Equity-Focused PBIS Approach Reduces Racial Inequities in School Discipline: A Randomized Controlled Trial
McIntosh, Kent; Girvan, Erik J.; Fairbanks Falcon, Sarah; McDaniel, Sara C.; Smolkowski, Keith; Bastable, Eoin; Santiago-Rosario, María Reina; Izzard, Sara; Austin, Sean C.; Nese, Rhonda N. T.; Baldy, Tabathia S. (2021). School Psychology, v36 n6 p433-444. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1316009
-
examining8Schools, gradesK-5
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: March 2023
- Single Study Review (findings for Racial equity through Assessing data for vulnerable decision points, Culturally responsive behavior strategies, and Teaching about implicit bias and how to neutralize it (ReACT))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Black-Other Office Discipline Referral (ODR) risk difference (researcher-created) |
Racial equity through Assessing data for vulnerable decision points, Culturally responsive behavior strategies, and Teaching about implicit bias and how to neutralize it (ReACT) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.09 |
0.17 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Office Discipline Referral (ODR) rates per Black student (researcher-created) |
Racial equity through Assessing data for vulnerable decision points, Culturally responsive behavior strategies, and Teaching about implicit bias and how to neutralize it (ReACT) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.26 |
0.69 |
Yes |
|
||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
29% English language learners -
Other or unknown: 100% -
Rural
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Georgia
-
Race Black 30% Other or unknown 70% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 34% Not Hispanic or Latino 66% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in eight elementary schools in a rural school district located in Georgia. Each participating school enrolled approximately 500 students.
Study sample
The researchers randomly assigned four schools to the intervention group and four schools to the comparison group. Approximately 500 students were enrolled in each school. Approximately 30% of the students in the study were Black and race was not reported for the other 70%. Just over one third of students were Hispanic or Latino and 29% were English learners. Twelve percent of students had a specific learning disability.
Intervention Group
The intervention in this study is ReACT. ReACT stands for Racial equity through Assessing data for vulnerable decision points, Culturally responsive behavior strategies, and Teaching about implicit bias and how to neutralize it. ReACT is a professional development (PD) intervention for all school staff and designed to leverage the positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) framework for increasing racial equity in school discipline. ReACT PD sessions delivered throughout the year focused on helping teachers understand implicit bias and how this influences disciplinary decisions. Sessions also entailed working with teachers to use root cause analyses of discipline data and understand why a discipline action occurred. These analyses informed creation of tailored intervention plans for students. ReACT trainers also led school personnel through a process of identifying which racial/ethnic groups are receiving inequitable discipline. The program was implemented across 3 full-day and 3 half-day sessions, totaling more than 25 hours of PD for school staff.
Comparison Group
Comparison group schools did not offer ReACT, and instead provided business-as-usual PD via professional learning communities. Comparison teachers may have participated in other business-as-usual training and PD offered by their schools or school districts. Comparison schools, like intervention schools, implemented “Tier 1” schoolwide PBIS programming but without an explicit equity focus.
Support for implementation
ReACT PD training entails (a) eliciting explicit statements from administrators regarding their commitment to equity, (b) trainers disclosing examples of their own implicit biases, (c) offering disciplinary strategy choices from a menu of similar interventions, (d) offering testimonials from school personnel willing to pilot these strategies, and (e) providing ongoing coaching of the school PBIS team coordinating the intervention.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).