Response to Intervention III SW Behavioral Assessment George Sugai Director CBER Co-Director Center on PBIS www.CBER.org www.PBIS.org Neag School of Education.
Download ReportTranscript Response to Intervention III SW Behavioral Assessment George Sugai Director CBER Co-Director Center on PBIS www.CBER.org www.PBIS.org Neag School of Education.
Response to Intervention III SW Behavioral Assessment George Sugai Director CBER Co-Director Center on PBIS www.CBER.org www.PBIS.org Neag School of Education • Brief RtI-SWPBS Review • SW data-based decision making • Data-based interventions BIG IDEA Successful individual student behavior support is linked to host environments or school climates that are effective, efficient, relevant, durable, & scalable (Zins & Ponti, 1990) Evaluation Criteria Effective • Desired Outcomes? Efficient • Doable? Relevant • Contextual & Cultural? Durable • Lasting? Scalable • Transportable? Integrated Elements Supporting Social Competence & Academic Achievement OUTCOMES Supporting Decision Making Supporting Staff Behavior PRACTICES Supporting Student Behavior IMPLEMENTATION W/ FIDELITY CONTINUUM OF UNIVERSAL EVIDENCE-BASED SCREENING INTERVENTIONS DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING STUDENT & PROBLEM PERFORMANCE SOLVING CONTINUOUS PROGRESS MONITORING RtI 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 Precision Teaching CBM Early Screening & Intervention Applied Behavior Analysis Behavioral & Instructional Consultation Prereferral Interventions Diagnostic Prescriptive Teaching Teacher Assistance Teaming CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT FEW ~5% ~15% SOME Primary Prevention: School-/ClassroomWide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings ALL ~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 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? • ??? Possible RtI Outcomes Gresham, 2005 High Risk No Risk Responder Non-Responder False + True + Adequate response Inadequate response True – False – Adequate response Inadequate response Avoiding False +/Technically adequate assessments Integrated initiatives Continuum of effective practices Fidelity of implementation Timely team-based decision making Efficient & accurate decision rules Regular systems level audits Training to fluency Need for…. Improving classroom & school climate Integrating Decreasing academic & reactive behavior management initiatives Improving support for Maximizing academic students w/ behavior achievement disorders SWPBS Conceptual Foundations Behaviorism ABA Laws of Behavior Applied Behavioral Technology PBS Social Validity SWPBS All Students CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT FEW ~5% ~15% SOME Primary Prevention: School-/ClassroomWide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings ALL ~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 GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS Team Agreements Data-based Action Plan Evaluation Implementation VIOLENCE PREVENTION • Positive, predictable school-wide climate • Surgeon General’s Report on Youth Violence (2001) • High rates of academic & social success • Coordinated Social Emotional & Learning (Greenberg et al., 2003) • Formal social skills instruction • Positive active supervision & reinforcement • Center for Study & Prevention of Violence (2006) • Positive adult role models • White House Conference on School Violence (2006) • Multi-component, multi-year school-family-community effort SWPBS Practices Classroom Non-classroom Student • Smallest # • Evidence-based Family • Biggest, durable effect School-wide 1. Leadership team 2. Behavior purpose statement 3. Set of positive expectations & behaviors 4. Procedures for teaching SW & classroom-wide expected behavior 5. Continuum of procedures for encouraging expected behavior 6. Continuum of procedures for discouraging rule violations 7. Procedures for on-going data-based monitoring & evaluation Non-classroom • Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged • Active supervision by all staff – Scan, move, interact • Precorrections & reminders • Positive reinforcement Sch o o l -w i d e I n terven ti o n Basel i n e 60 En teri n g Sch o o l 40 30 Probl em Behavi ors 50 20 10 60 En teri n g Cafeteri a 50 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 Problem Behaviors 0 5 min u te o b s e r v a tio n D a te 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 Franzen, K., & Kamps, D. (2008). 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 Allday & Pakurar (2007) -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 26 Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior 100 90 10 0 BL CI/ CO CI/CO +75% CI/CO +80% 80 80 90 School Days CI/CO +90% 70 Helena 60 50 40 30 20 10 100 0 90 70 Jade 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 80 Farrell 70 60 50 40 30 20 Began meds. Class B Results Check In/Out Pt Card Name________________ Date ________ GOALS 9:30 10:30 11:30 1. RESPECT OTHERS 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2. MANAGE SELF 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 3. SOLVE PROBLEMS RESPONSIBLY 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 Rating Scale 2 = Great 1 = Ok 0 = Goal Not Met 8:30 Goal _____ Pts Possible _____ Pts Received_____ % of Pts _____ Goal Met? Y N 12:30 1:30 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 30 Number of Major and Minor Office Discipline Referrals CICO begins 11/15 25 20 15 10 5 0 Sep-04 Oct-04 Nov-04 Dec-04 Jan-05 Feb-05 Mar-05 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Months 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 Ingram, Lewis-Palmer, & Sugai, 2005 % 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 ESTABLISHING CONTINUUM of SWPBS ~5% ~15% • • • • • • •• • • • ~80% of Students • • • • • • TERTIARY PREVENTION PREVENTION TERTIARY • Function-based support • Wraparound • Person-centered planning • • SECONDARY PREVENTION PREVENTION SECONDARY • Check in/out Targeted social skills instruction • Peer-based supports • Social skills club • PRIMARY PREVENTION PREVENTION PRIMARY • Teach SW expectations • Proactive SW discipline • Positive reinforcement • Effective instruction • Parent engagement • ESTABLISHING A CONTINUUM of SWPBS TERTIARY PREVENTION Practice Selection • Function-based support • Wraparound/PCP Audit • Evidence-based • Specialized individualised ~5% supports Identify existing practices by tier •1. Measurable outcome aligned with • need & student ~15% 2. Specify outcome for each effort SECONDARY PREVENTION • Check in/out • Rules for data-based decisions 3. Evaluate implementation • Targeted social skills instruction • Peer-based supports accuracy &with outcome • Integrated related practices • Social skills club effectiveness • based on outcomes, need, 4. student Eliminate/integrate based on PRIMARY PREVENTION • Teach & encourage positive outcomes • Implementation fidelity SW expectations • Proactive SW discipline Establish decision rules (RtI) •5. Continuous monitoring • Effective instruction • Parent engagement • ~80% of Students Self-Assessment Efficient Systems of Data Management Team-based Decision Making SWIS Data-based Action Plan EvidenceBased Practices Existing Discipline Data Multiple Systems Office Re fe rrals pe r Day pe r M onth A v e R efer r als per D ay Last Year and This Year 20 15 10 5 0 Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar School Months Apr May Jun Office Discipline Referrals • Definition – Kid-Teacher-Administrator interaction – Underestimation of actual behavior • Improving usefulness & value – Clear, mutually exclusive, exhaustive definitions – Distinction between office v. classroom managed – Continuum of behavior support – Positive school-wide foundations – W/in school comparisons N um ber of O ffic e R efer r als Referrals by Location 50 40 30 20 10 0 B ath R B us A B us C af C lass C omm Gym H all School Locations Libr P lay G S pec Other N um ber of R efer r als Referrals by Problem Re fe rr als pe r Prob Be havior Behavior 50 40 30 20 10 0 L a n g Ac h o l Ars o n Bo m bCo m b sDe f i a nDi s ru p tDre s sAg g / f g tT h e f tHa ra s sPro p D Sk i p T a rd y T o b a c Va n d W e a p Types of Problem Behavior Referrals per Location N um ber of O ffic e R efer r als Referrals by Location 50 40 30 20 10 0 B ath R B us A B us C af C lass C omm Gym H all School Locations Libr P lay G S pec Other N um ber of R efer r als per S tudent Referrals per Student 20 10 0 Students Referrals by Time of Day N um ber of R efer r als Re fe rrals by Tim e of Day 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 7 : 0 0 7 : 3 0 8 : 0 0 8 : 3 0 9 : 0 0 9 : 3 0 1 0 : 0 01 0 : 3 01 1 : 0 01 1 : 3 01 2 : 0 01 2 : 3 0 1 : 0 0 1 : 3 0 2 : 0 0 2 : 3 0 3 : 0 0 3 : 3 0 Time of Day 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) North Illinois Schools (Elem, Middle) Triangle Summary 03-04 Mean Proportion of Students 1 0.8 04% 08% 14% 17% 0.6 88% 69% 0.4 0.2 6+ ODR 2-5 ODR 0-1 ODR SWPBS schools are more preventive 0 Met SET N = 28 Not Met SET N = 11 SWIS summary 07-08 July 2, 2008 2,717 sch, 1,377,989 stds; 1,232,826 Maj ODRs Grade Range # Schools Mean Enroll. Mean ODRs/100/ sch day (std dev.) K-6 1,756 445 ..35 (.45) 1/300 day 6-9 476 654 .91 (1.40) 1/100 /day 9-12 177 910 1.05 (1.56) 1/105/day K-(8-12) 308 401 1.01 (1.88) 1/100 /day National ODR/ISS/OSS July 2008 K-6 6-9 9-12 2409 # Sch 1756 476 177 # Std 781,546 311,725 161,182 1,254,453 # ODR 423,647 414,716 235,279 1,073,642 ISS # Evnt 6 38 38 avg/100 # Day 12 49 61 OSS # Evnt 6 30 24 avg/100 # Day 10 74 61 # Expl 0.03 0.29 0.39 July 2, 2008 % Students 3 100% 8 9 15 16 8 90% 80% 70% 60% 6+ 50% 2-5 89 77 40% 0-1 74 30% 20% 10% 0% K-6 6-9 9-12 School Level ODR rates vary by level % Major ODRs 100% 90% 33 45 80% 44 70% 60% 6+ 50% 42 2-5 0-1 40% 38 38 17 18 30% 20% 26 10% 0% K-6 6-9 School Level July 2, 2008 9-12 Bethel School District Office Discipline Referrals 1000 900 800 Number of Referrals 700 600 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 500 2004-05 2005-06 400 2006-07 2007-08 300 200 100 0 K 1 2 3 4 5 6 Grade Level 7 8 9 10 11 12 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 T otal O ffic e D is c ipl ine R efer r al Kennedy Middle School 1500 1200 900 600 300 0 95-96 96-97 97-98 School Years 98-99 Elementary School Suspension Rate Elementary School Middle School Office Referrals 531 600 346 500 400 300 200 100 0 2004-05 2005-06 Middle School Suspension Rate Middle School FC, MD Trends in Suspension Rates for PBS Schools Implementing w/ Fidelity & Maturity FC, MD Trends in Black & Hispanic Suspension Rates for PBS Schools Implementing w/ Fidelity & Maturity www.pbis.org Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2008). Is school-wide positive behavior support an evidence-based practice? OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions & Support. 90-School Study Horner et al., in press • Schools that receive technical assistance from typical support personnel implement SWPBS with fidelity • Fidelity SWPBS is associated with ▫ Low levels of ODR ▫ .29/100/day v. national mean .34 ▫ Improved perception of safety of the school ▫ reduced risk factor ▫ Increased proportion of 3rd graders who meet state reading standard. Project Target: Preliminary Findings Bradshaw & Leaf, in press • PBIS (21 v. 16) schools reached & sustained high fidelity • PBIS increased all aspects of organizational health • Positive effects/trends for student outcomes – Fewer students with 1 or more ODRs (majors + minors) – Fewer ODRs (majors + minors) – Fewer ODRs for truancy – Fewer suspensions – Increasing trend in % of students scoring in advanced & proficient range of state achievement test SSS Mean Protective Factor Score: Mean Protective Factor Score Illinois Schools 03-04 t = 7.21; df = 172; p < .0001 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 N = 59 N = 128 12 schools 25 schools Met SET Did Not Meet SET SSS Mean Risk Factor Score: Mean SSS Risk Factor Score Illinois Schools 03-04 t = -5.48; df = 134; p < .0001 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 N = 59 N = 128 12 schools 25 schools Met SET Did Not Meet SET 4J School District Change from 97-98 to 01-02 Elem With School-wide PBS 20 Eugene, Oregon 15 10 5 0 -5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Schools Change from 97-98 to 01-02 Elem Without School-wide PBS 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 -6 1 2 3 4 Schools 5 6 Change in the percentage of students meeting the state standard in reading at grade 3 from 97-98 to 0102 for schools using PBIS all four years and those that did not. Mean ODRs per 100 students per school day Illinois and Hawaii Elementary Schools 2003-04 (No Minors) Schools using SW-PBS report a 25% lower rate of ODRs Mean ODR/100/Day 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 .85 .64 0.2 0 N = 87 N = 53 Met SET 80/80 Did Not Meet SET Illinois 02-03 Mean Proportion of Students Meeting ISAT Reading Mean Percentage of 3rd graders meeting ISAT Reading Standard Standard t test (df 119) p < .0001 70% 62.19% 60% 50% 46.60% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% PBIS NOT in place N = 69 PBIS IN place N = 52 Proportion of Students Meeting Reading Standards Proportion of 3rd Graders who meet or exceed state reading standards (ISAT) in Illinois schools 02-03 t = 9.20; df = 27 p < .0001 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 N =23 N = 23 NN==88 0 Not Meeting SET Meeting SET ODR Instruc. Benefit Springfield MS, MD 2001-2002 2277 2002-2003 1322 = 955 42% improvement = 42,975 min. @ 45 min. = 716.25 hrs = 119 days Instruc. time ODR Admin. Benefit Springfield MS, MD 2001-2002 2277 2002-2003 1322 = 955 42% improvement = 14,325 min. @15 min. = 238.75 hrs = 40 days Admin. time “Mom, Dad, Auntie, & Jason” In a school where over 45% of 400 elem. students receive free-reduced lunch, >750 family members attended Family Fun Night. I like workin’ at school After implementing SW-PBS, Principal at Jesse Bobo Elementary reports that teacher absences dropped from 414 (2002-2003) to 263 (20032004). “I like it here.” Over past 3 years, 0 teacher requests for transfers “She can read!” With minutes reclaimed from improvements in proactive SW discipline, elementary school invests in improving schoolwide literacy. Result: >85% of students in 3rd grade are reading at/above grade level. “We found some minutes?” After reducing their office discipline referrals from 400 to 100, middle school students requiring individualized, specialized behavior intervention plans decreased from 35 to 6. PBIS Messages • Measurable & justifiable outcomes • On-going data-based decision making • Evidence-based practices • Systems ensuring durable, high fidelity of implementation