Transcript Slide 1

Universal Screening Using the
Systematic Screening for
Behavior Disorders (SSBD)
Louisiana Positive Behavior Support
1st Annual Conference
July 11, 2008
Cindy Morgan-D’Atrio, Ph.D.
Gale Naquin, Ph.D.
University of New Orleans
Pupil Assistance Model (PAM) Team
Overview
How does universal behavior screening fit
in to the “big RTI picture?”
Description of SSBD
How do we look at SSBD data?
Screenings in Jefferson Parish
Public Schools 2006-2007 & 2007-2008
Future Directions
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
2
Response to Intervention
(RTI)
IS
IS NOT
A multi-tiered process that
enables early identification
Allocates instructional
resources to student needs
Use of scientific research to
guide instruction and direct
interventions
Uses data to drive studentrelated decisions and
problem-solving
An Instructional Program
A Curriculum
A Strategy
An Intervention
A Committee
A Fad
An Educational Revolution
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
3
An RTI Model includes:
High quality,
research-based
instruction
Continuous progress
monitoring and use of
data
Actively involved
administrators and
teachers
Ongoing interventions
Universal screening
of academics and
behavior
Problem-solving
framework to be applied
to the system,
classroom and
individual student
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
4
Advantages of RTI:
Focus on providing effective instruction
across the board (instead of WHO is
eligible)
Identification is not dependent on teacher
referral
Encourages placement of student in
intervention immediately rather than
waiting for time-consuming and often
expensive assessments
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
5
How RTI Relates to NCLB:
Academic and behavior problems are
identified early; intervention is EARLY
Progress monitoring is ongoing
Design and implementation of remedial
and individualized interventions for
children not responding to scientifically
based curriculum and instruction
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
6
Integrating RTI and PBS makes
sense:
Effective educational environments meet
both the academic and social needs of
students
Effective behavioral support enhances
academic outcomes
Effective instruction enhances social
behavior
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
7
Integrating RTI and PBS makes
sense:
Children who engage in problem behavior
typically do so for one of two MAIN
reasons:
– Get access to attention (adult/ peer)
– Avoid/escape work or demands
Good instruction improves behavior
Good behavioral support improves
academic engagement… and academic
gains
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
8
TIER 3
Intensive, Individual Interventions
Individual Students; Assessmentbased; High Intensity; longer
duration
TIER 2
Targeted Group Interventions
Some students (at-risk)
High efficiency
Rapid response
Academic
Systems
5%
TIER 3
Intensive, Individual Interventions
Individual Students; Assessmentbased; Intense, durable procedures
15%
80%
TIER 1
Core Instructional/
Universal Interventions
TIER 2
Targeted Group Interventions
Some students (at-risk)
High efficiency
Rapid response
Behavioral
Systems
TIER 1
Universal Interventions
All settings; all students;
preventive; proactive
All students; preventive,
proactive
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
9
Fluid Movement Through the Three
Tiers
Tier III
Tier II
Tier I
Successful
Unsuccessful
Response to
Intervention
Response to
Intervention
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
10
SSBD – Description
Hill M. Walker, Ph.D. & Herbert H. Severson,
Ph.D.
Published in 1990
Universal-screening instrument (all reg. ed.)
Identifies “AT-RISK” students
3-stage, multiple-gating system
Grades 1-6
Behavior is 2-dimensional:
– EXTERNALIZING and INTERNALIZING
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
11
RANK ORDERING
Teacher Screens class
on Int. & Ext.
behavioral dimensions
SSBD:
The Multiple
Gating
Procedure
Take 3 highest
ranked on Int. &
Ext. dimension
GATE 1
RATING SCALES
rate 3 highest
ranked students on
Int. & Ext. dimension
Determine if scores
meet cutoffs
GATE 2
DIRECT
OBSERVATIONS
in classroom & on
playground by
someone other than
teacher
Determine if scores
meet cutoffs
GATE 3
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
ABIT or problem-solving team more
involved
12
[INTERVENTION(S) or EVALUATION]
SSBD – Description (3 Stages)
Stage 1:
– Teachers rank order students along either the
EXTERNALIZING or INTERNALIZING dimension
Stage 2:
– Rating scales completed on 3 highest ranked students
from Stage 1 (3 for Ext. & 3 for Int. = 6 scales)
– Each rating scale includes:
CRITICAL EVENTS INDEX (33 items)
COMBINED FREQUENCY INDEX (23 items –
Adaptive and Maladaptive Behavior)
– Cutoff scores applied
Stage 3:
– Professional other than teacher observes “at-risk”
students using structured observations (academic
engaged time & social behavior)
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
13
SSBD – Technical Properties
5 years to develop
Field tested in six school districts across
country
Standardization samples:
– Stage 2 measures: 4500 cases
– Stage 3 observations: 1300 cases
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
14
SSBD – Properties
7 Assumptions of the Authors:
1. Externalizers are more frequently
referred than Internalizers
2. Teachers’ assumptions are valid,
accurate, cost-effective and
underutilized in identification of students
having behavioral disorders
3. Screenings require teachers to look at
behavior of all of their students
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
15
SSBD – Properties
7 Assumptions of the Authors:
4. Rankings, ratings and observations are
necessary to adequately assess student
behavior
5. Academic engaged time and social
behavior are important indicators of student
adjustment
6. Externalizing and Internalizing dimensions
capture the majority of behavior disorders
7. Early identification of students with behavioral
disorders is critical32
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
16
SSBD – Technical Properties
STAGE 1
Externalizing Internalizing
Interrater
Reliability
.89 - .94
.82 - .90
Test-retest
Reliability
.81 - .88
.74 - .79
Sensitivity (accuracy
of procedures in
identifying students who
had previously been
identified)
9 out-of 10
within
highest 3
ranked
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
17
SSBD – Technical Properties
Adaptive Maladaptive
Behavior
Behavior
STAGE 2
Internal Consistency
(coefficient alpha)
Stability of Teacher
Ratings
.85 - .88
.82 - .87
.88
.83
(Pearson correlations of
teacher ratings over 1 month)
Stability of Critical Events Index not conducted
due to scoring system (1 or 0) and low
frequencies of checked events
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
18
SSBD – Technical Properties
STAGE 3
Interobserver
agreement
Academic
Engaged Time
Playground
Social Behavior
.86 – 1.00
.65 – 1.00
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
19
The Dimensions
Internalizing Dimension:
• behaviors directed inwardly
• self-imposed
• social deficits
• patterns of avoidance
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
20
Internalizing Dimension
Examples:
– Low / restricted activity levels
– Quiet around others
– Shy, timid, unassertive
– Avoiding social situations
– Preference to be alone
– Fearful
– Doesn’t play games or engage in activities
– Unresponsive to initiations by others
– Allowing self to be victimized
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
21
Internalizing Dimension
Non-Examples:
– Engaging socially with others
– Initiating conversations
– Playing with others
– Exhibiting positive social behavior toward
others
– Participating in games and activities
– Resolving conflicts appropriately
– Joining in with others
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
22
The Dimensions
Externalizing Dimension:
• behavior are directed outwardly
• behavioral excesses
• behavior is considered inappropriate
by most adults
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
23
Externalizing Dimension
Examples:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Displaying aggression toward people or things
Arguing
Forcing others to be submissive
Exhibiting defiance / noncompliance
Out-of-seat
Having tantrums
Being overactive
Being disruptive or disturbing others
Stealing
Not following rules or directions
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
24
Externalizing Dimension
Non-Examples:
– Cooperating and sharing
– Working on schoolwork / assignments
– Letting others know when he/she needs
assistance
– Listening to the teacher
– Interacting with others appropriately
– Following directions
– Attending during activities
– Complying with teacher requests
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
25
Students can only be an
Internalizer
OR
Externalizer
NOT BOTH!
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
26
Stage Two Scoring:
“At-Risk” Identification
Dimension
Internalizing
Criteria to Pass to Stage 3
Critical Events
Index
Adaptive Behavior
Maladaptive
Behavior
>4
----
----
OR
>1
Externalizing
AND < 41
AND > 19
Critical Events
Index
Adaptive Behavior
Maladaptive
Behavior
>5
----
----
OR
>1<5
AND < 30
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
AND > 35
27
Dimension
Criteria to Pass to Stage 3
Critical Events Index
Adaptive Behavior
Maladaptive Behavior
>4
----
----
Internalizing
OR
>1
AND < 41
AND > 19
Critical Events Index
Adaptive Behavior
Maladaptive Behavior
>5
----
----
Externalizing
OR
>1<5
AND < 30
AND > 35
Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD) TRACKING SHEET
School: GREAT Elementary
Teacher
Grade
Student
SUMMARY by CRITICAL EVENTS
INDEX
(M or F)
Gender Race
Critical
Events
Form
Ext. or Int.
(E or I)
Critical
Events
Index
Date:
11/14/07
Adaptive Maladaptive Check if
Behavior
Behavior Student is
Score
Score
"At-Risk"
Simpson
2
Lance
M
B
E
9
22
36
+
Charles
4
David
M
B
E
4
26
41
+
Smith
2
Brian
M
B
E
3
32
32
Smith
2
Javon
M
B
I
7
44
12
Davis
4
Nell
F
H
I
3
43
16
5
+
5
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
28
How do we
look at SSBD
data?
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
29
Primarily through
EXCEL
spreadsheets
we’ve created…
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
30
SSBD Results
Identify At-Risk Students
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
31
Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD) TRACKING SHEET
School: GREAT Elementary
Teacher
Grade
Student
SUMMARY by CRITICAL EVENTS INDEX
Critical
Events
Form Ext.
(M or F)
or Int. (E or
Gender Race
I)
Critical
Events
Index
Date:
11/14/07
Adaptive Maladaptive Check if
Behavior
Behavior Student is
Score
Score
"At-Risk"
Davis
4
Jane
F
B
E
15
24
40
+
Simpson
2
Lance
M
B
E
9
22
36
+
Charles
4
David
M
B
E
8
32
41
+
Smith
2
Brian
M
B
E
7
31
32
+
Bernard
5
Bethany
F
B
E
7
39
44
+
Thompson
3
Jeffrey
M
B
E
4
30
41
+
Bernard
5
Lisa
F
B
E
4
41
34
+
Reavis
1
Julio
M
H
E
3
28
35
+
Carter
1
Davonte
M
B
E
2
31
36
+
Smith
2
Javon
M
B
I
7
44
12
+
Davis
4
Nell
F
H
I
6
26
16
+
Bernard
5
Rufus
M
B
I
6
23
32
+
Simpson
2
Darryl
M
B
I
4
45
30
+
Mercer
1
Keshawn
M
B
I
3
32
19
+
14
14
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
32
SSBD Results
School Summary
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
33
SSBD School Summary Report
2007-2008 School Year
School: GREAT ELEMENTARY
*Total Screened Population:
247
# of Students Nominated on SSBD:
47
"At-Risk" Students
RACE
% of Students Nominated on SSBD 19.0%
# of Students "At-Risk" on SSBD:
20
% of Students "At-Risk" on SSBD: 8.1%
"*" Total Student Population = all regular education
students in grades 1-5 (or 6 if applicable), and
students identified as Speech Only and Gifted or
Talented
CEI
#
%
Black:
17
85.0%
140
56.7%
6.9%
Hispanic:
3
15.0%
84
34.0%
1.2%
White:
0
0.0%
9
3.6%
0.0%
Asian:
0
0.0%
11
4.5%
0.0%
Other:
0
0.0%
3
1.2%
0.0%
20
100.0%
247
100.0%
8.1%
"At-Risk" Students
#
%
Externalizing:
15
75.0%
Internalizing:
5
25.0%
20
100.0%
"At-Risk" Students
GENDER
% of "At# of
% of
Risk"
students in students in students in
population population population
(minus
(minus
(minus
SpEd.)
SpEd.)
SpEd.)
# of
# of "AtTotal # of
students
% of
Risk"
students by % of "At- nominated students
students in % of
grade
Risk"
by grade nominated
Externalizin Internalizin
each
"At-Risk"
(minus
students in
(minus
in entire
GRADE
g
g
grade
total
SpEd.) entire grade
SpEd.)
grade
"At-Risk" Students
1st:
2
1
3
15.0%
61
1.2%
16
26.2%
2nd:
3
2
5
25.0%
57
2.0%
12
21.1%
3rd:
3
0
3
15.0%
55
1.2%
4
7.3%
#
%
4th:
5
1
6
30.0%
42
2.4%
8
19.0%
Males:
14
70.0%
5th:
2
1
3
15.0%
32
1.2%
7
21.9%
Females:
6
30.0%
15
5
20
100.0%
247
8.1%
47
19.0%
20
100.0%
75.0%
25.0%
refers to students
"At-Risk" on SSBD
100.0%
refers to students
nominated on SSBD
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
refers to regular/entire
student population
34
SSBD Results
Item Analysis – developed at UNO
Address training needs for PBS
Identify concerns by:
– Grade
– Gender
– Dimension
– School
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
35
School: GREAT Elementary
Date of Admin: 11/14/07
Grade 1
EXT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
CRITICAL EVENTS INDEX
Steals
Sets fires
Vomits after eating
Tantrums
Physically assaults adults
Painful Shyness
Large weight loss/gain
Depression
Aggressive to others
Damages property
Obsessive-compulsive
Nightmares/sleep problems
Inapprop. sexual behaviors
Self-abusive
Injure w/ weapons/objects
Suddenly cries in normal sit.
Headache/somatic thoughts
Suicidal/death thoughts
Thought disorders
Ignores teacher warnings
Lewd or obscene gestures
Evidence of physical abuse
Evidence of drug use
Reports sexual abuse
Obscene language
Cruelty to animals
Teased/neglected by peers
Restricted activity levels
Enuretic (bladder control)
Encopretic (bowel control)
Sexually molests others
Auditory/visual halluc.
Severe lack of interest
Other
Other
36 Total
M
1
1
Grade 2
INT
F
M
EXT
F
1
M
1
F
M
F
3
1
1
1
1
INT
1
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
SSBD Item Analysis
Grade 3
Grade 4
EXT
INT
EXT
INT
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
2
1
Grade 5
EXT
M
1
2
1
INT
F
2
M
2
1
F
1
1
2
1
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
2
3
3
2
1
3
3
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
6
2
18
1
1
2
2
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
7
6
6
15
1
1
1
1
13
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
0
9
1
17
0
0
UNO-PAM/RTI,
Copyright-2008
0
1
2
2
1
2
20
26
6
0
Totals
6
0
1
14
0
5
0
10
16
7
8
0
1
1
0
3
4
2
10
22
0
0
0
0
5
0
11
2
2
1
0
1
4
14
4
36 154
JPPSS – SSBD Screenings
2006-2007 & 2007-2008
06-07
07-08
# of schools
screened
53
53
# of students
screened
22,101
16,634
Grades screened
K-5
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
1-5
(5 6th grade
classes)
37
JPPSS – SSBD Screenings
2006-2007 & 2007-2008
Nominated Students
06-07
07-08
Students nominated
3488
3521
% of students
screened
Avg. # nominated per
school
15.8%
21.2%
67
66
Range of nominated
students
3.7%-34.3%
5.1%-33.8%
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
38
JPPSS – SSBD Screenings
2006-2007 & 2007-2008
At-Risk Students
06-07
07-08
At-Risk Students
1533
1299
% of students
screened
Avg. # At-Risk per
school
6.9%
7.8%
30
25
Range of At-Risk
students
1.3%-14.6%
2.0%-21.7%
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
39
JPPSS – SSBD Screenings
2006-2007 & 2007-2008
At-Risk Students by GENDER
06-07
07-08
Male
71.7%
71.7%
Female
28.3%
28.3%
(100.0%)
(100.0%)
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
40
JPPSS – SSBD Screenings
2006-2007 & 2007-2008
At-Risk Students by SSBD DIMENSION
06-07
07-08
Externalizing
66.6%
66.6%
Internalizing
33.4%
33.4%
(100.0%)
(100.0%)
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
41
JPPSS – SSBD Screenings
2006-2007 & 2007-2008
At-Risk Students by RACE
06-07
07-08
Black
62.3%
60.6%
White
29.5%
29.3%
Hispanic
6.5%
6.2%
Asian & Other
1.7%
3.9%
(100.0%)
(100.0%)
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
42
Jefferson Parish Public Schools Screening
2007-2008
Item analysis for each school
Combined SSBD results with
disciplinary data (Infinite Campus)
Provided each school with
behavioral profile
Assisted school personnel with
interpretation of data for their school
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
43
Jefferson Parish Public Schools Screening
2008-2009
Train problem-solving teams to
administer, score and review SSBD
data
Consider results of SSBD in light of
Office Disciplinary Referrals (ODRs)
Prioritize student needs based on
these results
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
44
Jefferson Parish Public Schools Screening
2008-2009
Develop interventions based on
these data
Develop standard protocol
behavioral interventions for use with
students on Tier I and Tier 2
Assist with development of more
sophisticated interventions for
students needing Tier III intervention
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
45
What we know from behavioral
science…
Children aren’t born with BAD behaviors
– Ex: Children aren’t born knowing how to steal,
cheat or lie
– Ex: Children aren’t born knowing how to curse,
swear and “shoot the finger”
– Ex: Children aren’t born knowing how to carry a
handgun or distribute heroin
Children don’t learn healthy and socially
appropriate behaviors when they’re only issued
negatives, consequences and volatile reactions
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
46
What we know from behavioral
science…
Children DO learn healthy and
appropriate behavior when they are
provided with:
– INSTRUCTION (direct)
– IMMEDIATE FEEDBACK (that is
also constructive)
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
47
Response To Intervention (RTI):
A Problem Solving Philosophy
If a student isn’t performing as
expected, we will change what
WE’RE doing …
and continue problem
solving until we find
what works.
UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008
48