Sustaining Change: RtI & SWPBS George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education and Research University of Connecticut March 10, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org [email protected].
Download ReportTranscript Sustaining Change: RtI & SWPBS George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education and Research University of Connecticut March 10, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org [email protected].
Sustaining Change: RtI & SWPBS George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education and Research University of Connecticut March 10, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org [email protected] Purpose RtI & SWPBS & sustaining change: – Promoting effective, efficient, & relevant teaching & learning environments – Working from continuum of behavior support for all students – Building capacity for adoption & sustained Implementation of evidence-based practices Sustaining Change • Know your basics • Implement with fidelity • Give priority to what matters • Know your outcomes • Integrate for efficiency • Build durable capacity Questions Who am I? What is RtI? What is SWPBS? What outcomes? What questions do you have? Who is he? PRE SCH 145 ELEM MID HS (K-6) (6-9) (9-12) 4043PBIS Center schools 1465 by state--September 2007 708 ALTJJ 311 7138 schools across 45 states (3/08) 700 Alt./Ctr. 600 High Over 110,000 public schools…..6.4%!! 500 400 Elem ECH 300 200 IL NC MD OR LA NY MI CO HI FL OH AL MO TN MT SC WV GA NH KY DE NM IA CA WY TX MN VA WA KS AZ DC PA ND MA WI CT SD NV RI NJ AK ID UT VT NE OK MS IN 0 ME 100 AR # of schools Mid/Jr. What is RtI? Basics 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 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 Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success Academic Systems Intensive, Individual Interventions •Individual Students •Assessment-based •High Intensity 1-5% 5-10% Targeted Group Interventions •Some students (at-risk) •High efficiency •Rapid response Universal Interventions •All students •Preventive, proactive Behavioral Systems 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 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 Questions to Ponder • What is “scientifically/evidence-based” intervention/practice? • How do we measure & ensure “fidelity of implementation?” • How do we determine “non-responsiveness?” • Can we affect “teacher practice?” • Do we have motivation to increase efficiency of “systems” organization? • ??? What is SWPBS? Implementation Levels Student Classroom School District State SWPBS Conceptual Foundations Behaviorism ABA PBS SWPBS SW-PBS Logic! Successful individual student behavior support is linked to host environments or school climates that are effective, efficient, relevant, & durable (Zins & Ponti, 1990) SWPBS is about…. Improving classroom & school climate Integrating Decreasing academic & reactive behavior management initiatives Improving support for students w/ EBD Maximizing academic achievement WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT PREVENTING VIOLENCE? • Positive, predictable school-wide climate • Surgeon General’s Report on Youth Violence (2001) • Formal social skills instruction • Coordinated Social Emotional & Learning (Greenberg et al., 2003) • Positive active supervision & reinforcement • Center for Study & Prevention of Violence (2006) • Positive adult role models • White House Conference on School Violence (2006) • High rates of academic & social success • Multi-component, multi-year school-family-community effort Basics: 4 PBS Elements Supporting 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 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 SWPBS Subsystems Classroom 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 Non-classroom • Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged • Active supervision by all staff – Scan, move, interact • Precorrections & reminders • Positive reinforcement 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 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 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 Who does SWPBS look like? Redesign Learning & Teaching Environment Saying & doing it “Positively!” Keep off the grass! LC: Expectations & behavioral skills are taught & recognized in natural context Expectations & behavioral skills are taught & recognized in natural context SETTING TEACHING MATRIX Expectations All Settings Hallways Playgrounds Cafeteria Library/ Computer Lab Study, read, compute. Sit in one spot. Watch for your stop. Assembly Bus Respect Ourselves Be on task. Give your best effort. Be prepared. Walk. Have a plan. Eat all your food. Select healthy foods. Respect Others Be kind. Hands/feet to self. Help/share with others. Use normal voice volume. Walk to right. Play safe. Include others. Share equipment. Practice good table manners Whisper. Return books. Listen/watch. Use appropriate applause. Use a quiet voice. Stay in your seat. Recycle. Clean up after self. Pick up litter. Maintain physical space. Use equipment properly. Put litter in garbage can. Replace trays & utensils. Clean up eating area. Push in chairs. Treat books carefully. Pick up. Treat chairs appropriately. Wipe your feet. Sit appropriately. Respect Property Acknowledge & Recognize SWPBS Outcomes? FRMS Total Office Discipline Referrals SUSTAINED IMPACT Pre 3000 Total ODRs 2500 2000 Post 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 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) 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 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 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 Class B Results + Composite Peers 100 BL CI/ CO 90 CI/CO +75% CI/CO +80% CI/CO +90% 80 Helena 70 60 Peer 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 Jade 80 70 60 Peer 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 Farrell 80 70 Peer 60 50 40 30 20 School Days eb 4M a 11 r -M a 30 r -M ar 5A p r 13 -A pr 29 -A p 10 r -M a 19 y -M ay -F 25 17 -F eb eb Began meds. 8F -O ct 3N ov 16 -N ov 30 -N ov 7D ec 0 6Ja n 13 -J a n 18 -J a n 27 -J a n 3F eb 10 26 Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior 50 100 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 Study 2 Results + Composite Peer 100 BL 90 CI/ CO CI/CO 75% CI/CO 80% FB plan FB plan 2 80 Marce llus 70 60 Peer 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 Peer 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 Be n 70 60 Peer 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 70 Peer Oliv ia 60 50 40 30 20 10 School Days 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 6Ja n 13 -J a n 18 -J a n 27 -J a n 3F eb 8F eb 17 -F e 25 b -F eb -O ct 3N ov 16 -N o 30 v -N ov 7D ec 0 26 Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior Blair 70