Transcript MN Charter School Survey Data

Student and Family Engagement:
Lessons Learned from the Check
& Connect Intervention Studies




Description of Check & Connect
Evidence for the intervention model
Suggestions for implementing C & C
Time for questions
Research and Implementation Team

Many individuals: Mary Sinclair, Cammy Lehr,
Martha Thurlow, Christine Hurley, David Evelo,
Colleen Kaibel and Research and Community
Program Assistants
 Began: Fall, 1990 in two middle schools in the
Minneapolis School District with OSEP funding
 At present: Worked with K–12 students in
suburban schools and urban schools with OSEP,
Dakota County, and NIMH funding
 Applications nationally and internationally
What is Check & Connect?

A comprehensive model designed to enhance
students’ engagement at school and with learning.


Relationship Building, Systematic Monitoring, and
Following Students and Families
An important premise of C & C is the shift in focus from
preventing negative outcomes (dropout) to promoting
student competence, school success and school
completion (positive outcomes)



Standards and supports
11 month intervention
Comprised of four main components
Component 1: Systematic Monitoring


Of students’ school adjustment, behavior, and
educational progress
Connection to school – by checking in three areas:





Attendance (skips, tardies, absences)
Academic performance (credits earned, GPA, reading objectives
passed)
Behavior (behavioral referrals, suspensions, detentions)
Monitoring students’ functional behavior and
alterable variables – not only demographic risks
This is the “Check” Component – done at least
weekly
Component 2: Timely and
Individualized Intervention


Our Connect Component
Two levels – match to student need – use check data to
determine type and level of risk for disengagement
 All targeted students receive basic interventions – a
deliberate conversation about:





Sharing monitoring data
Discussing the relevance of school for students’ future goals
Problem solving about ways to meet demands of the school
environment
Looking for ways to increase student participation
Students showing high risk behaviors receive additional
intensive interventions
Intensive Interventions

Problem Solving:





Academic Support:



Problem-solving sessions
Parent problem-solving meetings
Individualized behavioral contracts
Alternatives for out-of-school suspensions
Tutor-mentor
Individualized academic contract
Recreation/Community Service:


Access to after-school activities
Summer employment
Work toward self-determination

We use a five-step cognitive behavioral problem solving
strategy:






Stop. Think about the problem.
What are some choices?
Choose one.
Do it.
How did it work?
(Braswell & Bloomquist, 1991)
Help students integrate their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors
to meet schooling demands:





Coming to class on time
Attending classes regularly
Working hard in class
Completing assignments
Getting passing grades
The Mentor – the Third Component





Linchpin for the Check & Connect components
Person in student’s life who keeps
education salient
Provides social support for families (navigates
school system and requirements; assists with
communication)
Serves as an anchor point for students, families,
teachers, and support personnel
Builds relationships thru formal connections and
informal connections – showing interest in student’s
life
Component 4: Connect with Families


Mentors are a liaison; follow students and families
Focus on enhancing home-school communication, keeping the focus on
the student’s educational performance.



Responsive to parents needs about ways to help engage their children



Mentors may attend parent-teacher conferences
Mentors meet with parents about how there could be more of an educational
focus at home
Worked with school staff and community supports to offer parent education
classes or workshops that families identify as being interesting or important
Used multiple ways to connect with families: phones, written notes to
parents to let them know what is going on in school, and home visits
Made home visits at least once a year for a positive reason
Role of the Mentor
Monitoring is essential for students at-risk of
disengaging as a learner for two reasons . . .

Provides a systematic and efficient way to
connect students with immediate interventions
that includes the family

Provides an essential link to students’
educational progress and performance
Persistence-plus:

Persistence: There is someone who is not going to give
up on the student or allow the student to be distracted
from the importance of school.

Continuity: There is someone who knows the student’s
needs and desires and is available across school years.

Consistency: The message is the same from all
concerned adults.
Persistence-plus Message:
A caring adult wants you to . . .
 learn
 do the work
 attend class regularly
 be on time
 express frustration constructively
 stay in school
In a nutshell:
Check & Connect is comprised of systematic
monitoring of student performance, timely
intervention coordinated with teachers and parents,
and relationship building with the mentor who
provides the persistent support and an avenue for
problem solving with the student. These aspects
allow the mentor to design in collaboration with
others an individualized approach to service delivery
for students at risk of educational failure or early
school withdrawal.
In sum:


We have hypothesized that the unique feature
of Check & Connect is not the specific
interventions per se, but the fact that
interventions are facilitated by a person, the
mentor, who is trusted and known by the
student and who has demonstrated his or her
concern for the school performance of the
youth persistently and consistently over time.
Persistent support to meet standards
Evidence for Check & Connect

Experimental Studies -Secondary Level-SWD


9th grade students (N=93) with disabilities in the treatment
group were significantly more likely to be enrolled in
school, have persisted in school, and on track to
graduate within five years.
High school students with EBD (N=150) were
significantly less likely to dropout, more likely to
persist in school, and more likely to access educational
services (alternative programs, transition planning). They
were more likely to be on track to complete school in
four years; and more likely to have completed school at
the end of five years.
Three Non-experimental Studies

Chronically truant students in grades 6-12 with and
without disabilities in suburban schools.



Shown improvement in attendance, skipped classes, outof-school suspensions, and academic performance.
About 65% of Check & Connect students (N=91) were
successfully engaged (equivalent of 0-1 day absent per
month), with no incidences of class failures. Levin’s data
– each failed grade increases dropout by 15%
More effective if students are referred before absences
exceed 25% of the school year.

Pre-post intervention results for elementary students with and
without disabilities (N= 147 with 2 years of intervention) in
suburban settings revealed that tardies to and absences from
school declined, and attendance has improved.





Nearly two-thirds of students have improved attendance and 15% have
stabilized their level of engagement.
One-third of students were receiving all passing marks.
87% of parents were rated by teachers as more supportive of their children’s
education.
Teacher perception of child behavior is positive – 90% indicated students
were showing improvement in homework completion, interest in school, and
attendance.
Sustained intervention: more eager to learn, to follow directions, get along
with others, show respect
Descriptive study




Effect of the Mentor-Student Relationship
Elementary students who were referred for attendance
difficulties
After controlling for student risk factors and prior attendance,
student and mentor perceptions of the quality of the
relationship predicted improved attendance.
Mentor perception of the relationship was associated
positively with teacher-rated academic engagement and
approached significance as a predictor of teacher-rated social
competence.
Check & Connect


Has met the evidence based standards of the
What Works Clearinghouse
Concluded Check & Connect to have positive
effects on staying in school and potentially
positive effects on progressing in school.
Need to know:


How students cognitive engagement (goal
setting) and affective engagement (sense of
belonging, relatedness with teachers and
peers) mediates greater time on task and
attendance
Whether there are improved outcomes for
Check & Connect where universal
interventions that focus on engagement and
school climate – like pbis – are in place
Suggestions for Implementing C & C

Implementation steps:
 Determine indicators of disengagement (alterable risk
factors: Attendance (tardiness, absences), Behavior
(behavioral referrals, suspensions), Academics (low
academic performance)
 Systematically target students for intervention
 Select mentors (persistence, believe all students have
abilities, willingness to cooperate with families and school
staff, advocacy skills (negotiation, compromise,
confrontation), and organization (case management,
documentation)

Caseload – ideal if a mentor has 1 hour per week per student







Set Criteria for Check Risk Factors – determines need for
basic or intensive intervention
Organize existing resources - Mentors are service
coordinators: mentors “broker services”
Begin checking and connecting – all within a persistence
framework
Mentor is the standardized part of the intervention
Meet with program supervisor
Think of ways to evaluate
Modification of our model: check in and check out
Considerations for Effective
Implementation of Targeted Intervention

Systematically target students for intervention



Systematic identification and monitoring
Use multiple referral criteria derived from
alterable indicators of engagement
Use data to guide intervention and
improvement

Routine use of check data
Considerations, continued:

Maintain a focus on a student’s educational
progress



Keep outreach focused on alterable factors
Maintain problem solving – an optimistic view
Partner with families

Use a family-centered, nonblaming approach;
home visiting; bilingual staff
Considerations, continued:

Make a sustained and long term commitment


Allows for time to build trusting relationships,
redirect student’s trajectory, provide support during
transitions, manage staff learning curves
Meet as a Check & Connect team

Supervisor maintained treatment integrity and
provided an opportunity to debrief and receive
ongoing staff development
Merits of Check & Connect





Persistent Outreach – consistent long term support
that is student and family focused.
Relationship Building – follow students and
families from school to school (staff not bound to
one school)
Prevention – monitoring alterable predictors of
dropping out
Efficient – uses existing resources and two levels of
intervention to maximize finite resources
Capacity Building – promotes acquisition of skills
and confidence
In closing. . .

Increasing the successful completion of school is much more
than simply staying in school, and thus, much more than the
dropout problem – it involves meeting the defined academic
standards of the school, as well as underlying social and
behavioral standards.

Focus on student engagement – a multi-dimensional
construct:




Relationship building
Problem solving
Systematic monitoring of alterable variables
Persistent support
Questions . . .
Contact Information
Sandra L. Christenson, Ph.D.
Birkmaier Professor of Educational Leadership
University of Minnesota
School Psychology Program
344 Education Sciences Building
56 East River Road
Minneapolis, MN 55455
612-624-0037 [email protected]
Thank you!
Check & Connect Information




http://www.ici.umn.edu/checkandconnect/
Check & Connect has recently met the evidence standards of
the U.S. Department of Education’s What Works
Clearinghouse (WWC, 2006; www.whatworks.ed.gov ).
Hammond, C., Linton, D., Smink, J., & Drew, S. (2007).
Dropout risk factors and exemplary programs. Clemson, SC:
National Dropout Prevention Center, Communities in
Schools, Inc. www.dropoutprevention.org
Christenson, S.L., Reschly, A.L., Appleton, J.J., Berman, S.,
Spanjers, D., & Varro, P. (In press). Best practices in fostering
student engagement. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology V. Washington, DC: National
Association of School Psychologists.