I t was January, and Jody, the new principal at Plateau Frontier High School (pseudonym), had a problem. Although excited and well prepared to begin her new position, the fact that she was the fifth person in four years to hold the job weighed heavily on her mind. In addition, several issues required her immediate attention, including the top of the list: student discipline. Leaders from the district office, in collaboration with the state network, had begun the process of bringing the positive behavioral interventions and support (PBIS) framework to schools in the district, but Plateau Frontier High School had yet to take the necessary steps to be trained. In collaboration with her assistant principals and a team of teacher leaders, Jody decided to take the rest of the year and explore what PBIS had to offer. However, the last four principals also tried to implement ‘‘one more thing’’ or ‘‘something new’’ and faced significant pushback from both faculty and students. In addition, she heard from a principal at another high school implementing PBIS school-wide that it is a very difficult process, albeit a worthwhile one once you got going. Jody knew that to solve these intertwined dilemmas she would have to think outside the box. Schools implementing schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS) at the high school level face the same challenges as elementary and middle schools (see Bambara, Nonnemacher, & Kern, 2009), but also encounter an additional set of barriers all their own (Bohanon, Fenning, Borgmeier, Flannery, & Malloy, 2009; Flannery & Sugai, 2009; Flannery, Sugai, & Anderson, 2009; Morrisey, Bohanon, & Fenning, 2010). To name but a few, these barriers include the need to focus on dropout prevention, postsecondary outcomes, academic issues, and career readiness (Flannery & Sugai, 2009). In addition, because most high schools are organized by large, disparate academic departments with unique purposes, there are often inefficiencies with respect to (a) communication between and among individual faculty members, departments, and administrators; (b) agreement on common expectations for students; (c) willingness to spend time teaching and reinforcing expectations; and (d) establishing core systems (e.g., for data collection and decision-making) to support PBIS initiatives (Flannery, Guest, & Horner, 2010). Each of these interrelated issues added unique and collective complexity to Jody’s life as she transitioned into her new role. Inefficiencies regarding how high schools work (or don’t work) play a role in limiting the success of academic (see Supovitz & Weinbaum, 2008) and behavioral (see Bohanon et al., 2009) reforms. Therefore, new thinking is required in order to bring successful reform to high schools (Elmore, 2004), especially when implementing SWPBIS (Lewis, 2009; Newcomer & Barrett, 2009; Putnam et al., 2009). For many schools, successful reforms hinge on the actions of building-level administrators (Fullan, 2007) and buy-in from their faculty and staff (Lohrmann, Forman, Martin, & Palmieri, 2008). Specifically, administrators are charged with providing a compelling vision for the future to their faculty and staff, which should extend beyond a catchy slogan and rhetoric (i.e., let’s move from excellent to outstanding) (Spillane & Coldren, 2011). An example of extending beyond cliche slogans is using data to spur authentic dialog among stakeholders, and rally support for a needed reform framework such as SWPBIS (Kennedy et al., 2009). But how can a principal like Jody use data to do more than simply give status updates to her faculty and other stakeholders?