Consultants say tiered Behavior Solutions work is reducing suspensions and aggression in Dickinson schools

John Hannigan, co‑author of Behavior Solutions, told the Dickinson Public School District board that the district’s first year of schoolwide (tier 1) work has laid the foundation for targeted (tier 2) interventions and measurable behavior change.

The consultants said the framework treats behavior instruction similarly to academic instruction: teach essential behavioral standards, identify students who are not meeting them, then apply targeted interventions and monitor outcomes. “We’re building the capacity of your amazing leaders and educators to make sure we have what we need in place to produce productive, empathic members in our community one day,” John Hannigan said.

Why it matters: the presenters and a district staff member told the board the approach has produced concrete measures and early successes in Dickinson schools, and they urged the district to make intervention options more visible and to track whether interventions meet their stated goals.

According to a district staff presentation summarized at the meeting, schools set 35 building behavioral SMART goals this school year; 24 of those goals have been met so far. One elementary school reported reducing physical aggression during recess by more than 50 percent in one month after instituting the tier‑1 instruction and follow‑up interventions. High school leaders reported a nearly 66 percent reduction in suspensions, and staff described cases where students who previously received out‑of‑school suspension remained in class after participating in replacement‑skill programs.

Jessica Hannigan, who also co‑authored Behavior Solutions, emphasized that the model is a systematic approach, not a single program, and that districts should expect varying paces of progress across elementary, middle and high schools. “We had the opportunity to meet with what y’all call the blue teams, like your intervention teams, to now start that next level of, okay, when we have repeated kiddos now needing behavioral needs or mental health needs, what does that look like? And what are we doing? How do we know if that’s working or not?” she said.

District staff urged the board to continue supporting a visible “menu” of formal interventions on each campus so teachers and families can see what supports are available when students do not respond to universal instruction. A district staff member who led the presentation said the work pulled together prior local initiatives, including PBIS, restorative practices and trauma‑informed approaches, into a single, measurable structure.

John Hannigan told the board that implementing the professional learning and high‑reliability practices is not instantaneous; between three and five years is a common timeline to reach the deeper effects of the model, with tier 1 in year one and tier 2 emphasized in year two. Board members thanked the presenters and accepted copies of the Behavior Solutions materials distributed to trustees.

The presentation and question‑and‑answer period occupied the board’s informational segment; no formal board action or vote was taken on the item.