School-wide Positive Behavior Supports: Implications for Special Educators Tim Lewis, Ph.D. University of Missouri OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Intervention & Supports pbis.org.
Download ReportTranscript School-wide Positive Behavior Supports: Implications for Special Educators Tim Lewis, Ph.D. University of Missouri OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Intervention & Supports pbis.org.
School-wide Positive Behavior Supports: Implications for Special Educators Tim Lewis, Ph.D. University of Missouri OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Intervention & Supports pbis.org The Challenge • Students with the most challenging academic and social behavior problems need pro-active comprehensive and consistent systems of support • School-wide discipline systems are typically unclear and inconsistently implemented – absence of a “social behavior curriculum” • Educators often lack specialized skills to address severe problem behavior and learning challenges • Pressure on schools to incorporate national and state initiatives such as Values Education, Anti-Bullying, Safe Schools and achieving “adequate yearly progress.” Many often have clearly defined outcomes without structures to reach or a framework for deciding what should be implemented when, for whom, and to what degree Behavior Challenges Common school response to problem behavior = “punishment” of misbehavior and assumptions about appropriate behavior and/or seek out alternative placements The Danger…. “Punishing” problem behaviors (without a proactive support system) is associated with increases in (a) aggression, (b) vandalism, (c) truancy, and (d) dropping out. (Mayer, 1995, Mayer & Sulzar-Azaroff, 1991, Skiba & Peterson, 1999) The Good News… Research reviews indicate that the most effective responses to school violence are (Elliot, Hamburg, & Williams, 1998;Gottfredson, 1997; Lipsey, 1991, 1992; Tolan & Guerra, 1994): • Social Skills Training • Academic Restructuring • Behavioral Interventions Toward a Solution The answer is not the invention of new solutions, but the enhancement of the school’s organizational capacity to: • Accurately adopt and efficiently sustain their use of research-validated practices • Provide a Seamless continuum of behavioral and academic support for all students • Be part of a district wide system of behavior support • Increased focus, teacher training, community training, and funding for early intervention School-wide Positive Behavior Support SW-PBS is a broad range of systemic and individualized strategies for achieving important social and learning outcomes while preventing problem behavior OSEP Center on PBIS Positive Behavior Support Social Competence & Academic Achievement OUTCOMES Supporting Decision Making Supporting Staff Behavior PRACTICES Supporting Student Behavior CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT ~5% ~15% Primary Prevention: School-/ClassroomWide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings ~80% of Students Tertiary Prevention: Specialized Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior Secondary Prevention: Specialized Group Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior Universal Strategies: School-Wide Essential Features • Statement of purpose • Clearly define expected behaviors (Rules) • Procedures for teaching & practicing expected behaviors • Procedures for encouraging expected behaviors • Procedures for discouraging problem behaviors • Procedures for record-keeping and decision making (swis.org) • Family Awareness and Involvement Benton Elementary I am…. All Settings Classroom Hallways Cafeteria Bathrooms Playground Assemblies Safe •Keep bodies calm in line •Report any problems •Ask permission to leave any setting Maintain personal space Walk Stay to the right on stairs Banisters are for hands •Walk •Push in chairs •Place trash in trash can Wash hands with soap and water Keep water in the sink One person per stall Use equipment for intended purpose Wood chips are for the ground Participate in school approved games only Stay in approved areas Keep body to self •Walk •Enter and exit gym in an orderly manner Respect ful •Treat others the way you want to be treated •Be an active listener •Follow adult direction(s) •Use polite language •Help keep the school orderly Be honest Take care of yourself Walk quietly so others can continue learning Eat only your food Use a peaceful voice Allow for privacy of others Clean up after self •Line up at first signal •Invite others who want to join in •Enter and exit building peacefully •Share materials •Use polite language Be an active listener Applaud appropriately to show appreciation A Learner •Be an active participant •Give full effort •Be a team player •Do your job •Be a risk taker •Be prepared •Make good choices Return to class promptly •Use proper manners •Leave when adult excuses •Follow bathroom procedures •Return to class promptly •Be a problem solver •Learn new games and activities •Raise your hand to share •Keep comments and questions on topic Universal Strategies: Nonclassroom Settings • Identify Setting Specific Behaviors • Develop Teaching Strategies • Develop Practice Opportunities and Consequences • Assess the Physical Characteristics • Establish Setting Routines • Identify Needed Support Structures • Data collection strategies Universal Strategies: Classroom • Use of school-wide expectations/rules • Effective Classroom Management – Behavior management – Instructional management – Environmental management • Support for teachers who deal with students who display high rates of problem behavior Why build strong universal systems of support? • We can’t “make” students learn or behave • We can create environments to increase the likelihood students learn and behave • Environments that increase the likelihood are guided by a core curriculum and implemented with consistency and fidelity across all learning environments Outcomes of Universal Supports FRMS Total Office Discipline Referrals Sustained Impact 3000 Total ODRs 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 Academic Years Alton High School Average Referrals per Day 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Novembe r December January February INSTRUCTIONAL HOURS GAINED Projected (50% ) vs. Actual (Aug-Dec 2000) 5000 4500 4000 3500 HOURS 3000 2500 2000 4290 HOURS 1500 2145 HOURS 1000 1671 ADDITIONAL Instructional Hours 78% 500 474 HOURS 0 Total Instructional H ours Lost 9900 Projected Instructional H ours Lost Actual Instructional H ours Lost Western Sydney Region Number of Long Suspensions Percentage change from 2005 to 2006 30% 26% 20% Percentage Change 11% 10% 0% -10% -7% -20% -23% -30% PBL Phase 1 (13 schools) PBL Phase 2 (14 schools) PBL Phase 3 (28 schools) Not PBL (183 schools) Elementary Office Refferals by Year 900 852 800 700 654 608 600 490 500 Pre 433 416 Post 385 400 296 300 218 200 187 180 134 108 140 138 87 100 0 1E 2E 3E 4E 5E 6E 7E 8E MIddle School Office Referrals by Year 3000 2514 2500 2082 1948 2000 2001-02 1464 1500 2002-03 1031 1000 800 592 465 500 0 9M 10M 11M 12M Group Cost Benefit Office Referral Reduction Across 12 PBIS schools= 5,606 If one Office Referral=15 minutes of administrator time, then 5,606 x 15= 84,090 minutes 1401.15 hours or 233 days of administrator time recovered and reinvested. Group Cost Benefit Office Referral Reduction Across 12 PBIS Schools =5,606 If students miss 45 minutes of instruction for each Office Referral, 5,606 X 45= 252,270 minutes 4204.50 hours or 700 days of instructional time recovered!!!!! Self-contained Special Education Building - St. Louis • Enrollment 200 • 50% free and reduced lunch • Ages 13 and up • Programs • Serves 8 component districts • • • • • Physically Impaired Autism Language Impaired Hearing Impaired Multiple/ Severe Disabilities • Emotional/ Behavioral Disorder Self Contained School • Supported by PBS Coach • Prior to implementing school-wide system, Identified 33 students (17%) with chronic behavior teachers felt would require intensive individualized plans Reported Results • Reduction in inappropriate behavior (verbal aggression, sleeping in class, off task, disruption) • Increased prosocial behaviors and task completion • Post universal systems, only 5 students (2%) required intensive individualized support plans Prevention & Supports For Identified and At-risk Students Social Behavior Mental Health Outcomes • Does School-wide PBS fit within a comprehensive mental health model of prevention and intervention? Minimizing and reducing “risk factors” by building “protective factors” Risk and Protective Factor Comparison SSS Risk and Protective Factor Scores (Illinois Schools 02-03) Mean SSS Factor Scores 100 t = -2.17 (37) p < .036 t = 2.31 (37) p < .026 80 60 40 20 Partial N=21 Full N=18 Partial N=21 Full N=18 0 Risk Factor Protective Factor Correlation of Risk Variables with EBS Survey Score N = 13 Middle Schools Sprague, Walker, Sowards, Van Bloem, Eberhardt & Marshall, 2001 Pearson R 0.2 0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 Free & R Acd Fail Mobiltiy A&D Crm ASB Total Series1 0.017896 -0.119001 0.115955 -0.291545 -0.513794 -0.376016 Risk Variables A&D = Alcohol and Drug; ABS = Anti-social Behavior Scale Impact on Moving Students to More Restrictive Settings Columbia Public Schools • Elementary Schools who implement SW-PBS referred students to alternative/special school at lower rates compared to schools who were not implementing SW-PBS (r = -0.4306, p < 0.01) • Elementary Schools who implemented SW-PBS have less recidivism to alternative settings once students returned to home-school Prevention & Supports For Identified and At-risk Students Achievement BALLWIN ACHIEVEMENT PBS 800 70 760 700 60 58.2 50 47.4 500 40 405 400 32.5 31 30 302 300 185 200 20 10 100 0 0 2000 2001 2002 YEAR Office Referrals Proficient or Advanced on MAP 2003 MAP PERCENTILE NUMBER OF REFERRALS 600 Illinois 02-03 Mean Proportion of Students Meeting ISAT Mean Percentage of 3rd graders meeting ISAT Reading Standard Reading Standard t test (df 119) p < .0001 70.00% 62.19% 60.00% 50.00% 46.60% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% PBIS NOT in place N = 69 PBIS IN place N = 52 Small Group and Individual Interventions Supporting Students At-Risk and those with Disabilities Within Their Home School Important Themes • Part of a continuum – must link to schoolwide PBS system • Efficient and effective way to identify students • Assessment = simple sort • Intervention matched to presenting problem but not highly individualized Small Group/Targeted Assessment • Focus is on sorting student for service, not “diagnosis and placement.” • Social-Behavioral Concerns – Social skills – Self-management • Academic Concerns – Peer Tutors – Check in – Homework club • Emotional Concerns – Adult mentors STUDENTS RECEIVING A "BEHAVIOR PLAN" EIGHT OR MORE REFERRALS 1999/2000 vs. 2000/2001 AVERAGE PERCEN T D ECLIN E IN REFERRALS 20 18 50% % NUMBER OF REFERRALS 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 A* B C D E F* G H I J* K STUDENT NAME * STUDENT LEFT SCHOOL DISTRICT BEFORE THE END OF THE ACADEMIC YEAR REFERRALS 99-00 REFERRALS 00-01 L M N O P Table 1. Pre- and Posttest Scores for Subjects on Dependent Variable (SSRS-T) SSRS-T Social Skills Non PBS PBS Pre Mean 72.8 (56-86) 78.3 (70-84) Post Mean 80 (61-103) 90 (77-125) .11 .04* P Value SSRS-T Problem Behavior Non PBS PBS Pre Mean 123.6 (110-138) 124.8 (113-133) Post Mean 121.4 (102-139) 124.7 (115-138) .50 .97 P Value * Significance at the .05 P Value Pals - Combined Discipline Referrals Sept-Jan YR2 vs. YR3 45 43 46% Number of Behavior Referrals 40 35 30 25 Average 5.38 23 20 15 Average 2.88 10 5 0 YR2 YR3 AMOUNT OF TIME PER WEEK SPENT WORKING DIRECTLY WITH STUDENT More than 60 minutes 0 40 to 60 minutes 0 30 to 40 minutes 0 20 to 30 minutes 10 to 20 minutes 3 6 10 minutes or less 9 NUMBER OF TEACHERS Individual Support Plans • When small group not sufficient • When problem intense and chronic • Driven by Functional Behavioral Assessment • Linked to school-wide system Does Implementation of PBIS improve individual interventions? • Illinois “profile” analysis. – Assessment of intervention effectiveness Very Low, Low, Med, High, Very High 0 1 2 3 4 – School-wide – Individual Intervention Profile Effectiveness Scores (Illinois Schools 02-03) Mean Effectiveness Scores 4 t = 11.11 (335) p< .0001 t = 2.30 (27) p < .03 3 N=223 N=38 N=169 2 N=17 1 Partial Full Partial Full N=169 N=223 N=17 N=38 0 School-wide Individual Individual PBS Success requires: 1. Individual(s) with expertise in FBA-PBS 2. Fluency with a clear process among all staff including their role 3. A basic understanding of the Applied Behavior Analysis = Behavior is functionally related to the teaching environment FBA Baselin e Non-Fun ct io n Based Int erven t ion Funct ion Based Int erv en t ion 1 0 0 9 0 8 0 7 0 6 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 Mat t hew Percentage of Intervals Inappropriate Behavior 0 10 0 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 Jerro d 10 0 1 00 9 0 8 0 7 0 6 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 Em ma 2 0 1 0 0 1 3 5 7 9 1 1 1 3 1 5 1 7 1 9 2 1 2 3 2 5 Daily Sessio ns 2 7 2 9 3 1 3 3 3 5 3 7 3 9 4 1 4 3 4 5 4 7 4 9 Academic Challenges Common school response to academic challenges = send to specialists to “be fixed” Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success Academic Systems Behavioral Systems Intensive, Individual Interventions •Individual Students •Assessment-based •High Intensity 1-5% Targeted Group Interventions •Some students (at-risk) •High efficiency •Rapid response Universal Interventions •All students •Preventive, proactive 5-10% 80-90% 1-5% Intensive, Individual Interventions •Individual Students •Assessment-based •Intense, durable procedures 5-10% Targeted Group Interventions •Some students (at-risk) •High efficiency •Rapid response 80-90% Universal Interventions •All settings, all students •Preventive, proactive Response to Intervention EVIDENCE-BASED INTERVENTIONS DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING & PROBLEM SOLVING STUDENT PERFORMANCE CONTINUOUS PROGRESS MONITORING Universal Supports: Core Instruction • Consistent “core” curriculum implemented schoolwide (research-based) • Core instruction follows effective instructional practices (NWREL.org) • Core instruction implemented with fidelity • Consistent, prioritized, and protected time allocated to instruction • Data decision rules to identify a) those at high risk and b) “non-responders” in a timely manner Targeted Supports • Part of a continuum – must link to core curriculum • Efficient and effective way to identify students (Curriculum Based Measures; DIBELS) through FREQUENT monitoring • Intervention matched to presenting problem but not highly individualized • In addition to core curriculum Targeted Supports Intensify Instruction • Increase academic engaged time • Small group / one:one • Increased opportunities to respond • Supplemental curriculum Alter Instructional Environment • Rules & routines • Attention signal • Ratio of positive / negative statements • Efficient transitions • Active supervision Individual/Intensive • When small group/targeted not sufficient • When data indicate high risk* • Linked to core curriculum / outcomes *limited data beyond literacy Individual/ Intensive • Targeted assessment (Curriculum Based Measures; DIBELS) • Instruction targets remediation and/or accommodation • Environment provides multiple and sustained engagement opportunities • Monitor outcomes and make necessary adjustments (progress monitoring) • In addition to core curriculum Implications & Conclusion Implications For Educators Concerned with Children and Youth At-risk and Those with Disabilities • Prevention/early intervention • Schools w/PBS refer less to alternative school (CPS) • Continuum of Behavioral Supports (prevention – effective individual interventions) • Generalization – building environments to increase the likelihood • IEP still individualized, behavioral objectives mapped to school-wide expectations Implications For Educators Concerned with Children and Youth At-risk and Those with Disabilities • Build similar SW-PBS systems to facilitate transition from self-contained settings back to home school • Build capacity in schools to support students with academic and social concerns – Technical assistance directing best practice v. simple compliance • Blend education and related initiatives – Safe Schools / Achievement / Mental Health On school reform… Kauffman states “…attempts to reform education will make little difference until reformers understand that schools must exist as much for teachers as for student. Put another way, schools will be successful in nurturing the intellectual, social, and moral development of children only to the extent that they also nurture such development of teachers.” (1993, p. 7). School-wide Positive Behavior Supports: Implications for Special Educators Tim Lewis, Ph.D. University of Missouri OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Intervention & Supports pbis.org