What do reasonable behavior expectations look like? Different types of behavior are appropriate in different circumstances. The circumstances include externally observable elements as well as things that can only be internally observed by the person exhibiting the behavior.
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a framework for addressing “problem behavior” in schools. It is based on behaviorism, which is a field of study that aims to explain behavior scientifically by considering only externally observable factors. (1) In my article Neurodiversity, Behavior, and the Problem with PBIS, I wrote about some of my concerns about the use of PBIS with neurodiverse student populations. This article is about how PBIS appears to be in conflict with teaching children about interpersonal safety skills.
PBIS is a data-driven approach. The forms used to collect data about behavioral incidents contain fields for the location, problem behavior, perceived motivation, and action taken. The “perceived motivation” field is represented by checkboxes for getting or avoiding peer attention, adult attention, or an item or activity. (2)
Even if all of the information is recorded accurately, it will be incomplete. I am extremely uncomfortable with the idea of assessing behavior that is motivated by avoiding another person without acknowledging that this motivation corresponds with a very broad range of reasons. If I try to avoid someone because I stole something from them, that’s an entirely different situation than if it’s because they’ve threatened to hurt me. If they tried to kidnap me, it would be appropriate for me to be disruptive, disrespectful, and even aggressive to get away from them.
Behavior motivated by getting someone’s attention also needs additional context to be understood. It can be necessary to be disruptive to get someone’s attention in an emergency, for example.
If a stranger tries to take a child, we teach them to say no, run away, and alert a trusted adult. What specifically distinguishes these things from problem behaviors like defiance and disruption? Are these differences reflected in the data collected about behavior in schools? How are these distinctions communicated to students?
Consider a situation where a child says no to an adult who then decides to fill out one of the behavior incident forms I mentioned earlier. In the “problem behavior” field, they could check the box for disrespect, defiance, or noncompliance, depending on the language on the form. Under “perceived motivation” they might check the box for avoiding a person or activity.
When should a person say no, and when is saying no a problem behavior? Who decides?
Requiring kids to comply with rigid rules about appropriate behavior even when they feel afraid or uncomfortable teaches them the opposite of what they need to know to stay safe in the world. We want them to say no if a stranger offers them candy. But if they aren’t ever allowed to say no to things they don’t like, how can they learn to say no to something enticing?
Telling kids about when to say no isn’t enough. Kids who know they shouldn’t take candy from strangers aren’t necessarily equipped to apply this knowledge. (3) In many approaches to teaching behavioral expectations, children gain experience in complying with instructions in order to receive rewards. As a result, this is where their practical knowledge will be the strongest.
When I was a teenager, I was considered “difficult.” The methods used to address my behavior gave me personal experiences with some of the dangers of discussing behavior only in terms of what others can observe. My most concerning behaviors were trauma responses, but that’s not what my file said. By the time I reached adulthood, I had been trained to respond to perceived danger with “appropriate behavior.”
When I was in my early thirties, there was an incident where a dog bit me two or three times and then ran off. I didn’t know what an appropriate response would be, so I stood there for a moment, waiting for someone to notice and give me some cues as to how I should react.
No one noticed, but I realized that it was probably strange for me to continue standing there silently. In a tentative voice, I said to my partner, “Um, excuse me? I’m bleeding. In multiple places. From where the dog bit me. Repeatedly.” Eventually, she realized there was an emergency, and she helped me get the first aid I needed.
After I recovered from the shock of the whole thing, I realized that in my effort to have an appropriate response, I had neglected to communicate the urgency of the situation. At the time, I thought of it as part of my general quirkiness.
The more I learn about behaviorism, though, the more I see how I was trained to act that way.
In practice, the “appropriate behavior” I learned is really only appropriate for a limited range of situations. I learned to calmly and politely ask for things and let go if I was told no. I learned to panic in situations that call for anything beyond that. As an adult, I have ended up in a number of bad positions when people have continued to pressure me to do things after I said, “No, thank you.” Training me to behave “appropriately” at all times had the effect of mostly extinguishing my ability to advocate for myself.
I wish I’d received more guidance on interpersonal safety earlier in life instead of only being trained in compliance. I hope that by encouraging discussions about this issue, I can help others like me have opportunities to learn the skills they need to stay safe.
Wisconsin’s Violence Against Women with Disabilities and Deaf Women Project has a resource called Conversations about Interpersonal Safety that they produced in partnership with Disability Rights Wisconsin, End Domestic Abuse Wisconsin, and Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault. It’s targeted toward people who work with or care for people with developmental disabilities, and it includes excellent points about how compliance culture can increase people’s vulnerability.
It guides the reader to think about various behaviors from the point of view of the person doing them and relates this to personal safety and self-advocacy. There is a section called “Conversation Starters,” which contains a list of questions that can be used to aid in discussions about how to handle a variety of interpersonal situations. There are also some ideas for group discussions and activities.
I encourage people to have more discussions about how children can learn to take their own sense of danger or safety into account when navigating interpersonal situations. I also encourage further discussion about the implications of relying on evidence bases that explain behavior without considering fear or other internal factors.
References
1 Psychology Today. (2019). Behaviorism. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/behaviorism
2 Resource: Referral form examples. Center on PBIS. (2015, July 24). https://www.pbis.org/resource/referral-form-examples
3 Dampa, A. and Giagazoglou, P. (2023) A Theoretical Knowledge of Interpersonal Safety Skills Is Not Related to Children’s Ability to Protect Themselves in Real-Life Situations. Creative Education, 14, 1411-1420. doi: 10.4236/ce.2023.147089.
