Transcript Monarch Room Intervention: Student Education Outcomes

Leading the way: Trauma-informed
educators and alternatives to
suspension
American Council of School Social Workers Conference
New Orleans, LA
January 26, 2015
Presentation Objectives
• Participants will gain knowledge on how trauma
manifests itself in the classroom setting & how
education professionals have historically addressed
problematic behavior
• Participants will know the components of the
alternative intervention & strategies staff can
implement to decrease time off task
• Participants will be exposed to strategies they could
use to be leaders in moving this process to other
schools & how to influence current school leaders
Impact of Trauma on Educational Well-Being
• History of trauma can manifest itself in the classroom:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Internalized and externalized behaviors
Inability to self regulate
Inappropriate boundaries
Inability to cognitively process information
Inattentiveness
Need for constant redirection
Need to move
Unexpected reactions to triggers
Impact of Trauma on Educational Well-Being
• Court-involved students are/have:
• Less likely to do their homework
• Lower scores on standardized achievement tests
• More than twice as likely to fail a grade
• Assigned to special education services with greater frequency
• Higher discipline referral rates, suspensions, and expulsions
• Lower GPAs
• Higher school absences
• Lower high school graduation rates
• Lower IQs
• Lower self-esteem
Background on Suspension/Expulsion
• OSS most commonly recognized method of addressing
conduct infractions in middle and high schools across
the country
• In 2006 over 3 ¼ million students suspended annually
across this country – with over 100,000 of these in
Michigan
• 7% of the entire school population missing at least 1
school day/year due to suspension/expulsion – a figure
that has doubled since the 1970s
• Actual % are higher as in school suspension statistics
are not tabulated nationally
Zero Tolerance Policies
• State Board of Education Model Code of Student
Conduct (2014)
• EX) fighting, gambling or defacing school property
(10 days OSS)
• Ex) gambling, drugs and weapons as well as a
variety of criminal activities (Expulsion)
• Virtually any inappropriate behavior can result in
time away from the school environment and
academics
• Disproportionately impacts students of color,
special education, and court-involved students
Unintended Consequences of
Zero Tolerance Policies
• Exclusionary discipline policies conflict with current best
knowledge about adolescent development
• Lost valuable continuity in mastering the curriculum
• Multiple OSS leads to high absenteeism
• missing work during period OSS translates to lower grades
• negative correlation between OSS rates and achievement
scores on math, reading and writing
• OSS linked to increased high school drop-out rates
• Putting students in unsupervised and unstructured
situations led to further problems
• School exclusion detrimentally effects all around social
adjustment
Causes of over-using OSS/Expulsions
•
•
•
•
•
institutional bias,
school culture,
teacher training, and
adult perceptions
To address these causes, CBF administration
made the decision to implement the Monarch
room as an alternative to OSS/expulsion
Case for court-involved students
• OSS use linked to negative psychosocial functioning, and
development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression,
anxiety, and aggressive behavior in and outside of school
• OSS promote feelings of inadequacy, hopelessness , suppressed
negative emotions, poor self-image, social rejection, resistance to
building relationships, increased risk substance abuse, suicidal
ideations
• School may be the only stable and predictable institution in a
child’s life
• Troubled students need to find support in the school before they
resort to inappropriate behaviors & find themselves in
OSS/Expelled
• When students feel engaged at school and feel a sense of
connectedness, rates of school violence decrease and school safety
increases
Getting Started: Assessing School Readiness for Implementing a
Trauma-Informed Alternative to Suspension
Why?
• Personal philosophy
– Mental health as Social Worker, clinical and School
– Schools dual service delivery systems
• Traditional discipline does not work in long run
– Power and control short-term benefits
– Displayed behaviors often misinterpreted
– Need to teach life skills
• Increase academic achievement-need to be in school
• Enhance collaboration: agencies with education
• Ideal setting-Vista Maria’s campus
Monarch Room Description
•
•
•
•
•
Separate room
Facilitated by trauma-informed professionals
Available all day
Incorporates Sensory motor technologies
Short-term: Goal is to return to class in 10
minutes
• Not seen as punitive by staff or students
• Extensive data is collected
Methods
• Sample
- 620 Girls enrolled at CBF btw Sept. 2011 and June
2014 (MS population not included)
- 86% residents @ VM, 14% CS
- Ages 14-18
- Race: AA (70%) W (24%) H (3%) AI (1%)
- First stay at VM: 57%; 43% experienced multiple
stays
- Average time per stay: 133 days
Methods
• Secondary data analysis of data analyzed
from:
• Monarch room tracking logs (frequency of
monarch room use, OSS) & matched with
• Administrative data from PowerSchool (entry
and exit dates, grade level, race, # absences)
Research Questions
• Do racial disparities exist in Monarch room
use?
• Does frequent school mobility (multiple
entries in and out of the school) predict
monarch room use?
• Did the intervention reduce the number of
suspension/ expulsions given?
Results
Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of the Sample (N=620)
Total
Monarch Room Users
N (%)
Non-Users
N (%)
244 (39)
N= 376 (61)
Race
White
AA
Hispanic
46 (19)
191(78)
7 (3)
74 (30)
94 (39)
76 (31)
# Absences
217 (89)
18 (7)
7 (3)
2 (1)
Mean (SD)
r
8.81 (3)
0.01
0.13
111.40 (3)
0.001
0.42
43.50 (3)
0.001
0.29
263 (70)
90 (24)
23 (6)
# Suspensions
0
1
2
3
P<
103 (27)
255 (68)
16 (4)
# Stays
1
2
3+
X2 (df)
376 (100)
0
0
0
Median Range
Year1 (N= 395)
8.62 (11.42)
4 0-70
Year 2 (N= 296)
11.01 (14.48)
6 0-83
Year 3 (N= 245)
12.82 (15.09)
10 0-98
Results
Table 2: Grade Level of Enrollees Over Observation Period (years)**
Monarch Room Users
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Non-users
Total
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Total
N
N
N (%)
N
N
N
N (%)
Nonusers
9
36
50
35
121 (54)
61
23
20
104 (40)
10
24
69
73
166 (48)
109
46
23
178 (52)
11
12
31
42
85 (42)
68
30
17
115 (58)
52
10
8
70 (58)
12
1
22
27
50 (42)
** As students were enrolled over multiple years, the total students per grade
captured in the table is higher than the unduplicated student count (620)
Year 1 X2= 30.06 (4), P< .001, r=.30
Year 2 X2= 7.66 (4), P< .11
Year 3 X2= 35.02 (4), P< .001, r=.34
Results
Table 3: Demographic Characteristics of the Sample by History of Suspensions/Expulsions (N=620)
History of out-of-school suspensions/expulsions
Total
Yes
No
N (%)
N (%)
27 (4%)
593 (96%)
Race
AA*
Other
23 (5%)
423 (95%)
4 (2%)
170 (98%)
# Stays
1
2 or more
4 (1%)
333 (99%)
23 (8%)
260 (92%)
# Absences
Under 10
10 or more
* African American
19 (4%)
503 (96%)
8 (9%)
90 (91%)
X2 (df)
P<
R
2.46 (1)
.12
.08
17.79 (1)
.000
.18
4.05 (1)
.044
.09
Results
Table 4: Predictors of Monarch Room Use (N=620)
95% confidence Interval
Predictor
 (SE)
Lower
Estimated Odds
Ratio
Upper
Intercept
Race
1.35 (.25)***
-.5 (.21)*
.43
.62
.91
# Stays
-1.39 (.18)***
.19
.26
.37
# Absences
-1.13 (.26)***
.27
.31
.51
(Cox
& Snell) .17, (Nagelkerke) .23, Model X2 (3) = 134.16, p<.001. *p<.05, ***p<.001
Results
Table 5: Predictors of Suspension/Expulsion (N=620)
95% confidence Interval
Predictor
(SE)
Lower
Estimated Odds Upper
Ratio
Intercept
Race
-3.42 (.48)***
-.50 (.52)
.22
.60
1.7
# Stays
-1.41 (.51)**
.09
.24
.66
# Absences
.36 (.49)
.55
1.44
3.7
# monarch room
events
.08 (.01)***
1.06
1.09
1.12
Cox & Snell) .10, (Nagelkerke) .31, Model X2 (4) = 76.12, p<.001. **p<.01, ***p<.001
Discussion
• Monarch room has been demonstrated
to be a successful alternative to
suspension/expulsion
• It has been implemented successfully
despite the fact that the population of
girls at CBF has become more
challenging over time
Leadership, Replication of the Model
& Implications for Policy & Practice
– Policies, procedures, and protocols
• Discipline policy of the school and standards of behavior
• Communication
– Professional development
– Liaison btw school administrators & mental health
professionals
– Coaches for staff and administrators
– Data driven decision-making
Today’s Presenters
 Beverly A. Baroni, Ph.D., LMSW
Principal, Clara B. Ford Academy
[email protected]
 Angelique Day, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Wayne State University, school of Social Work
[email protected]
Publications
•
West, S.D., Day, A.G., Somers, C.L., & Baroni, B.A. (2014). Student Perspectives on how
Trauma Experiences Manifest in the Classroom: Engaging Court-Involved Youth in the
Development of a Trauma-Informed Teaching Curriculum. Children and Youth Services Review,
38. 58-65.
•
Crosby, S.D., Day, A.G., Baroni, B.A., & Somers, C.L. (In Press). School Staff Perspectives on the
Challenges and Solutions to Working with Court-Involved Students. Journal of School Health.
•
Day, A.G., Somers, C. L., Baroni, B.A., West, S.D., Sanders, L., & Peterson, C.D. (In Press).
Evaluation of a Trauma-Informed School Intervention with Girls in a Residential Facility
School: Student Perceptions of School Environment. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment &
Trauma.
Publications
•
Baroni, B.A., Day, A.G., Somers, C.L., Crosby, S., & Pennefather, M. (Under Review). The
Adoption of the Monarch Room as an Alternative to Suspension and Expulsion in Addressing
School Discipline Issues Among Court-Involved Youth.
•
Crosby, S., Somers, C., Day, A., & Baroni, B. (Under Review). Working with traumatized
students: Measures to assess school staff perceptions, awareness, and instructional
responses.
•
Weber, N. M., Somers, C. L., Day, A., & Baroni, B. A. (Under Review). Predictors and
outcomes of school attachment and school involvement in a sample of girls in residential
treatment.