School-wide Positive Behavior Support: Providing State-Wide Leadership Rob Horner University of Oregon George Sugai University of Connecticut www.pbis.org Barbara Kelley Roger Titgemeyer Orange County.
Download ReportTranscript School-wide Positive Behavior Support: Providing State-Wide Leadership Rob Horner University of Oregon George Sugai University of Connecticut www.pbis.org Barbara Kelley Roger Titgemeyer Orange County.
School-wide Positive Behavior Support: Providing State-Wide Leadership Rob Horner University of Oregon George Sugai University of Connecticut www.pbis.org Barbara Kelley Roger Titgemeyer Orange County Goals Define core features of SWPBS Define Role of a Leadership Team Provide examples from other states Planning for Desert Mountain SELPA School-wide PBS Build a continuum of supports that begins with the whole school and extends to intensive, wraparound support for individual students and their families. What is School-wide Positive Behavior Support? School-wide PBS is: A systems approach for establishing the social culture and individualized behavioral supports needed for schools to achieve both social and academic success for all students while preventing problem behavior Evidence-based features of SW-PBS Prevention Define and teach positive social expectations Acknowledge (reward) positive behavior Arrange consistent consequences for problem behavior On-going collection and use of data for decision-making Continuum of intensive, individual interventions. Administrative leadership – Team-based implementation (Systems that support effective practices) Establishing a Social Culture Common Language MEMBERSHIP Common Experience Common Vision/Values SCHOOL-WIDE 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 SWPBS Practices Classroom Non-classroom • Smallest change • Evidence-based • Biggest, durable effect Student Family Supporting Social Competence, Academic Achievement and Safety School-wide PBS OUTCOMES Supporting Student Behavior Supporting Decision Making SYSTEMS Supporting Staff Behavior Define School-wide Expectations for Social Behavior Identify 3-5 Expectations Short statements Positive Statements (what to do, not what to avoid doing) Memorable Examples: Be Respectful, Be Responsible, Be Safe, Be Kind, Be a Friend, Be-there-be-ready, Hands and feet to self, Respect self, others, property, Do your best, Follow directions of adults States Implementing SWPBS 9000+ schools in 44 states 1200 Number of Schools 1000 California Illinois 800 600 400 200 0 1 3 5 7 States 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 Hawaii California Scott Spaulding, Claudia Vincent, et al Pbis.org / evaluation/ evaluation briefs Visibility Political Support Funding Leadership Team Active Coordination Training Coaching Behavioral Expertise Local Demonstration Schools Evaluation Leadership Team Political authority Families School Administrators State Department of Education (Gen Ed-SPED?) Union/ Staff Technical Expertise Behavioral expertise Implementation and training expertise University and Personnel Prep positions Coordination Experience, skill, social competence, time Leadership Team Meet Regularly Minimal: Quarterly Preferred: Monthly Once established (as needed) Meet Functionally Action planning (schools, districts, evaluation) Conduct: Review, input, guidance Funding Three years of funding Visibility Political, community, professional Political Support State policy At least annual (prefer twice a year) presentation to board/superintendent/governor. Core Functions of Leadership Team Trainers State and regional access to training at all three tiers of PBIS Build capacity for every district to conduct annual training orientation State-wide annual forum Coaching Cadre Coaches training, state forum Define job description of coach Behavioral Expertise School –psychologist, counselor, social worker, administrator Skills in FBA, Behavior Support development, data collection and use. Evaluation Plan Fidelity data Student behavioral data Student academic data Coaching Defined Coaching is the active and iterative delivery of: ◦ (a) prompts that increase successful behavior, and ◦ (b) corrections that decrease unsuccessful behavior. ◦ Coaching is done by someone with credibility and experience with the target skill(s) ◦ Coaching is done on-site, in real time ◦ Coaching is done after initial training ◦ Coaching is done repeatedly (e.g. monthly) ◦ Coaching intensity is adjusted to need Outcomes of Coaching Fluency with trained skills Adaptation of trained concepts/skills to local contexts and challenges And new challenges that arise Rapid redirection from miss-applications Increased fidelity of overall implementation Improved sustainability Most often due to ability to increase coaching intensity at critical points in time. Training Outcomes Related to Training Components Training Outcomes Training Components Presentation/ Lecture Knowledge of Content Skill Implementation Classroom Application 10% 5% 0% Plus Demonstration 30% 20% 0% Plus Practice 60% 60% 5% Plus Coaching/ Admin Support Data Feedback 95% 95% 95% Joyce & Showers, 2002 Example of the Impact of Coaching on Student Outcomes: Average Major Discipline Referrals per Day per Month Coach returns from leave 7 6 Avg. Referrals per Day 5 4Coach goes on leave 3 2 1 0 Sep Oct NovDec Jan Feb Mar Apr May 05-06 06-07 Demonstrations Initial demonstrations Fidelity is possible Outcomes are desired and useful Pockets of supported demonstrations Located where there is training expertise or money Building regional capacity PBIS in Illinois Lucille Eber Ed.D. IL PBIS Network July 17, 2008 Developing Local Systems of Care for Children and Adolescents with Mental Health Needs and their Families Training Institutes Nashville,TN PBIS Schools Over Ten Years: number of schools Trained & Partially or Fully Implementing 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 874 520 394 587 654 444 303 120 184 23 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 9/98 9/00 9/01 6/02 6/03 6/04 6/05 6/06 6/07 6/08 # External Coaches 138 # d istricts su p p o rted b y extern al co ach 140 120 100 71 76 80 60 40 20 0 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 # IL PBIS Schools & # External Coaches June 30, 2008 # IL PBIS Schools & # Ext. & Int. Coaches June 30, 2008 Steve Goodman [email protected] www.cenmi.org/miblsi 2009 Shifting to Regional Training Model Participating Schools 300 250 200 150 2000 Model Demonstration Schools (5) 2004 Schools (21) 2005 Schools (31) 2006 Schools (50) 2007 Schools (165) 100 50 0 2003-2004 Existing Schools 2004-2005 New Schools 2005-2006 2006-2007 DIBELS Instructional Recommendations and Major Discipline Referral per Cohort per Year Major Discipline Referrals 160 90 140 80 120 70 60 50 100 DIBELS Benchmark 80 40 60 30 40 20 20 10 0 0 2003-2004 Cohort 1 (n=16 schools) 2004-2005 2005-2006 Cohort 2 (n=24 schools) 2006-2007 Major Discipline Referrals per 100 students Percent Students at Benchmark (schoolwide) 100 Percentofstudents Participating School Example: Fourth Grade Reading MEAP Results Began MiBLSi Implementation 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 Year School District 2004 2005 North Carolina Positive Behavior Support Initiative Partners’ Update February 2009 Heather R. Reynolds NC Department of Public Instruction Bob Algozzine Behavior and Reading Improvement Center http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/positivebehavior/ State PBS Coordinator Heather R Reynolds North Carolina Positive Behavior Support Initiative 100 95 90 85 EOG Reading 80 Schools with Low ODRs and High Academic Outcomes 75 Reading Linear (Reading) 70 rxy = -.44 (n = 36) 65 60 55 50 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 ODRs 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Dr. Bob Algozzine Stages of Implementation Implementation occurs in stages: Exploration Installation Initial Implementation Full Implementation Innovation Sustainability Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005 2 – 4 Years Priority Effectiveness Valued Outcomes DataBased Prob. Solving Continuous Regeneration Identifying & Modifying Practices Practice Implementation Efficiency Considerations for Next Steps Build Political Commitment ◦ Policy recommendations Send to every district Send to state department ◦ Administrator Academy ◦ Summer institute for coaches/trainers Considerations for Next Steps Leadership Team Do we have the right people on the team? Do we have the administrative representatives we need? Do we have the FTE for “coordination” that will allow leadership team decisions to produce action? Considerations for Next Steps Trainer Capacity What is needed to build trainer capacity at district/regional level? Consider both initial training, and on-going training Do districts/ regions have the capacity for annual training as part of Fall orientation? Do districts/ regions have the capacity for advanced training in behavior support and data-based decisionmaking. Considerations for Next Steps Coaching Capacity Build coaching job description Build coaching expectations/ ratio recommendation Annual trainer/coaching training (forum) Considerations for Next Steps Behavioral Expertise State- very strong District/ Region: unclear School building: Is there someone who can do a simple FBA? Do schools have team structure to use FBA info for BIP design and implementation? Do schools have information system needed to manage BIP? Considerations for Next Steps Evaluation State/ District/ School evaluation plan Measures of fidelity Measures of student behavior outcomes SWIS CICO-SWIS ISIS Academic behavior District Level Capacity Evaluation DSSP Considerations for Next Steps Funding ARRA SPDG Safe & Drug Free State IDEA Mental Health Title I Considerations for Next Steps Demonstrations Schools using PBS Districts with Capacity Building sustainability at district, region, state Considerations for Next Steps Linking RtI and PBIS efforts. Core features Common assessment, organization and evaluation