Transcript SW-PBS & RtI: Lessons Being Learned George Sugai & Rob Horner OSEP Center on PBIS University of Connecticut & Oregon November 16, 2007 www.pbis.org www.swis.org [email protected].

SW-PBS & RtI:
Lessons Being Learned
George Sugai & Rob Horner
OSEP Center on PBIS
University of Connecticut & Oregon
November 16, 2007
www.pbis.org
www.swis.org
[email protected]
Purpose
Discuss "lessons being
learned" about SWPBS & RtI
• Review/Define RtI & features
• Describe SWPBS & RtI
• Show applied research examples
PBIS
Foundations
PBIS objective….
Redesign & support teaching &
learning environments that are
effective, efficient, relevant, &
durable
– Outcome-based
– Data-guided decision making
– Evidence-based practices
– Systems support for accurate & sustained
implementation
SWPBS Conceptual Foundations
Behaviorism
ABA
PBS
SWPBS
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
“Triangle” ?’s you should ask!
• Where did it come from?
• Why not a pyramid or octagon?
• Why not 12 tiers? 2 tiers?
• What’s it got to do w/ sped?
• Where those % come from?
Original logic: public health &
disease prevention (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
http://rtckids.fmhi.usf.edu
Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A. J., & Lynn, N. (2006).
School-based mental health: An empirical
guide for decision makers. Tampa, FL: University
of South Florida. Louis De la Parte Florida Mental
Health Institute, Department of Child & Family
Studies, Research & Training Center for Children’s
Mental Health.
Prevention Logic for All
(Walker et al., 1996)
• Decrease development of new problem
behaviors
• Prevent worsening of existing problem
behaviors
• Redesign learning/teaching environments
to eliminate triggers & maintainers of
problem behaviors
• Teach, monitor, & acknowledge prosocial
behavior
It’s not just about behavior!
STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT
Good Teaching
Behavior Management
Increasing District & State Competency and Capacity
Investing in Outcomes, Data, Practices, and Systems
Responsiveness to
Intervention:
Achievement
+
Social Behavior
Designing School-Wide Systems
for Student Success
Academic Systems
Behavioral 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
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
Responsivenessto-Intervention
RtI Logic
j
Modify &
specialize for
non-responders
Screen
universally &
frequently
Teach w/ best
curriculum &
instruction
Intervene early at
all levels
Use student
behavior as
progress indicator
RtI: Good “IDEA” Policy
Approach to increase efficiency,
accountability, & impact of effective
practices
• NOT program, curriculum, strategy, intervention
• NOT limited to special education
• NOT new
–
–
–
–
–
Problem solving process
Diagnostic-prescriptive teaching
Curriculum based assessment
Precision teaching
Applied behavior analysis
• Demonstrations
– Systemic early literacy
– School-wide positive behavior support
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”
RtI: Defining Features
IMPLEMENTATION
W/ FIDELITY
DATA-BASED
CONTINUUM OF
DECISION MAKING
EVIDENCE& PROBLEM
BASED
SOLVING
INTERVENTIONS
CONTINUOUS
PROGRESS
MONITORING
STUDENT
PERFORMANCE
Sounds simple, but
IMPLICATIONS
Special
Educator
Functioning
Curricular &
Instructional
Decisions
General
Educator
Functioning
Measurement
Requirements
Implementation
Fidelity
Implications & Cautions
(E.g., Gresham, Grimes, Kratochwill, Tilly, etc.)
• Psychometric features of measures?
• Standardized measurement procedures?
• Documented “cut” criteria for determining
responsiveness?
• Interventions efficacy, effectiveness, & relevance?
• Students with disabilities?
• Professional development?
• Applications across grades/schools & curriculum areas?
• Treatment integrity & accountability?
• Functioning of general v. special education?
• K-12 applications
Possible RtI Outcomes
Gresham, 2005
High
Risk
No
Risk
Responder
Non-Responder
False +
True +
Adequate response
Inadequate response
True –
False –
Adequate response
Inadequate response
To avoid False +/• Sensitive assessments
• Effective interventions
• Fidelity of intervention implementation
• Timely decision making
• Efficient decision rules
Still not so simple…..
Consider Students w/ EBD
Gresham, 2005
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Behavioral severity
Behavioral chronicity
Generalizability of behavior change
Treatment strength/dosage
Treatment integrity
Treatment effectiveness
Assessment/evaluation methods
Reliable change (functional relationship)
Absolute v. relative change
Social validity
RtI Applications
EARLY READING/LITERACY
SOCIAL BEHAVIOR
TEAM
General educator, special
educator, reading specialist, Title
1, school psychologist, etc.
General educator, special educator,
behavior specialist, Title 1, 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
Designing School-Wide Systems
for Student Success
Academic Systems
Behavioral 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
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
RtI & 3-Tiered
SWPBS Logic
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
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
Messages
• RtI logic is “good thing”
– Continuous progress monitoring
– Prescriptive problem solving & data-based
decision making
– Assessment-based intervention planning
– Consideration of all students
• However, still much work to be done
• SWPBS approach is good approximation
of RTI approach
Future: Document…
• Technical adequacy of RtI components
(measurement, decision rules, etc.)
• Full implementation across range of
contexts
• Impact & relationship of academic &
social behavior interaction
• Systems, resources, competence
needed to maintain effects, support high
fidelity of implementation, expand
applications, & sustain implementation
of practices