Running Head: THE ESCALATION CYCLE

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

Practices for Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders
Victoria E. Dickens
University of Virginia
EDIS 5100 Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

2
Abstract

Many educators are not trained in how to deal with the behaviors that cause children with emotional
and behavioral disorders to struggle in the classroom environment. Some of these behaviors include offtask behavior, distracting teachers and fellow students, defiance, and not getting along with peers.
Though most teachers feel as though these behaviors are unpredictable and unmanageable, there is a
pattern to student behavior when a student has EBD, and knowledge of the escalation cycle can benefit
teachers in learning how to diffuse situations before a student loses control. Teachers can use CLASS,
specific praise to reinforce behavior, the Good Behavior Game, and Functional Behavioral Assessments
in order to help them cope with erratic student behavior. These interventions and measures help a
teacher discover the reason for the behavior, the triggers for the behavior, the reinforcements for the
behavior, and how to prevent future incidents. In all situations, a teacher should work collaboratively
with other professionals in order to ensure the best possible practice when implementing any of these
interventions.

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

Students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBDs) experience unique challenges
in the classroom that hinder social and academic development if teachers lack the knowledge and
training to give appropriate social and academic supports. Many teachers are not aware of what
emotional and behavioral disorders entail, nor are they knowledgeable in regards to the research
available that could provide insight into EBD (Cook, Landrum, Tankersley, & Kauffman, 2003).
When working with students who have emotional or behavioral disorders, there is a
distinct cycle of negative behaviors that teachers may find challenging to gauge and difficult to
redirect into a positive classroom environment. Many times teachers will say that students simply
explode, and that some of their behavior is erratic, taking them by surprise (IRIS, 2005).
However, there are signs of these frustrations building up until the student erupts with anger, and
that teachers can learn to recognize a students irritation before that student disturbs the learning
environment in the classroom.
Research has shown that students with EBD receive more reprimands in the classroom
than praise, and that in general, their interactions with peers and teachers are negative, many
times regardless of whether the student shows compliant and on-task behavior (Sutherland,
Wehby, & Copeland, 2000). Many students with EBD find themselves in a spiraling cycle of
negative interactions; one negative experience leads to another, and students learn inappropriate
social skills from these series of negative experiences. Evidence suggests that students who
display behavioral problems also receive less academic instruction, further confounding
frustrations for a student who may be aggressive due to academic deficits (Sutherland, Alder, &
Gunter, 2003). Schools, administrators, and teachers still struggle to create environments that are
sensitive to the needs of individual students, especially when those students have emotional and
behavioral disorders (Manzies & Lane, 2011). Students with EBD get more attention for

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

negative behaviors than positive behaviors, so the cycle of negative interactions becomes a selfperpetuating problem inside and outside of the classroom.
Students with emotional and behavioral disorders react differently than their normally
developing peers to everyday life situations; many times students will react inappropriately to a
situation, lashing out or withdrawing from interaction entirely. However, when examined, this
cycle of behavior can actually be tracked and predicted through what some professionals call the
escalation cycle. This cycle of negative interactions is particularly interesting because this past
summer I had experience with a child who had a mood disorder who would go through these
phases of the escalation cycle, and I saw how each member of the staff reacted and treated her
differently during the escalation cycle. There are seven different phases in the escalation cycle:
calm, trigger, agitation, acceleration, peak, de-escalation, and recovery (IRIS, 2005). Each stage
has distinct signs, and an astute teacher can recognize these changes and prevent the escalation of
behavior with appropriate interventions.
Every student begins at the calm stage, where the student is cooperative and engaged
with their surroundings; in this stage, when a stimuli triggers negative emotions, the student may
not show overt signs of irritation at first. Such triggers cause the student to experience agitation,
a long phase that is characterized by unfocused behavior and a disconnect from the learning
experience, e.g. fidgeting, or reluctance, which can escalate into the acceleration phase if the
teacher does not recognize and ameliorate the problem. In the acceleration phase students will try
to engage in negative questions or comments that interfere with instruction or interrupt the
classroom, and possibly to gain escape from an academic task. Teachers often first recognize a
problem at this point, even though the students frustrations have been building for quite some
time. If unaddressed, this behavior will continue until the student reaches the peak of the

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

escalation cycle, defined by aggressive, violent, vehement behavior that could harm themselves
or others. At this point, prevention is no longer possible, and a teacher must implement a plan to
keep everyone safe until the peak phase subsides into the de-escalation phase. Students are
disoriented and confused during de-escalation; they may withdraw, or refuse responsibility for
their actions. Some students may blame others while other students attempt reconciliation for
their actions; regardless, students are usually less agitated during de-escalation. As long as the
student does not experience another trigger, the student will begin the recovery phase, in which
the child is generally subdued and needs to debrief about the incident. Many educators avoid an
after action review with the student or the class, but teachers can use this as a teachable moment
for everyone involved, and debriefing will help students with EBD learn to talk through their
feelings. In essence, not talking about the incident may unintentionally reinforce the negative
behaviors and create an unhealthy learning environment (IRIS, 2005).
Knowledge of the escalation cycle can allow teachers to prevent negative behaviors
before disrupting the classroom. Educators can be more in-tune with the student before peak
behavior manifests itself and creates a negative classroom environment. The child that I worked
with this past summer would get agitated, and some of the staff would chastise or ignore her
instead of using an intervention to prevent her behavior from escalating. The inconsistencies also
lead to difficulties. Students engage in behaviors because they attain some reinforcement for
engaging in that behavior, and some of the people on staff would reinforce her harmful behavior
by trying to appease her. Educators also need to remember that decreasing off-task behavior does
not always increase accuracy or work completion, so those skills will actually need to be taught
and reinforced. If the root of the problem lies in academic deficits, just providing behavioral
supports proves inefficient and the cause of the initial misbehavior still exists (Menzies & Lane,

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

2011). Along with this point, a teacher would have to know the student well enough to know
what is causing the student to feel and act as they do. Without knowing why, the teacher does not
know what method will prevent negative behaviors or how to approach the student in order to
calm the student down before the student explodes.
If a teacher can recognize these signs, and the teacher can tell what is making the student
upset, then the teacher can prevent the frustrated student from externalizing their behavior
through prevention. Once a student has become irritated, there are steps that a teacher can take in
order to diffuse the situation before anything spirals out of control. Regardless of what happens,
the teacher cannot allow students to act out their aggression freely on other students, because that
creates a hostile, permissive environment and reinforces the violent behavior. While there is not
a lot of research about how to select an intervention, there are a lot of choices for a teacher when
looking at interventions that could be implemented.
The first step in preventing this escalation cycle is to set up a healthy, positive, classroom
environment with quality instruction and a predictable structure. Building a structured, safe
learning environment is pertinent to ensuring student success, where praise is a normal and
frequent occurrence, social skills are taught, and the necessary academic supports are provided.
Engaging classrooms allow students to learn and prevent negative behaviors from occurring. The
Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) is an evaluation tool that can help teachers
with creating and evaluating their classroom environment with regards to supports provided for
students. The CLASS rating scale measures the emotional supports, classroom management, and
instructional supports that are provided in the classroom; emotional supports include positive
climate, negative climate, and the teachers sensitivity towards the students; classroom
management measures the amount of teacher overcontrol, the behavior management, and the

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

productivity of the classroom; the instructional supports measure concept development,

instructional learning formats, and the quality of teacher feedback towards the students that
extends thinking and learning (La Paro, Pianta, & Stuhlman, 2004). In one study, the CLASS
scale was used to evaluate prekindergarten classrooms in six states; in these classrooms there
was great variance for supports, but the emotional support was rated highest while the
instructional support was moderately low to low, entailing excessive directives, recall, and
busywork that did not promote conceptual development (La Paro, et. al., 2004). Even if a student
is at a high risk for school failure and experiences high levels of conflict with teachers,
classrooms with high emotional and instructional support can promote academic success,
especially for students with fewer socioeconomic resources (Hamre & Pianta, 2005).
Praise can stimulate a positive classroom environment and is a proven technique to
promote positive behaviors and compliance, especially for students who show oppositional
behaviors. One study looked at praise that was contingent on specific behaviors versus
nonspecific praise. Contingent teacher praise, or behavior specific praise, has been proven to be
more effective in increasing correct, on-task responses in the classroom (Sutherland, 2000).
More specific praise gives a student more valuable feedback, increasing the likelihood that a
student will perform that behavior again in order to gain positive attention. The literature
indicates that teacher praise impacts student behavior and academic achievement positively,
especially when the teacher provides specific praise that directs a student towards more positive
behaviors (Sutherland, 2000). Some studies also claim that ignoring negative behaviors or using
nonverbal cues to address off task behavior, increase the impact that praise can have on a student
with EBD (Dhaem, 2012; Sutherland, Wehby, & Copeland, 2000). Praise partnered with
opportunity to respond increases on-task behavior, teacher praise, and increases the opportunities

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

to respond that a teacher provides. Sutherland, Alder, and Gunter (2003) conducted a study that
found a possible relationship between praise and opportunities to respond; when the students
were given more opportunities to respond to the teacher, they responded with correct answers
that elicited teacher praise, which gave students confidence to answer more teacher questions.
This caused the students in the self-contained EBD classroom to remain on task, even during the
withdrawal phase of the research. This points to a dynamic relationship between opportunities to
respond and teacher praise; when the teacher gets an increased amount of correct answers from
students, the teacher asks more questions and praises students more, resulting in positive
relationships between the teacher and the students. However, when there is a decrease in praise,
the teacher asks fewer questions that give students an opportunity to respond, in turn resulting in
less praise (Sutherland et. al., 2003). These studies propose interventions that show monumental
impacts for students with EBD and should increase the use of effective teaching practices in
classrooms for students with EBD.
Several studies have supported the use of choice to increase compliance and greater
academic gains for students with emotional and behavioral disorders (Morgan, 2006; Green,
Nicole, & Jolivette, 2011; Kern & State, 2009). Many of the studies show that choice making, in
and of itself, cannot take the place of academic supports, but when used with quality, evidencebased instruction, choice can increase motivation so that students can practice the academic skills
they have been taught. Some precautions should be heeded when using choice as a way to
increase positive interactions and a students on-task behaviors. Practitioners should use caution
when selecting the options the student will choose from because some tasks may be less
academically engaging or may not allow the student to learn and grow through a challenge. In
essence, the type and intensity of reinforcement that a student receives causes better behavior, so

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

a teacher has to know a student individually when selecting tasks and setting up choice
conditions (Morgan, 2006). In early childhood classrooms, choice making can be used as an
antecedent-based intervention to prevent disruptive behaviors and promote communication and
social skills (Green, Mays, & Jolivette, 2011). Choice can also improve the quality of life for
students with EBD through promoting independence and decision making skills. By using
choice, students do not miss important instruction because the antecedent intervention prevents
problems so students are engaging with the learning environment (Kern & State, 2009). Choice
also promotes independence and a feeling of control that students with EBD may not experience
in other areas of their lives.
The same idea supports the use of high-p requests; high probability requests are tasks that
a student has little or no aversion towards and a low probability request is a task the student
actively avoids. In this method, a teacher asks the student to participate in a few high-p activities
before engaging in a low-p request. High P requests, asking students to do smaller tasks then
build up to doing larger tasks that they would normally show an aversion towards, and that
would usually illicit defiance. Practically, this could involve a teacher asking a student to pass
out papers, then ask them to return to their seat, then ask them to do one problem. Since the
student has already said yes to the first two requests, the student will more likely comply with the
last request; Nevin, Mandell, and Atak (1983) referred to this phenomenon as behavioral
momentum, when a student is more likely to respond to low-probability demands after positively
responding to high-probability demands.
The Good Behavior Game causes students to lose or gain reinforcers depending upon the
behavior of all the students in a group; in the game, the students earn or lose points for certain
behaviors that are clearly defined before the game begins, and the students lose or gain

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

10

reinforcers dependent upon their adherence to the rules during the game. In one study of the
Good Behavior Game in two kindergarten classrooms, they implemented two variations to the
game in both classes and observed a decrease in negative behavior for 6 students who were
identified as having emotional or behavioral problems. When implemented, the Good Behavior
Game caused rule violations to drop in some cases to 15% below baseline, and in other cases, to
as much as 45% below the baseline level of rule violations when reinforcements were used for
rule-following; when the Good Behavior Game was removed, the rule violations immediately
jumped back to baseline levels (Tanol, Johnson, McComas, & Cote, 2010). These results prove
the impact that the Good Behavior Game can have on students who experience emotional and
behavioral challenges in the classroom, as well as the ease of implementation for classroom
teachers. The teachers involved in this study provided positive feedback regarding the game and
the positive classroom environment that the game created (Tanol et al., 2010). Another study
found that the Good Behavior Game decreased the amount of oppositional behavior from
students with emotional or behavioral challenges with no significant differences between the
impact that the Good Behavior Game had on boys and girls (Leflot, van Lier, Onghena, &
Colpin, 2010). Both of these studies show the positive effects that the Good Behavior Game can
have on students, and this game can be implemented as a tier one positive behavior support for
all students to increase on-task and positive behaviors.
If all other forms of intervention fail, a teacher can perform a functional behavioral
analysis, in which the teacher records the antecedent-behavior consequence pattern in order to
find patterns, triggers, or the benefit the student gains from specific behaviors, which is known as
the function of the behavior (Green, Mays, & Jolivette, 2011). The teacher identifies the target

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

11

behavior, and after determining what the student is trying to gain, the teacher can pick a
replacement behavior and how to teach and reinforce that new behavior (Menzies & Lane, 2011).
Students with EBD have a history, a cycle of negative interactions, and it is essential for
teachers to prevent this from continuing. This can be done through prevention, reduction, and
interventions. Praise, giving students choices, and positive behavior supports such as the Good
Behavior Game and CLASS all impact students in a positive way, and can improve the outcomes
for students with emotional and behavioral disorders.

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

12
References

Benner, G. J., Beaudoin, K. M., Chen, P. Y., Davis, C., & Ralston, N. C. (2010) The impact of
intensive positive behavior supports on the behavioral functioning of students with
emotional disturbance: How much does fidelity matter? Journal of Behavior Assessment
and Intervention in Children, 1(1), 85-100.
Cook, B. G., Landrum, T. J., Tankersley, M., & Kauffman, J. M. (2003). Bringing research to
bear on practice: Effecting evidence-based instruction for students with emotional or
behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 26(4), 345-361.
Dhaem, J. (2012). Responding to minor misbehavior through verbal and nonverbal responses.
Beyond Behavior, 21(3), 29-34.
Foundation for Child Development & the Picower Foundation. Effective teacher student
interactions: Measuring and improving classroom practice. Retrieved from
www.teachstone.com
Green, K. B., Mays, N. M., & Jolivette, K. (2011). Making choices: A proactive way toimprove
behaviors for young children with challenging behaviors. Beyond Behavior, 20(1), 25-31.
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2005). Can instructional and emotional support in the first-grade
classroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure? Child Development,
76(5), 949-967.
Kern, L., & State, T. M. (2009). Incorporating choice and preferred activities into classwide
instruction. Beyond Behavior, 18(2), 3-11.
Kleinman, K. E., & Saigh, P. A. (2011). The effects of the Good Behavior Game on the conduct
of regular education New York City high school students. Behavior Modification, 35(1),
95-105.
La Paro, K. M., Pianta, R. C., & Stuhlman, M. (2004). The Classroom Assessment Scoring
System: Findings from the prekindergarten year. The Elementary School Journal, 104(5),
409-426.
Leflot, G., Van Lier, P. A. C., Onghena, P., & Colpin, H. (2010). The role of teacher behavior
management in the development of disruptive behaviors: An intervention study with the
Good Behavior Game. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 869-882.
Menzies, H. M., & Lane, K. L. (2011). Using self-regulation strategies and functional
assessment-based interventions to provide academic and behavioral support to students at
risk within three-tiered models of prevention. Preventing School Failure, 55(4), 181-191.

THE ESCALATION CYCLE

13

Morgan, P. L. (2006). Increasing task engagement using preference or choice-making: Some

behavioral and methodological factors affecting their efficacy as classroom interventions.
Remedial and Special Education, 27(3), 176-187.
Nevin, J. A., Mandell, C., & Atak, J. R. (1983). The analysis of behavior momentum. Journal of
the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39, 49-59.
Sutherland, K. S. (2000). Promoting positive interactions between teachers and students with
emotional/behavioral disorders. Preventing School Failure, 44(3), 110.
Sutherland, K. S., Alder, N., & Gunter, P. L. (2003). The effect of varying rates of opportunities
to respond to academic requests on the classroom behavior of students with EBD.
Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 11, 239-248.
Sutherland, K. S., Wehby, J. H., & Copeland, S. R. (2000). Effect of varying rates of behaviorspecific praise on the on-task behavior of students with EBD. Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders, 8(1), 2-8.
Tanol, G., Johnson, L., McComas, J., & Cote, E. (2010). Responding to rule violations or rule
following: A comparison of two versions of the Good Behavior Game with kindergarten
students. Journal of School Psychology, 48, 337-355.
The IRIS Center for Training Enhancements. (2005). Addressing disruptive and
noncompliant behaviors (part 1): Understanding the acting-out cycle. Retrieved
on November 25, 2013, from
http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/bi1/
The IRIS Center for Training Enhancements. (2005). Addressing disruptive and
noncompliant behaviors (part 2): Behavioral interventions. Retrieved on November 25,
2013, from http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/bi2/chalcycle/
Van Acker, R., Grant, S. H., & Henry, D. (1996). Teacher and student behavior as a function of
risk for aggression. Education and Treatment of Children, 19, 316-334.