of the study by Putnam et al.