Transcript Reaching All Students: RtI & SWPBS George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education and Research University of Connecticut January 28, 2009 www.pbis.org www.cber.org [email protected].

Reaching All Students:
RtI & SWPBS
George Sugai
OSEP Center on PBIS
Center for Behavioral Education and Research
University of Connecticut
January 28, 2009
www.pbis.org
www.cber.org
[email protected]
• RtI Context
• SWPBS Basics
• Applications & Examples
Responsivenessto-Intervention
Comprehensive
screening
Systematic
support for
nonresponders
Early &
timely
decision
making
Databased
decision
making
Instructional
accountability
& justification
Assessmentinstruction
alignment
WHY?
Need for
better…
Resource
& time use
Response to Intervention
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
Responsiveness to
Intervention
Social
Sciences
Specials
SWPBS
Etc.
Literacy &
Writing
Numeracy
&
Sciences
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
Responsiveness to Intervention
Academic Systems
Intensive, Individual Interventions
•Individual Students
•Assessment-based
•High Intensity
Circa 1996
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
Where’d “triangle”
come from….a
PBIS perspective?
Public Health & Disease Prevention
Kutash et al., 2006; 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
Teach,
teaching
worsening of environments
monitor, &
to eliminate acknowledge
existing
problem
triggers &
prosocial
behaviors
behavior
maintainers of
problem
behaviors
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 1994
Designing School-Wide Systems
for Student Success
Academic Systems
Intensive, Individual Interventions
•Individual Students
•Assessment-based
•High Intensity
Circa 1996
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
Intensive
Targeted
Universal
Dec 7, 2007
Few
Some
All
RTI
Continuum of
Support for
ALL
School-wide
Positive Behavior
Support & RtI
Need for….
Improving
classroom &
school climate
Integrating
Decreasing
academic &
reactive
behavior
management
initiatives
Improving
support for
Maximizing
academic
students w/
behavior
achievement
disorders
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
SWPBS Conceptual Foundations
Behaviorism
ABA
Laws of Behavior
Applied Behavioral Technology
PBS
Social Validity
IDEA: Positive Behavioral
Interventions & Supports
SWPBS
All Students
Working Smarter
Initiative,
Project,
Committee
Attendance
Committee
Character
Education
Safety
Committee
School Spirit
Committee
Discipline
Committee
DARE
Committee
EBS Work
Group
Purpose
Outcome
Target
Group
Staff
Involved
SIP/SID/e
tc
Sample Teaming Matrix
Initiative,
Committee
Purpose
Outcome
Target
Group
Staff
Involved
SIP/SID
Attendance
Committee
Increase
attendance
Increase % of
students attending
daily
All students
Eric, Ellen,
Marlee
Goal #2
Character
Education
Improve
character
Improve character
All students
Marlee, J.S.,
Ellen
Goal #3
Safety
Committee
Improve safety
Predictable response
to threat/crisis
Dangerous
students
Has not met
Goal #3
School Spirit
Committee
Enhance school
spirit
Improve morale
All students
Has not met
Discipline
Committee
Improve behavior
Decrease office
referrals
Bullies,
antisocial
students,
repeat
offenders
Ellen, Eric,
Marlee, Otis
DARE
Committee
Prevent drug use
High/at-risk
drug users
Don
EBS Work Group
Implement 3-tier
model
All students
Eric, Ellen,
Marlee, Otis,
Emma
Decrease office
referrals, increase
attendance, enhance
academic
engagement, improve
grades
Goal #3
Goal #2
Goal #3
SWPBS
Practices
Classroom
Family
Non-classroom
• Smallest #
• Evidence-based
• Biggest, durable effect
Student
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
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
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
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
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
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
100
BL
CI/
CO
90
CI/CO
+75%
CI/CO
+80%
CI/CO
+90%
80
Helena
70
60
Peer
50
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
Class B
Results
+
Compos
ite
Peers
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
100
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
Blair
70
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
Study 2
Results
+
Compo
site
Peer
BL
90
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