Transcript Evolution of RtI & SWPBS George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education and Research University of Connecticut January 23, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org [email protected].

Evolution of RtI
& SWPBS
George Sugai
OSEP Center on PBIS
Center for Behavioral Education and Research
University of Connecticut
January 23, 2008
www.pbis.org
www.cber.org
[email protected]
Questions
Who am I?
What is RtI?
What is SWPBS?
What does SWPBS look like?
What questions do you have?
What is RtI?
Comprehensive
screening
Early &
timely
decision
making
Databased
decision
making
Implementati
on Fidelity
Support for
nonresponders
Need
for
better
Instructional
accountability
& justification
Assessment
-instruction
alignment
Resource
& time
use
RtI: Good “IDEiA” Policy
Approach 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
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”
CBM
Precision
Teaching
Applied
Behavior
Analysis
Behavioral &
Instructional
Consultation
Prereferral
Interventions
Teacher
Assistance
Teaming
Diagnostic
Prescriptive
Teaching
IMPLEMENTATION
W/ FIDELITY
UNIVERSAL
SCREENING
RtI
CONTINUUM OF
EVIDENCE-BASED
INTERVENTIONS
DATA-BASED
DECISION MAKING
STUDENT
& PROBLEM
PERFORMANCE
SOLVING
CONTINUOUS
PROGRESS
MONITORING
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
teaching
Teach,
worsening of environments
monitor, &
to eliminate acknowledge
existing
problem
prosocial
triggers &
behaviors
maintainers of
behavior
problem
behaviors
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
Designing School-Wide Systems
for Student Success
Academic Systems
Intensive, Individual Interventions
•Individual Students
•Assessment-based
•High Intensity
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
Responsiveness to
Intervention
Academic
+
Social Behavior
Intensive
Targeted
Universal
Few
Some
All
Dec 7, 2007
RTI
Continuum of
Support for
ALL
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
Curricular &
instructional
decisions
Families &
community
interactions
Implementation
accountability
Measurement,
assessment, &
evaluation
Special
education
functioning
General
education
functioning
What is
SWPBS?
SW-PBS Logic!
Successful individual student
behavior support is linked to
host environments or school
climates that are effective,
efficient, relevant, & durable
(Zins & Ponti, 1990)
SWPBS is about….
Improving
classroom &
school climate
Integrating
Decreasing
academic &
reactive
behavior
management
initiatives
Improving
support for
students w/
EBD
Maximizing
academic
achievement
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
SWPBS
Subsystems
Classroom
Family
Non-classroom
Student
School-wide
1. Common purpose & approach to discipline
2. Clear set of positive expectations & behaviors
3. Procedures for teaching expected behavior
4. Continuum of procedures for encouraging
expected behavior
5. Continuum of procedures for discouraging
inappropriate behavior
6. Procedures for on-going 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
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
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
Who does
SWPBS look
like?
Few positive SW expectations defined,
taught, & encouraged
Expectations & behavioral skills are taught
& recognized in natural context
SETTING
TEACHING
MATRIX
Expectations
All
Settings
Hallways
Playgrounds
Cafeteria
Library/
Computer
Lab
Study,
read,
compute.
Sit in one
spot.
Watch for
your stop.
Assembly
Bus
Respect
Ourselves
Be on task.
Give your
best effort.
Be
prepared.
Walk.
Have a plan.
Eat all your
food.
Select
healthy
foods.
Respect
Others
Be kind.
Hands/feet
to self.
Help/share
with
others.
Use normal
voice
volume.
Walk to
right.
Play safe.
Include
others.
Share
equipment.
Practice
good table
manners
Whisper.
Return
books.
Listen/watch.
Use
appropriate
applause.
Use a quiet
voice.
Stay in your
seat.
Recycle.
Clean up
after self.
Pick up
litter.
Maintain
physical
space.
Use
equipment
properly.
Put litter in
garbage can.
Replace
trays &
utensils.
Clean up
eating
area.
Push in
chairs.
Treat
books
carefully.
Pick up.
Treat chairs
appropriately.
Wipe your
feet.
Sit
appropriately.
Respect
Property
Acknowledge & Recognize
Reinforcement Wisdom!
• “Knowing” or saying “know” does
NOT mean “will do”
• Students “do more” when “doing
works”…appropriate & inappropriate!
• Natural consequences are varied,
unpredictable, undependable,…not
always preventive
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
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
Major Office Discipline Referrals (05-06)
Mean Proportion of Students
0-1
'2-5
'6+
100%
90%
3%
8%
10%
11%
16%
18%
89%
74%
71%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
ODR rates vary by level
10%
0%
K=6 (N = 1010)
6-9 (N = 312)
9-12 (N = 104)
Major Office Discipline Referrals (05-06)
Percentage of ODRs by Student Group
'0-1
'2-5
'6+
A few kids get many ODRs
100%
90%
32%
48%
45%
43%
37%
40%
25%
15%
15%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
K-6 (N = 1010)
6-9 (N = 312)
9-12 (N = 104)
Bethel School District
ODR's by Grade Level
900
800
700
Number of ODR's
600
2001-02
500
2002-03
2003-04
400
2004-05
300
200
100
0
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
Grade Level
7
8
9
10
11
12
Change from 97-98 to 01-02
Elem With School-wide PBS
4J School
District
20
15
Eugene, Oregon
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
01-02 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)
1 Schools doing SW-PBS well report a 25% lower
Mean ODR/100/Day
rate of ODRs
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
0
N =23
N=
23
Not Meeting SET
NN==8
8
Meeting SET
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