Differentiated Instruction within Universal Supports: The Need to Address Prior Learning History Tim Lewis, Ph.D. University of Missouri OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports pbis.org.
Download ReportTranscript Differentiated Instruction within Universal Supports: The Need to Address Prior Learning History Tim Lewis, Ph.D. University of Missouri OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports pbis.org.
Differentiated Instruction within Universal Supports: The Need to Address Prior Learning History Tim Lewis, Ph.D. University of Missouri OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports pbis.org Context The School Environment Must Support Appropriate Social & Academic Behavior School-Wide Positive Behavior Support Response to Intervention Typical responses to students • • • • • • • Increase monitoring for future problem behavior Re-review rules & sanctions Extend continuum of aversive consequences Improve consistency of use of punishments Establish “bottom line” Zero tolerance policies Security guards, student uniforms, metal detectors, video cameras • Suspension/expulsion • Exclusionary options (e.g., alternative programs) However… • “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 & SulzarAzaroff, 1991, Skiba & Peterson, 1999) Consider…. If antisocial behavior is not changed by the end of grade 3, it should be treated as a chronic condition much like diabetes. That is, it cannot be cured but managed with the appropriate supports and continuing intervention (Walker, Colvin, & Ramsey, 1995). Contributing Factors • Home – Poverty- Language – Parent/Child interactions • Community • School • Disability Contributing Factors - Poverty & Language Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children Betty Hart & Todd Risley Contributing Factors -Parent/Child Social Interactions • Common Patterns of early learning found in homes of children at-risk for anti-social behavior – Inconsistent discipline – Punitive management – Lack of monitoring Contributing Factors -Parent/Child Social Interactions Social Learning • Coercion/Negative Reinforcement (Patterson et al.) – Present an aversive, remove aversive once the person complies – “Social skills” to get need met Contributing Factors Community (Biglan, 1995) –lack of pro-social engagement –antisocial network of peers Contributing Factors School (Mayer, 1995) • punitive disciplinary approach • lack of clarity about rules, expectations, and consequences • lack of staff support • failure to consider and accommodate individual differences • academic failure Grades 1-3 Grades 4-6 Grades 7-12 Parent Discipline & Monitoring Parent Discipline & Monitoring Parent Discipline & Monitoring Antisocial Behavior Antisocial Behavior Delinquency & Antisocial Behavior Adult Criminal & Antisocial Behavior Deviant Peer Group Deviant Peer Group Social Skills Deficts Social Skills Deficts Social Skills Deficts Patterson, Capaldi, & Bank (1991) 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 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 Tier II Interventions • Social-Behavioral Concerns – Social skills – Self-management • Academic Concerns – Peer Tutors – Check in – Homework club • Emotional Concerns – Adult mentors Linked to School-wide Tier III • • • • When small group not sufficient When problem intense and chronic Driven by Functional Behavioral Assessment Linked to school-wide system RtI and SW-PBS Importance of Effective Instruction (Sanders, 1999) • The single biggest factor affecting academic growth of any population of youngsters is the effectiveness of the classroom. • The answer to why children learn well or not isn't race, it isn't poverty, it isn't even per-pupil expenditure at the elementary level. • The classroom's effect on academic growth dwarfs and nearly renders trivial all these other factors that people have historically worried about. The Effects of Quality Teaching: accounting for variance in student achievement ( Findings from meta-analytic research) Percentage of Achievement Variance > 30% Teachers Students Home Peers ~5-10% Schools Principal ~50% ~5-10% John Hattie ( 2003, 2007) Dinham NLLN 27/08/08 20 Creating Effective Classroom Environments • Insuring ALL faculty and staff engaging in effective instruction and classroom management • Align resources to challenges – Work within existing organization structure – Raze and rebuild • Must build an environment that simultaneously supports student and adult behavior 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 students. 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). Universal Supports: Core Instruction • Consistent “core” curriculum implemented school-wide (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 Early Literacy & Behavior (Kelk & Lewis, 2001) What are the effects of three instructional conditions a) social skill instruction, b) phonological / phonemic awareness instruction, and c) a combination of social skill instruction and phonological awareness instruction on the reading related and/or social behavior of at-risk kindergarten children? Early Literary Outcome Social Skill Outcomes Phonemic Instruction +/- - Social Skill Instruction - +/- Phonemic and SS Instruction + + Control Group - - Targeted / Small Group Supports Tier II Important Themes • 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 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 Individual • 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) Field Elementary School • High Diversity – School has 290 students; 50% minority; 20% English Language Learners; 13% special education • Instructional leader turnover • Poverty – 79% of students qualify for free and reduced lunches • Highly transient population Field Elementary School + Teachers and Staff committed to the increasing academic and social success of all students + A committed Principal who supported faculty in their efforts to change the way the taught to improve children’s lives Field Elementary School • Academic Standing – Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) • 5% of all students scored proficient in 2005, according to the Missouri Assessment Program. Breakdown by group: – – – – – 0% African American 18% Caucasian 0% Students with disabilities 0% English Language Learners 7% Free/Reduced Priced Lunch Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success Academic 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 Behavioral Systems 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 Field Elementary School • Literacy • In 2004–05, 44% students required intensive support for reading and writing • Social Behavior • In 2003-04 Averaging 10.4 discipline referrals per day Field Elementary Literacy Data 04-05 100% 44% 80% 60% Intensive 26% Benchmark 40% 20% Strategic 30% 0% 2004-2005 Structure Tier III Intensive Intervention Tier II Strategic Intervention Tier I DIBELS benchmark Core Reading Intervention Groups 45 min, 90 min, 5 days 4 days week, with: week with: (5th day individual focus ) Classroom Teacher Reading specialists, Sp Ed, ELL, Sp. Lang, K-2 SRA Reading Mastery 3-5 Wilson Reading Systems Classroom Teacher Classroom Teacher Reading Mastery or Soar to Success Classroom Teacher Classroom Teacher Enrichment based on themes of core program Positive Behavior Supports Impact To 1.6 per From 10.4 per day day MU College of Education — 140 years of discovery, teaching and learning Impact • Improved Academic Standing – Annual Yearly Progress In 2007, 27% of Field’s students scored proficient (up from 5%). • African American: 0% improved to 16% • Caucasian: 18% improved to 57% • Students with disabilities: 0% improved to 25% • English Language Learners: 0% improved to 27% Field Literacy Data 100% 90% 44% 31% 33% 23% 80% 70% 60% 26% 50% 25% 29% 27% Strategic 40% Benchmark 30% 20% 10% Intensive 30% 40% 40% 51% 0% 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008