Transcript Document

PBIS in Urban Alternative
School Settings: Program
Design and Planning
Adam Feinberg Ph.D., BCBA-D
Deb Smyth, Ph.D., BCBA-D
The May Institute, Inc.
OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports
Annual Convention of the National Association of School Psychologists
February 23, 2011
San Francisco, CA
www.mayinstitute.org
www.pbis.org
What we’ll be covering…
• What’s different about alternative settings?
– Typical features
– Implementation of PBIS
• Is SWPBIS effective in Alternative settings?
– Emerging Evidence Base
– Case studies
– Discussion
SW-PBIS & Alternative
Settings
What is different about
Alternative settings?
What are critical
features of SW-PBIS in
these settings?
Typical features of
alternative settings?
Small and variable
population with
intensive behavioral,
mental health, and
educational needs
FEW
~5%
Tertiary Prevention:
Most
Specialized
interventions
Individualized
Systems for are
Students
individualized
with High-Risk
Behavior
and intensive.
~15%
SOME
Primary Prevention:
School-/ClassroomWide Systems for
All Students,
Staff, & Settings
Secondary Prevention:
Specialized Group
Systems for Students
with At-Risk Behavior
May also
employ systemwide features
(i.e., point or
level system)
ALL
~80% of Students
Approach
4 Integrated
Elements
Supporting Social Competence &
Academic Achievement
OUTCOMES
Supporting
Decision
Making
Supporting
Staff Behavior
PRACTICES
Supporting
Student Behavior
Sample Outcomes
1.Increases in prosocial & appropriate
behavior
2.Decreases in disruptive and
aggressive behavior
3.Increases in percentage of children
responding to behavioral support
4.Increases in student specific progress
toward IEP goals
5.Increases in number of students
returning to less restrictive environment
Data
1.Incident Reports
2.Direct Behavior Ratings
3.Earned Points
4.Direct Observation
5.Individual Student
Progress
6.Program-wide Data
7.______________
Use data
to make
decisions
Adopt or
develop a
data
management
system
Review
existing data
and collect
additional
data if needed
Systems
1. Team & Coaches
(system-wide)
(Team or classwide)
2. Continuous PD
3. Data-based decision making
4. Monitoring and evaluation
fidelity
5. Program evaluation and
continuous improvement
SWPBS
Practices
Classroom
Non-classroom
Student
Family
School-wide Systems
1. Common purpose & approach to discipline
2. Clear set of positive expectations
3. Procedures for teaching expected behavior
4. Continuum of procedures for encouraging
expected behavior
5. Continuum of procedures for discouraging
inappropriate behavior
6. Procedures for on-going monitoring &
evaluation
Classroom
Setting Systems
• Maximize structure and predictability
• Establish, post, teach, monitor and reinforce a
small number (3-5) of positively stated
expectations
• Establish a continuum of strategies to
acknowledge students for following
expectations
• Active engagement
• Redirections for minor, infrequent behavior
errors
• Frequent precorrections for chronic errors
Nonclassroom
Setting Systems
• Positive expectations & routines
taught & encouraged
• Active supervision by all staff
– Scan, move, interact
• Precorrections & reminders
• Positive reinforcement
Individual Student
Systems
• Develop data decision rules to identify those
students who do not respond to Tier I.
• Organize other supports along a continuum.
• Develop an assessment process to determine
which additional intervention(s) may be
appropriate
• Collect progress monitoring data
General
Implementation
Process
Identify Team
Conduct SelfAssessment
Develop / Adjust
Action Plan
Implement Action
Plan
Monitor & Evaluate
Action Plan
Is School-wide PBIS effective in alternative school
placements?
Emerging Evidence
Case Studies
Discussion
Emerging Evidence Base
(Miller, George, Fogt, 2005; Farkas et al., in press; Miller, Hunt,
Georges, 2006; Simenson, Britton, & Young, 2010)
• Descriptive case studies have documented that
implementing SW-PBIS, or similar proactive systemwide interventions, in alternative school settings
results in positive outcomes.
– Decreases in crisis interventions (i.e., restraints) and
aggressive student behavior
– Increases in percentage of students achieving highest
levels
• In addition, faculty and staff are able to implement
strategies with fidelity and staff and students
generally like SWPBIS
Case Studies
Two Alternative School
Settings
School 1
Alternative Elementary
Grades 3 – 6
School 1: Demographics
School 1
State Average
1:6
1:15
% Asian
9%
5%
% Hispanic
62%
16%
% Black
18%
8%
% White
8%
68%
% Unknown
3%
3%
% Eligible for Free Lunch
78%
26%
% Eligible for Reduced Lunch
11%
6%
Teacher : Student Ratio
Students by Ethnicity
School 1: Initial Systems Integrity
Self-Assessment
100
100
100
Effective
Behavior
Support
Survey
Spring…
Effective
Behavior
Support
Survey
Spring
2009
87
90
Percent Implementation
82
85
83
80
70
65
59
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Defined
Taught
Reward
Violations
Monitoring Management
District
Average
Goal 80%
38
0
Implementation Feature
Overall
50
District Level Support
20
Management
Monitoring & Evaluation
40
System for Responding to
Behavioral Violations
60
On-Going System for Rewarding
Behavioral Expectations
25
Behavioral Expectations Taught
20
Expectations Defined
Percent Implementation
School 1: Systems Integrity Data
School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)
Spring 2009
Goal 80%
100
80
67
50
38
13
School 1: Training and Support
• “Buy in” for PBIS was a concern and was perceived to
not be possible by administration or staff.
– Perception was PBIS features were in place
– Review of EBS Survey and current behavioral data
– Team agreed to review PBIS features relative to current system
over a series of team meetings
• School staff had a long learning history of attributing
behavioral challenges as influenced by factors outside
the immediate school environment.
School 1: SW-BSP Development
Review, Discuss, Agreements…
– Clear Expectations: Already in place but modified to increase
clarity for students by linking to reinforcement
– Teaching Expectations: Created formal lesson plans to teach
the school wide expectations
– Reinforcement Procedures: Individualized by classroom.
Modified to a formal school-wide process but added weekly
school-wide activities.
– Consequences: Informal process. Staff was resistant to modify
these procedures.
– Data: Instituted SWIS and bi-monthly meetings regarding Data
review with district BCBA staff.
Goal 80%
40
50
50
38
20
0
Implementation Feature
Overall
90
District Level Support
60
100
Management
25
100
Monitoring & Evaluation
100
System for Responding to
Behavioral Violations
80
On-Going System for Rewarding
Behavioral Expectations
100
Behavioral Expectations Taught
20
Expectations Defined
Percent Implementation
School 1: Systems Integrity Data
School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)
Goal 80%
100
87.5
90
67
50
Spring 2009
Fall 2009
38
13
School 1: Systems Integrity Data
Team Implementation Checklist (TIC)
Dec-09
100%100%100%
100%
Jun-10
100%
Dec-10
100%
100%
100%
100%
94%
92%
90%
83% 83%
Percent Implementation
80%
75%
70%
75% 75% 75%
67%
68%
67%
67%
60%
50%
50%
50%
50%
40%
30%
25%
20%
10%
0%
Establish
commitment
Establish &
maintain team
Conduct selfassessment
Establish schoolwide expectations
Establish
information
system
Build Capacity for
Function-based
Support
District level
Support
Total
School 1: Outcome Data
Frequency of behavioral incidents requiring out of
classroom intervention.
08-09
09-10
10-11
45.0
42.7
40.0
34.3
35.0
32.7
31.7
27.6
26.0
Frequency
29.2
29.1
30.0
25.3
25.0
22.1
19.0
20.0
17.0
15.8
15.0
11.4
11.1
10.0
11.0
11.9
10.3
7.6
6.9
5.4
5.1
5.0
0.0
September
October
November
December
January
Month
February
March
April
May
School 1: Outcome Data
Restraints
70
60
59
50
Frequency
62
58
SW-PBIS Implementation
47
40
30
21
20
10
2
0
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008 2008-2009
School Year
2009-2010
2010-2011
School 2
Alternative Early Childhood
Grades K – 2
School 2: Demographics
School 1
State Average
1:4
1:15
% Asian
3%
5%
% Hispanic
37%
16%
% Black
30%
8%
% White
23%
68%
% Unknown
7%
3%
% Eligible for Free Lunch
87%
26%
% Eligible for Reduced Lunch
3%
6%
Teacher : Student Ratio
Students by Ethnicity
School 2: Initial Systems
Integrity Self-Assessment
100
100
100
Effective Behavior Support Survey Spring 2008
100
88
Percent Implementation
90
78
80
90
90
District
Average
76
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Defined
Taught
Reward
Violations
Monitoring
Management
Goal 80%
66
Implementation Feature
Overall
40
District Level Support
0
Management
20
Monitoring & Evaluation
75
System for Responding to
Behavioral Violations
60
On-Going System for Rewarding
Behavioral Expectations
60
Behavioral Expectations Taught
Expectations Defined
Percent Implementation
School 2: Systems Integrity Data
School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)
Goal 80%
100
80
75
59
50
25
13
School 2: Training & Support
Building upon strengths!
• “Buy-in” was gained by reviewing EBS Data and
Behavior data
– Discussed areas in need for development and agreed
to focus on those.
– Once the “areas of need” were built team reviewed
and wanted to develop rest of PBIS School-wide
components.
• Team decided to use a Professional
Development day to build most of their plan
School 2: Training and Support
Building upon strengths!
– Clear Expectations: Already in place
– Teaching Expectations: Modified from informal teacher based
to school-wide formal instruction at the beginning of the year at
the start of EVERY new activity
– Reinforcement Procedures: Individualized by classroom.
Formalized it to a consistent school-wide process but continued
classroom based trade ins at the end of day
– Consequences: Informal process. Changed to formal
procedures of classroom managed and office managed
– Data: Instituted SWIS and bi-monthly meetings regarding Data
review with district BCBA staff.
Goal 80%
75
66
40
20
0
Implementation Feature
Overall
83
District Level Support
60
100
Management
60
100
Monitoring & Evaluation
80
System for Responding to
Behavioral Violations
100
On-Going System for Rewarding
Behavioral Expectations
100
Behavioral Expectations Taught
Expectations Defined
Percent Implementation
School 2: Systems Integrity Data
School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)
Goal 80%
100
88
89
75
59
50 50
25
13
Spring 2009
Fall 2009
School 2: Systems Integrity Data
Team Implementation Checklist (TIC)
Sep-10
100%100%
100%
Feb-11
100%100%
100%
100%
90%
83%
80%
75% 75%
75%
Percent Implementation
70%
67%
60%
50%
50%
50%
40%
20%
0%
Establish
commitment
Establish &
maintain team
Conduct selfassessment
Establish schoolwide Procedures
Establish
information
system
Build Capacity for
Function-based
Support
District level
Support
Total
School 2: Outcome Data
Frequency of behavioral incidents requiring out of
classroom intervention.
2008 - 2009
2009 - 2010
Number of Time Outs per day per month
5
4.7
4
4
4
3
3
2.9
3
2.3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
0
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
School 2: Outcome Data
Reduction of restraints
60
2008 - 2009
56
2009 - 2010
Frequency of Restraints
50
40
30
26
25
19
20
18
17
16
14
13
10
5
1
2
3
1
3
0
0
1
0
0
May
June
0
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
PBIS in Alternative Schools
Lessons Learned
• Alternative schools with a large number of
behavioral challenges can greatly benefit
from strong effective universal practices
• Take the time to build each component
with consideration
• Use data at every step
• Make sure data guides each decision!
Contact Information
Adam Feinberg
[email protected]
Deb Smyth
[email protected]
www.pbis.org
www.mayinstitute.org