SWPBS (aka EBS) 10 Year Perspective George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS University of Oregon Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut March 11, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org [email protected].
Download ReportTranscript SWPBS (aka EBS) 10 Year Perspective George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS University of Oregon Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut March 11, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org [email protected].
SWPBS (aka EBS) 10 Year Perspective George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS University of Oregon Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut March 11, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org [email protected] PURPOSE: Acknowledge what we have learned over last 10 years • Where did SWPBS come from? • Has triangle been useful? • What about academic achievement? • Is SWPBS program or system? • What about next 10 years? World Events for 1997 • Deep Blue defeats Garry Kasparov in chess rematch • Hong Kong reverts to China after 156 years as British Colony • Space station 'Mir' experiences life threatening malfunctions & accidents • 1st Harry Potter book published • Clinton US president of US & Chretien Canadian prime minister • Seinfeld, Men in Black, Candle in the Wind (E. John) • Millions commemorate 20th anniversary of Elvis' death • Princess Diana killed in Paris car crash • 3 high school students killed in Paducah KY • Iowa woman gives birth to septuplets; all survive • Adult sheep named Dolly successfully cloned in Scotland • Center on PBIS awarded to university collaborative Where did SWPBS come from? Before1997 • No such thing as www • No such thing as PBIS Center • “Pre-PowerPoint”…transparencies • Concern about school climate & problem behavior • EBS “Effective Behavior Support” 1985 2008 2008 1986 OR PBS & 2007 USF Bohemia PBIS-III? Scaling Up 1988 Elementary (1) 2003 Center Project OSEP TA PREPARE (4) PBIS-2 Center 1994 (~40/~6600) 2001 Effective Behavior OR Behavior Support 1996 Project (6) 1998 Research Center OSEP TA Fern Ridge PBIS Center Middle Evolution School-wide Positive Behavior Support (~15/~1000) Circa 1996 Fern Ridge Middle School Office Referrals/School Day by Month 1994-1995, 1995-1996 25 20 15 10 5 0 Sep Nov Jan Mar Months Taylor-Greene et al., 1996 May FRMS Total Office Discipline Referrals Pre 3000 Total ODRs 2500 2000 1500 Post 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 SWPBS Conceptual Foundations Behaviorism ABA EBS/PBS SWPBS PBIS objective…. Redesign & support teaching & learning environments that are effective, efficient, relevant, & durable – Outcome-based – Data-guided decision making – Evidence-based practices – Systems support for accurate & sustained implementation Has “triangle” been useful? Continuum of Effective Behavior Support Students with Chronic/Intense Problem Behavior (1 - 7%) Specialized Individual Interventions (Individual Student System) Tertiary Prevention Secondary Prevention Specialized Group Interventions (At-Risk System) Students At-Risk for Problem Behavior (5-15%) Students without Serious Problem Behaviors (80 -90%) Primary Prevention All Students in School Universal Interventions (School-Wide System Classroom System) Circa 1996 Original logic: public health & disease prevention (Larson, 1994) • Tertiary (FEW) – Reduce complications, intensity, severity of current cases • Secondary (SOME) – Reduce current cases of problem behavior • Primary (ALL) – Reduce new cases of problem behavior Prevention Logic for All Walker et al., 1996 Decrease development of new problem behaviors Redesign learning & Prevent teaching Teach, worsening of environments monitor, & to eliminate acknowledge existing problem prosocial triggers & behaviors maintainers of behavior problem behaviors 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 “Triangle” ?’s you should ask! • Where did it come from? • Why not a pyramid or octagon? • Why not 12 tiers? 2 tiers? • What’s it got to do w/ sped? • Where those % come from? Central Illinois Elem, Middle Schools Triangle Summary 03-04 1 05% Mean Proportion of Students 11% 20% 0.8 22% 0.6 84% 58% 0.4 0.2 6+ ODR 2-5 ODR 0-1 ODR SWPBS schools are more preventive 0 Met SET (N = 23) Not Met SET (N =12) SWIS 06-07 (Majors Only) 1974 schools; 1,025,422 students; 948,874 ODRs Grades # Sch Mean Enroll Mean ODRs/100/Day K-6 1288 446 .34 (.37) 1/300/day 6-9 377 658 .98 (1.36) 1/100/day 9-12 124 1009 .93 (.83) 1/107/day K-(8-12) 183 419 .86 (1.14) 1/120/day Rule violations happen Major Office Discipline Referrals (05-06) Mean Proportion of Students 0-1 '2-5 '6+ 100% 90% 3% 8% 10% 11% 16% 18% 89% 74% 71% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% ODR rates vary by level 10% 0% K=6 (N = 1010) 6-9 (N = 312) 9-12 (N = 104) Major Office Discipline Referrals (05-06) Percentage of ODRs by Student Group '0-1 '2-5 '6+ A few kids get many ODRs 100% 90% 32% 48% 45% 43% 37% 40% 25% 15% 15% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% K-6 (N = 1010) 6-9 (N = 312) 9-12 (N = 104) Bethel School District ODR's by Grade Level ODR rates vary by grade 900 800 700 Number of ODR's 600 2001-02 500 2002-03 2003-04 400 2004-05 300 200 100 0 K 1 2 3 4 5 6 Grade Level 7 8 9 10 11 12 What about academic achievement? It’s not just about behavior! STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Good Teaching Behavior Management Increasing District & State Competency and Capacity Investing in Outcomes, Data, Practices, and Systems Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success Academic Systems Circa 1996 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 Implementation Fidelity Comprehensive screening Early & timely decision making Databased decision making Support for nonresponders Need for better Instructional accountability & justification Assessment -instruction alignment Resource & time use IMPLEMENTATION W/ FIDELITY UNIVERSAL SCREENING RtI CONTINUUM OF EVIDENCE-BASED INTERVENTIONS DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING STUDENT & PROBLEM PERFORMANCE SOLVING CONTINUOUS PROGRESS MONITORING RtI: Good “IDEiA” Policy Approach or framework for redesigning & establishing teaching & learning environments that are effective, efficient, relevant, & durable for all students, families & educators • NOT program, curriculum, strategy, intervention • NOT limited to special education • NOT new Quotable Fixsen • “Policy is – Allocation of limited resources for unlimited needs” – Opportunity, not guarantee, for good action” • “Training does not predict action” – “Manualized treatments have created overly rigid & rapid applications” Precision Teaching CBM Instructional Consultation Applied Behavior Analysis Behavioral & Instructional Consultation Prereferral Interventions Diagnostic Prescriptive Teaching Teacher Assistance Teaming RtI Application Examples EARLY READING/LITERACY SOCIAL BEHAVIOR TEAM General educator, special educator, reading specialist, Title I, school psychologist, etc. General educator, special educator, behavior specialist, Title I, school psychologist, etc. UNIVERSAL SCREENING Curriculum based measurement SSBD, record review, gating PROGRESS MONITORING Curriculum based measurement ODR, suspensions, behavior incidents, precision teaching EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS 5-specific reading skills: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension Direct social skills instruction, positive reinforcement, token economy, active supervision, behavioral contracting, group contingency management, function-based support, selfmanagement DECISION MAKING RULES Core, strategic, intensive Primary, secondary, tertiary tiers Responsiveness to Intervention Academic + Social Behavior Intensive Targeted Universal Few Some All Dec 7, 2007 RTI Continuum of Support for ALL RCT etc. Algozzine et al., Horner et al., Leaf et al., • Improvements in school climate – Decreases in ODR – Improvements in perceived school safety • Improvements in achievement – Standardized achievement tests • High levels of implementation fidelity Is SWPBS Program or System? Positive Behavior Support Supporting Decision Making Supporting Staff Behavior SYSTEMS DATA PRACTICES Circa 1996 Supporting Student Behavior Basics: 4 PBS Elements Supporting Social Competence & Academic Achievement OUTCOMES Supporting Decision Making Supporting Staff Behavior PRACTICES Supporting Student Behavior GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS: “Getting Started” Team Agreements Data-based Action Plan Evaluation Implementation Sample Implementation “Map” • 2+ years of school team training • Annual “booster” events • Coaching/facilitator support @ school & district levels • Regular self-assessment & evaluation data • On-going preparation of trainers • Development of local/district leadership teams • Establishment of state/regional leadership & policy team Organization of behavioral subsystems School-Wide Individual Student Non-Classroom Classroom Circa 1996 SWPBS Subsystems Classroom What does SWPBS look like? Family Non-classroom Student School-wide 1. Common purpose & approach to discipline 2. Clear set of positive expectations & behaviors 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 Reinforcement Wisdom! • “Knowing” or saying “know” does NOT mean “will do” • Students “do more” when “doing works”…appropriate & inappropriate! • Natural consequences are varied, unpredictable, undependable,…not always preventive Non-classroom • Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged • Active supervision by all staff – Scan, move, interact • Precorrections & reminders • Positive reinforcement Pre-Co rrecti o n I n terven ti o n Basel i n e 60 En teri n g Sch o o l 40 30 20 10 0 Probl em Behavi ors Staff Interac ti ons 50 60 40 30 20 10 0 60 50 Exi ti n g Sch o o l 40 30 20 10 0 3/14/95 3/28/95 3/29/95 4/3/95 4/4/95 4/7/95 4/10/95 4/17/95 4/18/95 4/26/95 4/27/95 4/29/95 5/1/95 5/2/95 5/3/95 5/4/95 5/9/95 5/10/95 5/12/95 5/15/95 5/16/95 5/17/95 5/18/95 5/23/95 5/24/95 5/25/95 5/26/95 5/30/95 5/31/95 6/1/95 6/2/95 6/5/95 6/6/95 6/8/95 6/9/95 6/12/95 6/13/95 Frequency of Events En teri n g Cafeteri a 50 Date Classroom • Classroom-wide positive expectations taught & encouraged • Teaching classroom routines & cues taught & encouraged • Ratio of 6-8 positive to 1 negative adultstudent interaction • Active supervision • Redirections for minor, infrequent behavior errors • Frequent precorrections for chronic errors • Effective academic instruction & curriculum Romanowich, Bourett, & Volmer, 2007 Individual Student • Behavioral competence at school & district levels • Function-based behavior support planning • Team- & data-based decision making • Comprehensive person-centered planning & wraparound processes • Targeted social skills & self-management instruction • Individualized instructional & curricular accommodations % Intervals w/ P.B. for Bryce % Intervals w/ P.B. Baseline 100 90 80 70 60 ContraIndicated Indicated ContraIndicated Indicated 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 Sessions* *Data points with arrows indicate no medication % Intervals w/ P.B. for Carter 100 Baseline Indicated 90 ContraIndicated Contrandicated Indicated Indicated Modified % Intervals w/ P.B. 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 Sessions 17 19 21 23 25 27 Family • Continuum of positive behavior support for all families • Frequent, regular positive contacts, communications, & acknowledgements • Formal & active participation & involvement as equal partner • Access to system of integrated school & community resources CONTINUUM of SWPBS TERTIARY PREVENTION • Function-based support • Wraparound/PCP Audit • Special Education ~5%• 1. Identify existing practices • ~15% • • • • • by tier 2. Specify outcome for each effort SECONDARY PREVENTION Check in/out 3. Evaluate implementation Targeted social skills instruction Peer-based supports accuracy & outcome Social skills club effectiveness Eliminate/integrate based on PRIMARY4. PREVENTION • Teach & encourage positive outcomes SW expectations • Proactive SW discipline 5. Establish decision rules (RtI) • Effective instruction • Parent engagement • ~80% of Students What about next 10 years? How do we….. • Increase adoption of effective behavioral instructional technologies in classrooms & schools? • Ensure high fidelity of implementation of these technologies? • Increase efficient, sustained & scaled implementation of these technologies? • Increase accurate, efficient, & durable institutionalized use of these technologies? Fairbanks, Sugai, Gardino, & Lathrop, 2007. 100 BL CI/ CO CI/CO +75% CI/CO +80% CI/CO +90% 90 80 Helena 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 Jade 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 Farrell 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Began meds. -O ct 3N o 16 v -N o 30 v -N ov 7D ec 6Ja n 13 -J a n 18 -J a n 27 -J a n 3F eb 8F e 17 b -F eb 25 -F eb 4M a 11 r -M a 30 r -M ar 5A p 13 r -A p 29 r -A p 10 r -M a 19 y -M ay 0 26 Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior 70 School Days Class B Results 100 BL 90 Study 2 Results CI/ CO CI/CO 75% CI/CO 80% FB plan FB plan 2 80 Marce llus 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 80 Blair 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 Be n 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 Oliv ia 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 6Ja n 13 -J a n 18 -J a n 27 -J a n 3F e b 8F e b 17 -F e b 25 -F e b 4M a 11 r -M a 30 r -M ar 5A p r 13 -A p 29 r -A p 10 r -M a 19 y -M ay -O ct 3N ov 16 -N o 30 v -N ov 7D ec 0 26 Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior 90 School Days PBS Systems Implementation Logic Funding Visibility Political Support Leadership Team Active Coordination Training Coaching Evaluation Local School Teams/Demonstrations SUSTAINABLE IMPLEMENTATION & DURABLE RESULTS THROUGH CONTINUOUS REGENERATION Continuous Self-Assessment Relevance Valued Outcomes Priority Efficacy Fidelity Practice Implementation Effective Practices Questions • Pre-service preparation & induction process • Educator expectations, learning histories, outcomes, & reinforcers • Administrative leadership • Collaborative inter-agency interactions • Values, culture, context, learning histories, & reinforcers of organization • Policy guidance & accountability • Research & development – Urban ghettos, rural isolation, high schools, mental health, etc., etc. Also on Horizon: NCLB-II