When it comes to student support, the color-coded PBIS Triangle is often used to visualize how schools provide different levels of intervention—green for most students, yellow for some, and red for a few. At first glance, it seems like a simple and practical way to organize resources, but I believe it does a disservice to the complexity of student needs.
by Dr. Tim Grivois, Executive Director
The PBIS Triangle suggests that students can be neatly categorized into tiers, as though their challenges and strengths fit into fixed boxes. The reality, however, is much more nuanced. Students don’t fall into rigid categories, and their needs can’t be so easily compartmentalized. What works for one student one day might need adjustment the next, and yet the triangle implies a static, one-size-fits-all approach to support.
The Problem with Deficit Thinking Inherent in the PBIS Triangle
What bothers me most about the PBIS Triangle is how it can unintentionally promote a deficit-based view of students. Those in the “red zone,” at the top of the triangle, are often seen as the most problematic, rather than as individuals with unique strengths that need to be nurtured. By framing support as a hierarchy, the triangle suggests that the more a student “moves up” through the tiers, the more of a problem they are. This mindset doesn’t align with the fluid, ever-changing nature of how students grow, learn, and experience challenges.
A More Dynamic Approach to Support
Instead of a color-coded triangle, I advocate for a model that is adaptable and responsive, based on relationships and real-time needs. Student support shouldn’t feel like moving up layers of intervention as if it’s a problem to be solved. It should be a continuous process of growth, rooted in the belief that every student has strengths to build on. A better metaphor might be a wall of houseplants—some need more water than others, and some might have thorns. But we don’t blame the plants for needing different care. Instead, we adapt our approach to help them thrive.
In the same way, schools should be places where systems are built to meet individual needs, not where students are expected to fit into pre-made structures. Supports should grow with the students, shifting as their needs evolve. And just as importantly, these systems should support the adults responsible for nurturing those students, ensuring they have what they need to provide that care.
PBIS can be a powerful tool, but it’s time we move away from simplistic models that risk turning students into problems to be managed. Instead, let’s focus on creating systems that grow with them, driven by strengths and grounded in relationships.
Check out some tools that can help build alternatives to PBIS: