Identifying lagging skills (why) and unsolved problems (when) is what gets the ball rolling on effectively helping behaviorally challenging students. The instrument developed for this purpose is called the Assessment of Lagging Skills and Unsolved Problems (ALSUP). When it comes to helping behaviorally challenging kids, the ALSUP is absolutely indispensable.
Before I describe the ALSUP, let's adjust our terminology a little. We've established that doing well occurs at the interface of two forces: the expectations of the environment and the skills of the individual. When those two forces are compatible—in other words, when a student has the skills to meet certain expectations—challenging behavior does not occur. But when those two forces are incompatible—what could be referred to as the “clash of the two forces”—the likelihood of challenging behavior is heightened. Henceforth, we'll be referring to what happens when the forces clash as an incompatibility episode: an episode that communicates to us that there is incompatibility between a child's skills and certain demands and expectations.
An incompatibility episode [is] an episode that communicates to us that there is incompatibility between a child's skills and certain demands and expectations.
The first thing to notice about the ALSUP (see Figure 4.1) is the list of lagging skills on the left-hand side. It's not an exhaustive list of lagging skills; if we were to be exhaustive about the skills behaviorally challenging kids have been found to be lacking, the ALSUP would be ten to fifteen pages long. We don't need ten to fifteen pages to help adults recognize that lagging skills are at the core of a student's challenging behavior, and to recognize that many of the things they've been saying about the student have been inaccurate. So it's a representative list of lagging skills. The list helps us move from the general skills of flexibility/adaptability, frustration tolerance, and problem solving to skills that are even more specific.
Figure 4.1: The ALSUP (Assessment of Lagging Skills and Unsolved Problems)
Down the right-hand side is where unsolved problems are documented. Again, an unsolved problem is an expectation the student is having difficulty meeting.
The fact that there is a place to check off the lagging skills can sometimes mislead people into thinking that the ALSUP is a checklist or rating scale. The ALSUP is neither a checklist nor a rating scale. Caregivers who live and work with behaviorally challenging kids are frequently asked to check and rate too much. And, of course, what we're busy checking and rating is behavior (the least important part). Then we tabulate our ratings and count our checks so that we can calculate a total score … then we compare the student's total score to normative data for kids of the same age, grade, or gender … all in the quest for what has become the holy grail of assessment: a percentile that will somehow communicate to us whether the student needs our help. But percentiles aren't very good at telling caregivers whether a student needs help or what kind of help is needed. And percentiles aren't very good at helping adults understand why and when incompatibility episodes are occurring for a particular student.
Instead, the ALSUP is a discussion guide—a guide for discussing a student's lagging skills and unsolved problems. Checklists don't help the different adults who are working with a student have a shared set of lenses; checklists don't help those adults speak the same language; checklists don't persuade the unpersuaded. Discussions about a student's lagging skills and unsolved problems do.
In meetings in which the ALSUP is the discussion guide, the sole focus is on lagging skills and unsolved problems; these are things we can actually do something about.
The ALSUP helps us focus on the things we can actually do something about. Caregivers have a tendency to spend a great deal of time trying to explain a child's behavior, and these explanations typically center on adverse historical or environmental factors about which little can be done. These factors are frequently held up as the cause of a child's difficulties. Although such factors—tough neighborhoods, exposure to substances in utero, parental psychopathology, trauma, and so forth—can certainly exacerbate a child's difficulties, they are seldom the primary cause. In meetings in which the ALSUP is the discussion guide, the sole focus is on lagging skills and unsolved problems; these are things we can actually do something about. And there's no pressure to explain anything; the ALSUP is going to do the explaining for you.
Using the Alsup
Let's consider the format of meetings in which the ALSUP is used as the discussion guide. First, everyone in the meeting is given a blank copy of the ALSUP. It's actually far less productive to have participants fill out the ALSUP prior to the meeting, as that's not conducive to a discussion. And we really do want to have a discussion.
The discussion begins at the top of the ALSUP with the first lagging skill: difficulty making transitions, shifting from one mind-set or task to another. The assembled group is asked to consider whether that lagging skill applies to the student being discussed in the meeting. Deciding whether or not to check off a particular lagging skill isn't a democratic process: if two people feel that the student is lacking the skill and four people aren't so sure, you're still checking off that lagging skill. If the group feels that the student is not lacking that skill, you move on to the next one. But as soon as a lagging skill is checked, you're no longer moving down the list; instead you're moving over to identify the unsolved problems that spring to mind in association with that lagging skill. Identification of unsolved problems is prompted by the question, “Can you give me some examples of times when [student's name] is having difficulty [repeat the lagging skill]?” or “Are there expectations that [student's name] is having difficulty meeting that spring to mind when you think of that lagging skill?”
So, for example, if our expectation is that students come in from recess and back into the classroom quietly, and the student who is being discussed is having difficulty with that, then difficulty quietly coming back into the classroom from recess is an unsolved problem. If our expectation is that students stay in their places in line on the way from the classroom to lunch, and the student being discussed is having difficulty with that, then difficulty staying in place in line on the way from the classroom to lunch is an unsolved problem.
Once a lagging skill has helped us identify one unsolved problem, are we ready to move on to the next lagging skill? No, actually, we're going to identify as many unsolved problems in association with that lagging skill as we possibly can. When we can't think of any more, we move on to the next lagging skill. By the way, you don't want to “cherry-pick” lagging skills; it's best just to go in order. Nor do you want to waste time discussing which lagging skill best explains a given unsolved problem. You can't figure that out with great precision anyway; just assume that multiple lagging skills can contribute to the same unsolved problem.
Checking off lagging skills is the easy part of using the ALSUP. Identifying and wording unsolved problems is the hard part. There are four guidelines involved in writing unsolved problems. These guidelines make it harder to write unsolved problems, but they're worth the added difficulty, for they increase the likelihood that the student will participate in the process of solving the problem. That's because the wording of the unsolved problem on the ALSUP translates directly into the words that will be used to introduce the problem to the child when it comes time to solve it together. Well-worded unsolved problems get the problem-solving process off to a good start; poorly worded unsolved problems can stop the process dead in its tracks. Plus, writing unsolved problems isn't going to be hard forever; it's only going to be hard until you become comfortable with the four guidelines.
Before reviewing the guidelines, here are some key points to remember:
Don't have meeting participants complete the ALSUP beforehand. Doing so is not conducive to discussions, and it's discussions that help people speak the same language, see a child through shared lenses, and persuade the unpersuaded.
Don't go down the entire list of lagging skills and then go back to think of unsolved problems. That makes the connection between lagging skills and unsolved problems more tenuous.
Don't “cherry-pick” lagging skills, bouncing from one lagging skill to another. It's best to go in order and cover them all so that you don't miss anything.
Don't identify unsolved problems and then go back to consider which lagging skill best accounts for each one. Again, just assume that multiple lagging skills could be contributing to the same unsolved problem, and it's not a good use of time to try to determine which lagging skill is the primary contributor.
Identify as many unsolved problems as possible for a checked lagging skill. You don't need to write the same unsolved problem twice, even if a later lagging skill seems to be associated with it. This means that, quite often, early lagging skills will have many unsolved problems written in—only because you covered them first—while later lagging skills are likely to have fewer unsolved problems.
Guidelines for Writing Unsolved Problems
The unsolved problem contains no challenging behaviors. People who are unfamiliar with the ALSUP are often tempted to write challenging behaviors (hitting, swearing, screaming) in as the unsolved problems. But behaviors are not the unsolved problems; the unmet expectations that are causing the behaviors are the unsolved problems. Remember, behavior is just the by-product of the unsolved problem; it's the fever, the signal—it's downstream. The problems causing the behavior are upstream. So we're leaving the behavior out of the unsolved problem. In other words, we're not going to write an unsolved problem as follows: Gets upset and runs away when told to stay in place in the line from the classroom to lunch. “Gets upset and running away” is the behavior … it's gone. The unsolved problem is Difficulty staying in place in the line from the classroom to lunch.
The wording of the unsolved problem translates directly into the words you'll be using to introduce the unsolved problem to the student when it comes time
to solve the problem together.
Why is this an important guideline? Because, again, the wording of the unsolved problem translates directly into the words you'll be using to introduce the unsolved problem to the student when it comes time to solve the problem together. If you refer to a kid's challenging behavior when you're trying to solve a problem with her, she's likely to become defensive or think she's in trouble. And if one or both of those things happen, she's going to be far less receptive to participating in the discussion. And we very badly want her to participate in this discussion. Second, we want to make it crystal clear to the people in the meeting that the behavior is not the unsolved problem; again, the unmet expectation causing the behavior is the unsolved problem. That way, they'll stop talking about the behaviors and start talking about the expectations the student is having difficulty meeting.
The unsolved problem contains no adult theories. If we want to spend our meeting time talking about the things about which we can do something, we're going to talk a lot less (if at all) about our theories and explanations related to the cause of the student's behavior. And we're certainly not going to include theories in the wording of our unsolved problems. In other words, we wouldn't write Difficulty sitting next to Thomas during circle time because her parents are going through a very difficult divorce as an unsolved problem. Anything that comes after the word because is pretty much guaranteed to be a theory and is left out of the unsolved problem.
Why? First, even though school meetings have traditionally been the venue in which adults try to explain a child's behavior, our theories are often wrong. We think they're right, but they're wrong a lot more often than we think they are. Again, when you're using the ALSUP, there's no pressure to explain anything. You're focused solely on identifying lagging skills and unsolved problems. Second, as you know, the wording of the unsolved problem is going to translate directly into the wording we use to introduce the problem to the kid when the time comes to solve the problem together. Throwing a theory at the kid when you really want to talk about the unsolved problem—“I've noticed you're having difficulty sitting next to Thomas during circle time because your parents are going through a very difficult divorce”—is likely to confuse the kid and make it very difficult for her to figure out what information you're seeking (“Are they asking me about sitting next to Thomas or about the divorce?”). Many will simply say, “I don't know,” or not respond at all.
Along these lines, I've begun recommending that adults strive for something I call assumption-free living. The minute one begins assuming that one already understands what's making it hard for a kid to meet a given expectation, one should get rid of that assumption as quickly as possible. It's just a distraction. Plus, as you'll soon see, it's much more reliable to simply ask the kid.
Having school staff talk about lagging skills and unsolved problems instead of theories is a very productive development. Hard in the beginning, but very productive.
The unsolved problem is split, not clumped.
What does this mean? Here are some examples of clumped unsolved problems:
Difficulty getting along with others
Difficulty reading
Difficulty staying safe
Difficulty following directions
Difficulty listening
Difficulty doing as told
Difficulty writing
Let's use that last one to clarify. If we use the words, “I've noticed you're having difficulty writing” to introduce an unsolved problem, then we're asking the student to think about all of the different assignments she's having difficulty writing and all of the different reasons she's having difficulty writing them. That's often asking for too much sorting through, so such wording greatly increases the likelihood of the student responding with “I don't know.” Plus, while it's tempting to believe that the student is having difficulty on all of the writing assignments for the exact same reason, that won't actually be the case most of the time.
So we're going to split the unsolved problem by being precise about the specific individual writing tasks and assignments the student is having difficulty completing. Let's say she's having difficulty writing the term paper in social studies, difficulty writing the definitions to the spelling words in English, and difficulty writing the answers to the word problems in math. Those are three separate unsolved problems.
Our motto is split early; maybe you can clump later … but if you clump early, you'll never find out. This means that when it comes time to solve problems collaboratively, we're going to talk to the student about one of the writing tasks or assignments she's having difficulty completing (say, difficulty completing the term paper in social studies). Because it's been split, we've greatly increased the likelihood that she will participate in the discussion and provide us with information. After we're through gathering information from the student about that single writing task or assignment, we can then ask her if what we now understand about the reasons she's having difficulty completing the term paper in social studies also helps us understand the difficulty she's having in writing the definitions to the spelling words in English. The answer is either yes or no. If the answer is no, it's good that we split the unsolved problem, because the student's difficulties on the two writing assignments are different. But even if the answer is yes, splitting was still a smart play, because the student would have been less likely to talk about it if it had been clumped.
One of the biggest concerns people have about splitting unsolved problems is that it makes the list of unsolved problems very long. But a long list of unsolved problems represents the reality. If there are many expectations the student is having difficulty meeting, then we're not doing her or ourselves any favors by pretending that the list is shorter than it really is. The real favor is that, finally at long last, all of the expectations the student has been having difficulty meeting for a very long time have been identified. Plus, even if the list is lengthy, you're not going to be working on all of the unsolved problems at once anyway. We'll discuss prioritizing later in this chapter.
The unsolved problem is specific.
There are two strategies that will help make the unsolved problem as specific as possible:
Strategy 1: asking “W questions” (who, what, where, and when, but not why)
Strategy 2: inquiring about the expectation the student is actually having difficulty meeting
Examples
Let's bring these strategies to life with some examples. Let's say the meeting participants want to write “Difficulty being impulsive” as an unsolved problem. First, that's a lagging skill, not an unsolved problem. (You'll find impulsiveness in the list of lagging skills.) Remember, the unsolved problems would be the specific expectations a student is having difficulty meeting that spring to mind in association with poor impulse control. So now let's use our strategies.
Where is she impulsive? (Strategy 1)
“She's impulsive during social studies.”
What's going on during social studies when she's being impulsive? (Strategy 1)
“She always calls out answers without raising her hand during social studies discussions.”
That unsolved problem just became a lot more specific after just two applications of Strategy 1. We're almost ready to log that unsolved problem on the ALSUP. But it needs a little additional refining, because there's still a challenging behavior (calling out answers) in there. Let's take calling out answers out of the unsolved problem and insert the word difficulty. Now we have an unsolved problem (Difficulty raising hand during social studies discussions) that contains no challenging behavior, contains no adult theories, is split, and is specific.
You might be thinking that “raising hand” is a behavior, and you'd be right, but it's not a challenging behavior. It's the expectation that the student is having difficulty meeting, so it's fine.
Here's another example. Let's say the group has decided that a student “has a lot of rage.” Not good, right? That's either a behavior or a theory, but it's not a specific unsolved problem (yet). So let's use our strategies:
Where does she have a lot of rage? (Strategy 1)
“Recess.”
What's going on during recess—and with whom—that makes you say she has a lot of rage? (Strategy 1)
“She always kicks her best friend, Teresa, when they disagree about the rules in the four-square game.”
That's a lot more specific. We're almost ready to write that unsolved problem down on the ALSUP. There's only one problem with that unsolved problem: there's a challenging behavior in there (kicking). So let's take kicking out and put the word difficulty in. Now what do we have? Difficulty agreeing with Teresa on the rules in the four-square game during recess.
Let's try one more. Let's say a meeting participant proposes “Difficulty with the word no” as the unsolved problem. Don't write that in! The word no is not the unsolved problem. What caregivers are saying “no” about could be the unsolved problem. Let's use our strategies:
What are you saying no about? (Strategy 1)
“I'm saying, ‘No, you can't go to the bathroom eighteen times during every math period.’”
OK, well, going to the bathroom a lot during math period is the behavior … but what expectation is she having difficulty meeting during math period? (Strategy 2)
“Oh, she's having difficulty completing the division problems on the worksheet during math.”
What is she having trouble with on the division on the worksheet? (Strategy 1)
“Double-digit division problems.”
So are you saying that she's having difficulty completing the double-digit division problems on the worksheet during math?
“Yes!”
Difficulty completing the double-digit division problems on the worksheet during math is the unsolved problem.
Here are some examples of unsolved problems that do not meet the guidelines. Try to figure out which guideline the unsolved problem isn't meeting.
Difficulty moving from one assignment to the next.
If you recognized that this is clumped, well done! To split it, we'd need to be more explicit about the specific assignments the student is having difficulty moving from and to, even if that means writing ten different unsolved problems. Strategy 1 (What assignments is she having difficulty moving from and to?) should help. Some examples of split unsolved problems that might be identified in this instance:
Difficulty moving from English to math.
Difficulty moving from recess back into the classroom.
Difficulty moving from the resource room back to the classroom for math.
Again, while it would be tempting to think that the student is having difficulty moving from all assignments, classes, and activities to the next for the exact same reason, that's unlikely to be true. Here's another:
Difficulty moving from a preferred activity to a less preferred activity.
Clumped, yes? And now we've added a very common theory (preferred and less preferred). We're a lot better off just documenting the specific activities the student is having difficulty moving from and to (using Strategy 1):
Difficulty moving from lunch to the resource room.
Difficulty coming from the bus into the classroom in the morning.
Here's another:
Difficulty completing difficult assignments.
This, you may have noticed, is clumped and may also contain a theory. What we really want to identify are the specific assignments the student is having difficulty completing (using Strategy 1):
Difficulty completing the word problems on the worksheet in math.
Difficulty getting started on the definitions in English.
Difficulty getting started on the geography project in history.
Here's another:
Difficulty treating others with respect when she's upset.
Now, this one is pointing us downstream (when she's upset). To make this unsolved problem more specific, we'd need to ask about the problems that are causing the student to become upset (Strategy 1). Ultimately, it's those unsolved problems that would take the place of the original:
Difficulty finding someone to sit with at lunch.
Difficulty finding someone to sit with on the school bus.
Difficulty when she thinks the kids are cheating during the four-square game at recess.
How do you know that last one isn't a theory? Whenever a potential theory is raised in an ALSUP discussion, you'll want to ask the informant, “How sure are you?” If the answer is, “Not very sure,” it's probably a theory. But if the informant responds, “She [the student] has told me that's why she gets upset at recess,” it's no theory.
In other words, information that's already been provided by the student is usually good protection against adult theorizing. But it's not infallible. A long time ago, I asked a four-year-old girl why she was exhibiting challenging behavior (that's a question I wouldn't ask anymore), and she responded, “I do it for negative reinforcement.” Because most kids that age aren't familiar with the concept of negative reinforcement, it was a distinct possibility that the girl was restating a theory that had been provided to her by adults, and additional querying confirmed this.
Here's another:
Difficulty when Mrs. Thomas says she's lost recess.
This one refers to a punishment that is being applied after a student exhibits a behavior that is resulting from an unsolved problem that isn't specified; so now we're way downstream. Neither the behavior nor the punishment is the unsolved problem. So let's paddle upstream:
What is she losing recess for? (Strategy 1)
“Talking to her classmates during math.”
What expectation is she having difficulty meeting when she's talking to her classmates during math? (Strategy 2)
“Well, she's not supposed to be talking to them … and she's not completing her word problems.”
So she's having difficulty completing the word problems during math?
“Yes … and she's having difficulty remaining quiet during work time in math.”
Good … so we have two unsolved problems there, yes?
“Yes.”
Here's yet another:
Difficulty accepting help.
Clumped, yes? We'd want to know the specific assignments the student needs help with; those are the unsolved problems. Also, you'll want to stay away from the word “accepting” (often what the student is having difficulty “accepting” is an adult-imposed solution, which is downstream).
What is it that you want her to accept help with? (Strategy 1)
“Writing paragraphs in Writer's Workshop.”
What expectation is she having difficulty meeting in writing the paragraphs in Writer's Workshop? (Strategy 2)
“Adding details.”
So she's having difficulty adding the details to the paragraphs during Writer's Workshop?
“Yes.”
Here's still another:
Difficulty staying focused due to socializing with her friends.
This one contains situationally challenging behavior (socializing with friends). It's also clumped; we'd want to know what tasks the student is having difficulty completing. We also want to stay away from words like “focused,” as we really have no way of knowing whether the student is actually focused or not (but we do know the tasks the student is having difficulty completing). In addition, the wording of the lagging skill really shouldn't find its way into the unsolved problem.
When is that happening? (Strategy 1)
“All the time.”
But more specifically when? (Strategy 1)
“You mean an example of a time when that happens?”
Yes, please.
“Geography.”
And what expectation is she having difficulty meeting during geography that makes you say she's not focused and too busy socializing with her friends? (Strategy 2)
“Well, she's not getting her work done.”
What work? (Strategy 1)
“Well, right now we're working on the map of Africa.”
So she's having difficulty completing the map of Africa in geography?
“Yes.”
Just a few more:
Difficulty arriving to class on time.
Clumped. What class(es)?
Difficulty doing things on the first request.
Clumped. What things?
Difficulty if things don't go her way.
Clumped. Also possibly a theory. What things?
Difficulty not lying.
Pure behavior. What's the student lying about? Some people might be tempted to change this to Difficulty telling the truth, and that might feel like a step in the right direction, but it's still clumped, and we'd still need to know what the student is having difficulty telling the truth about. If the student is having difficulty telling the truth about whether she's completed her lab reports in science, then Difficulty not lying and Difficulty telling the truth—which are downstream—would be replaced by Difficulty completing her lab reports in science.
Also, you want to avoid unsolved problems that include the word not whenever possible, especially as the not often refers to a challenging behavior. So Difficulty not pushing people in the lunch line would be altered to the actual expectation the student is having difficulty meeting: Difficulty keeping hands to self in the lunch line. And Difficulty not calling kids mean names on the bus would be altered to Difficulty speaking kindly to John and Trevor on the school bus.
Here's one more:
Difficulty getting off the computer when I tell her to.
The difficulty getting off the computer part is fine, but the when I tell her to part isn't, mostly because it's not specific enough.
So let's ask some questions:
When are you telling her to get off the computer?
“At the end of choice time.”
And what expectation is she having difficulty meeting when she doesn't turn off the computer at the end of choice time?
“She's supposed to be going to math.”
Always math?
“Yes, math is always after choice time.”
So she's having difficulty turning off the computer at the end of choice time to go to math?
“Yes!”
Enough examples of what could go wrong and how to get it right? OK, here's an example of an ALSUP reflecting well-worded unsolved problems (Figure 4.2).
Aside from identifying lagging skills and unsolved problems, what do we hope happens in an ALSUP meeting? A whole bunch of good things:
Participants come to appreciate that the student is, indeed, lacking a lot of skills, so they're now wearing—or, at least, trying on for size—different lenses.
Participants come to appreciate why interventions that have been focused primarily on motivation haven't been working. Motivation wasn't the issue all along.
Participants who have been treating the student in a harsh, adversarial, punitive manner may start to feel some regret now that they understand what's really getting in the way for the student.
Participants come to recognize that incompatibility episodes occur only in the context of specific unsolved problems, and are therefore highly predictable.
Participants also come to recognize that if those problems are solved, they won't cause incompatibility episodes anymore.
Participants recognize that if unsolved problems are predictable, they can be solved proactively rather than emergently.
If those things are accomplished in a meeting, then participants will leave the meeting with new lenses (lagging skills), a new language, and a clear sense of what problems need to be solved. The alternative, of course, is to continue discussing behaviors, diagnoses, and things about which nothing can be done, in which case participants will continue to leave meetings feeling that they can do nothing to help the student, and also possibly feeling that the meeting was a complete waste of time.
You may have noticed that the student is not present in the ALSUP meeting. Although we want to be collaborating with the student on solving problems as soon as possible, we need to facilitate the free flow of information among school staff in discussing the student's lagging skills and unsolved problems before the problem solving begins. If the student is present, staff might not feel at liberty to speak freely, and there's always the risk of the student disagreeing with what the staff are saying. So the student isn't present at this meeting. But that doesn't mean the student doesn't have valuable information to offer, especially in the realm of unsolved problems. Thus it's a good idea to meet separately with the student for the purpose of gathering this information. Because students aren't familiar with your new terminology, you wouldn't ask a student about her unsolved problems. But you could ask, “What are people bugging you about?” (whatever people are bugging her about must be an unsolved problem or they wouldn't be bugging her about it); or “What are people giving you a hard time about?” (again, whatever people are giving her a hard time about must be an unsolved problem or they wouldn't be giving her a hard time about it); or “What are you getting in trouble for?” (students don't get in trouble over solved problems; they only get into trouble over unsolved problems). Any new unsolved problems provided by the student should be added to the list on the ALSUP.
Prioritizing
A few things can happen after you've identified a student's lagging skills and unsolved problems. One possibility is that you may feel completely overwhelmed by the realization that there is a monumental task at hand. Behaviorally challenging students often have quite a few lagging skills. And, if you've done a good job of splitting, a given student may have thirty to forty different unsolved problems.
There's a silver lining to all those lagging skills and unsolved problems: at least you now know what they are. In other words, not knowing about them is far more overwhelming than knowing about them. And you're not going to be trying to solve all of those unsolved problems at once anyway, tempting as that might be. Indeed, trying to solve all of those problems at once is the best way to ensure that none of them get solved at all.
You're going to have to prioritize. Which unsolved problems are going to be solved first, and which are we setting aside for now?
Now you don't have to wait until the student disrupts the class before you try to solve the problem that causes the disruption; you can do it in advance because the problem (and the disruption) are predictable.
Before we talk about that, here's another reason to feel less overwhelmed by that long list of unsolved problems: now that you've identified them, they can be solved proactively. When unsolved problems remain unidentified, you're still stuck trying to deal with them emergently and reactively, and that's just a lot less effective. Now you don't have to wait until the student disrupts the class before you try to solve the problem that causes the disruption; you can do it in advance because the problem (and the disruption) are predictable. In other words, you're no longer responding to one incident after another (an approach captured by the well-known maxim related to chickens with their heads cut off). You're solving the problems that are causing those incidents, and now you know what those problems are. Your head is very much on.
And what about all those lagging skills you've checked off? Don't they have to be taught? Well, yes and no. Yes, improving those skills would be a very positive development. But you're actually not going to be teaching the vast majority of skills on the ALSUP in a direct or explicit manner because there's no technology for doing so. True, some of the skills—some basic social skills and language processing and communication skills—can be taught directly, and there you'd want to rely on programs such as Michelle Garcia-Winner's Social Thinking model. But the vast majority of skills are going to be taught indirectly, by solving problems collaboratively and proactively. Put another way, when you're solving problems collaboratively and proactively, you're simultaneously (but indirectly) teaching the student the skills she's lacking.
So your primary focal point is the unsolved problems. Which ones should you prioritize? First and foremost, any that are causing safety issues. If there are no safety issues, go with the unsolved problems that are causing incompatibility episodes with the greatest frequency. But don't obsess over prioritizing; getting started with the process of solving problems collaboratively and proactively is more important than splitting hairs over which specific unsolved problems to start with. Can the student help you decide which unsolved problems to prioritize? Sure, why not?
How many unsolved problems should you target initially? No more than three. Any more than that, and both you and the student will be working on too many things at once. What are you doing with the rest? You're setting them aside, at least for now. Unsolved problems that have been removed from the agenda won't set in motion incompatibility episodes anymore. You'll read more about the setting aside part in later chapters.
How do you keep track of everything? With another instrument—also a single-sided, single sheet of paper—called the Problem Solving Plan (Figure 4.3). This instrument provides a convenient mechanism for listing the problems that are presently prioritized for a student, designating the person who's taking primary responsibility for solving that problem with the student, and tracking progress in solving the problem. Once a problem is solved, it is removed from the Problem Solving Plan and another problem from the ALSUP takes its place. (See Figure 4.4 for a filled-out Problem Solving Plan.)
Figure 4.4: Problem Solving Plan (Plan B Flowchart)
Some schools have found that the Problem Solving Plan eventually takes the place of the old Behavior Plan. The Behavior Plan is focused on the wrong thing (behaviors); the Problem Solving Plan is focused on the right thing (the problems that are causing those behaviors).
Why is it important to designate the adult who's taking primary responsibility for solving a given problem with the student? Because if no one is designated, one of two bad things will happen. Possibility number one: everyone will work on the problem with the student, which is both overkill and unlikely. Possibility number two (more likely): no one will work on the problem with the student, in which case the problem will remain unsolved.
In the hustle and bustle of the school day, problems (and students) can get lost in the shuffle. Under such circumstances, the problems never get identified and solved. The ALSUP and Problem Solving Plan keep that from happening. They keep things organized. They make problem solving systematic and proactive. They save time.
Q & A
Question: What if I have thirty students in my classroom and five or ten of them are behaviorally challenging? Do I need an ALSUP for all of the challenging ones?
Answer: That would be ideal, just to help you organize the effort. Helping ten behaviorally challenging students is a daunting task in and of itself, and it's even more daunting if you're not going about it in a systematic, planned manner. Remember, all those unsolved problems didn't get there overnight, and you're not going to get them solved overnight either. So, rather than chronically putting out brushfires—let's face it, that's why those problems got stacked up in the first place—you'll know what problems you're trying to solve (and which ones you're not prioritizing) with each student. Slowly but surely, you'll not only see progress with each student but also in the general functioning of your class as a whole.
Question: For the less challenging kids, do I need a complete ALSUP, or can I just start solving problems?
Answer: You can solve a problem collaboratively with a student whenever you want. But if a student has a long list of unsolved problems, the organizing and prioritizing piece is critical. Otherwise you run the risk of working on everything at once, or of working on problems that aren't your top priorities.
Question: Is the student's parent present at the ALSUP meeting?
Answer: No, not usually at the first one. The free flow of information is the premium, and school staff may not speak freely in the presence of the student's parent. Better to ask the parent(s) about the student's lagging skills and unsolved problems in a separate meeting.
Question: In my school, we don't really meet together as a group very often. Is the ALSUP something I can complete on my own?
Answer: Yes, you could complete the ALSUP on your own. But better to find ways to get together with all the people in the building who interact with the child. That way, everyone's on the same page. Helping all the adults who interact with the child get on the same page regarding lenses and priorities is crucial. And the expectations the student is having difficulty meeting may vary from one adult to another.
Question: What if, in a meeting, when I'm probing for specific unsolved problems after checking off a lagging skill, the participants respond with “always” or “with everyone”?
Answer: Use the two strategies you just read about to transform those responses into specific unsolved problems. Here's what that might sound like:
FACILITATOR Does Zoe have difficulty making transitions?
PARTICIPANT Oh, absolutely.
FACILITATOR OK, let's check that off. When does she have difficulty making transitions?
PARTICIPANT All the time.
FACILITATOR Well, like with who?
PARTICIPANT Everybody.
FACILITATOR Where?
PARTICIPANT Everywhere.
FACILITATOR Can you give me an example of a transition she had difficulty making yesterday?
PARTICIPANT Oh, well, she had difficulty coming back into the classroom from recess yesterday.
FACILITATOR Is that something she often has difficulty doing?
PARTICIPANT Definitely.
FACILITATOR So, it sounds like Difficulty coming back into the classroom from recess is one of our unsolved problems, yes?
PARTICIPANT Yes! Now I see what you're after.
Question: What if it takes more than one meeting to cover all the lagging skills and unsolved problems?
Answer: That'll be time well spent, especially when we consider how much time is being spent on the student because we haven't yet identified her lagging skills and unsolved problems.
Question: Isn't there something to be said for letting staff vent about students in a meeting?
Answer: Sure, for about two minutes. But if the entire meeting is spent on venting—if staff never get around to the information (lagging skills and unsolved problems) that will help them do something about the behaviors they're venting about—then they'll still be venting in the next meeting … and the next.
Question: On previous iterations of the ALSUP, weren't the lagging skills divided into categories?
Answer: Yes, quite some time ago, the lagging skills were divided into five categories: executive skills, language processing and communication skills, emotion regulation skills, cognitive flexibility skills, and social skills. But I found that the categories were doing more harm than good. First, there's so much overlap among the categories that it's actually a bit artificial to treat them as discrete entities. Second, I found that caregivers were counting the number of checks within a category as a means of prioritizing, when it's actually not lagging skills that are being prioritized; it's unsolved problems that are being prioritized. Third, it's the specific lagging skills—not the categories—that really help caregivers understand what's getting in the way for a kid.
Question: Aren't lagging skills and unsolved problems kind of negative? Isn't it important to focus on the student's strengths too?
Answer: It's great to focus on a kid's strengths in addition to her lagging skills and unsolved problems. Remember, though, that it's not the strengths that are contributing to incompatibility episodes; it's lagging skills and unsolved problems. And although talking about lagging skills and unsolved problems may seem negative, it's a vast improvement over what caregivers have been saying about a behaviorally challenging kid. Interestingly, the CPS model is usually characterized as a strength-based approach.
Question: In talking about unmet expectations, is it also useful to think about whether the expectations are realistic for the student?
Answer: That's a very important part of the discussion. Unrealistic expectations are often a major precipitant of incompatibility episodes.
Question: I can see completing the ALSUP and Problem Solving Plan in the usual meetings that take place in my school. But where do you think I'm going to find the time to solve all of those problems?
Answer: There are some pockets of time throughout the school day that can be devoted to problem solving if we're systematic about it. Before school, after school, during lunch, during recess, during prep time, when the rest of the class is busy working on something—these are all times that can be devoted to problem solving. And, as you'll read in chapter 8, many schools have committed to carving out specific times every day to solving problems with students. Not solving problems takes up a lot more time than solving them.
Not solving problems takes up a lot more time than solving them.
