School-Wide Positive Behavior Support: Features & Outcomes George Sugai & Rob Horner OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut March 18, 2009 www.pbis.org www.cber.org www.swis.org George.sugai@uconn.edu

PURPOSE Enhance capacity of school teams to provide the best behavioral supports for all students and maximize academic & social achievement. Your task: “Does SWPBS make sense for us?” What is SWPBS? What outcomes have been documented?

“Kiyoshi” What would you do? Kiyoshi is a highly competent student, but has long history of antisocial behavior. He is quick to anger, & minor events quickly escalate to major confrontations. He has few friends, & most of his conflicts occur with peers in hallways & cafeteria & on bus. In last 2 months, he has been given 8 days of in school detention & 6 days of out of school suspension. In a recent event, he broke glasses of another student. What would you do?

“159 Days!” Intermediate/senior high school with 880 students reported over 5,100 office discipline referrals in one academic year. Nearly 2/3 of students have received at least one office discipline referral.

5,100 referrals = 76,500 min @15 min = 1,275 hrs = 159 days @ 8 hrs

8 SW-PBS Logic! Successful individual student behavior support is linked to host environments or school climates that are effective, efficient, relevant, & durable for all students (Zins & Ponti, 1990)

2 Worries & Ineffective Responses to Problem Behavior Get Tough (practices) Train-&-Hope (systems)

Worry #1 “Teaching” by Getting Tough 10 Worry #1 “Teaching” by Getting Tough Runyon: “I hate this f____ing school, & you’re a dumbf_____.” Teacher: “That is disrespectful language. I’m sending you to the office so you’ll learn never to say those words again….starting now!”

Immediate, predictable, & seductive solution…. ”Get Tough!” Clamp down & increase monitoring Re-re-re-review rules Extend continuum & consistency of consequences Establish “bottom line”

When behavior doesn’t improve, we “Get Tougher!” Zero tolerance policies Increased surveillance Increased suspension & expulsion In-service training by expert Alternative programming …..Predictable systems response!

Erroneous assumption that student… 12 Erroneous assumption that student… Is inherently “bad” Will learn more appropriate behavior through increased use of “aversives” Will be better tomorrow…….

But….false sense of safety/security! Fosters environments of control Triggers & reinforces antisocial behavior Shifts accountability away from school Devalues child-adult relationship Weakens relationship between academic & social behavior programming

Science of behavior has taught us that students…. Are NOT born with “bad behaviors” Do NOT learn when presented contingent aversive consequences ……..Do learn better ways of behaving by being taught directly & receiving positive feedback

13 VIOLENCE PREVENTION Positive, predictable school-wide climate High rates of academic & social success Formal social skills instruction Positive active supervision & reinforcement Positive adult role models Multi-component, multi-year school-family-community effort Surgeon General’s Report on Youth Violence (2001) Coordinated Social Emotional & Learning (Greenberg et al., 2003) Center for Study & Prevention of Violence (2006) White House Conference on School Violence (2006)

2 SWPBS is about…. Improving classroom & school climate Decreasing reactive management Maximizing academic achievement Improving support for students w/ EBD Integrating academic & behavior initiatives

= Effective Academic Instruction Effective Behavioral Interventions POSITIVE, PREVENTIVE SCHOOL CULTURE (SWPBS) = Continuous & Efficient Data-based Decision Making Systems for Durable & Accurate Implementation

Supporting Social Competence & Integrated Elements Supporting Social Competence & Academic Achievement OUTCOMES 15 Supporting Decision Making Supporting Staff Behavior DATA SYSTEMS PRACTICES Supporting Student Behavior

23 ALL SOME FEW Tertiary Prevention: Specialized CONTINUUM OF Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT FEW ~5% Secondary Prevention: Specialized Group Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior ~15% SOME Primary Prevention: School-/Classroom- Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings 23 ALL ~80% of Students

Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success Academic Systems Behavioral Systems Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based High Intensity Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures 1-5% 1-5% Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response 5-10% 5-10% Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Universal Interventions All students Preventive, proactive 80-90% Universal Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive 80-90% 25

RtI Response to Intervention IMPLEMENTATION W/ FIDELITY CONTINUUM OF EVIDENCE-BASED INTERVENTIONS STUDENT PERFORMANCE CONTINUOUS PROGRESS MONITORING DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING & PROBLEM SOLVING UNIVERSAL SCREENING RtI

Continuum of Support for ALL 23 RTI Continuum of Support for ALL Universal Targeted Intensive Few Some NOTICE GREEN GOES IS FOR “ALL” All Dec 7, 2007

Aurora, CO, EBD, all schools Two messages: 1. high rates of problem behaviors & reactive “get tough” management 2. teaching to the corner

Biggest, durable effect 17 SWPBS Practices School-wide Classroom Smallest # Evidence-based Biggest, durable effect Family Non-classroom Student

18 School-wide Leadership team Behavior purpose statement Set of positive expectations & behaviors Procedures for teaching SW & classroom-wide expected behavior Continuum of procedures for encouraging expected behavior Continuum of procedures for discouraging rule violations Procedures for on-going data-based monitoring & evaluation

Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged Non-classroom Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged Active supervision by all staff Scan, move, interact Precorrections & reminders Positive reinforcement

Classroom All school-wide Maximum structure & predictability in routines & environment Positively stated expectations posted, taught, reviewed, prompted, & supervised. Maximum engagement through high rates of opportunities to respond, delivery of evidence-based instructional curriculum & practices Continuum of strategies to acknowledge displays of appropriate behavior, including contingent & specific praise, group contingencies, behavior contracts, token economies Continuum of strategies for responding to inappropriate behavior, including specific, contingent, brief corrections for academic & social behavior errors, differential reinforcement of other behavior, planned ignoring, response cost, & timeout.

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

Worry #2: “Train & Hope” 34

GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS: “Getting Started” Team GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS: “Getting Started” 35 Agreements Data-based Action Plan SAY: In general, the implementation of a school-wide PBS approach at the school level is built around five main implementation steps. Evaluation Implementation

Challenge

Initiative, Project, Committee Working Smarter Initiative, Project, Committee Purpose Outcome Target Group Staff Involved SIP/SID/etc Attendance Committee Character Education Safety Committee School Spirit Committee Discipline Committee DARE Committee EBS Work Group Are outcomes measurable?

Are outcomes measurable? 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 Marlee, J.S., Ellen Goal #3 Safety Committee Improve safety Predictable response to threat/crisis Dangerous students Has not met School Spirit Committee Enhance school spirit Improve morale 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 Decrease office referrals, increase attendance, enhance academic engagement, improve grades Eric, Ellen, Marlee, Otis, Emma Are outcomes measurable?

ESTABLISHING CONTINUUM of SWPBS TERTIARY PREVENTION TERTIARY PREVENTION Function-based support Wraparound Person-centered planning ~5% ~15% SECONDARY PREVENTION SECONDARY PREVENTION Check in/out Targeted social skills instruction Peer-based supports Social skills club PRIMARY PREVENTION Teach SW expectations Proactive SW discipline Positive reinforcement Effective instruction Parent engagement PRIMARY PREVENTION ~80% of Students

Redesign Learning & Teaching Environment School Rules NO Food NO Weapons NO Backpacks NO Drugs/Smoking NO Bullying

Few positive SW expectations defined, taught, & encouraged

Establish 3 to 5 Clearly Stated, Positive Expectations Example of Expectations from a few Project REACH schools

58 2. NATURAL CONTEXT 1. SOCIAL SKILL 3. BEHAVIOR EXAMPLES Teaching Matrix SETTING All Settings Hallways Playgrounds Cafeteria Library/ Computer Lab Assembly Bus Respect Ourselves Be on task. Give your best effort. Be prepared. Walk. Have a plan. Eat all your food. Select healthy foods. Study, read, compute. Sit in one spot. Watch for your stop. 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. Respect Property 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. 2. NATURAL CONTEXT 1. SOCIAL SKILL Expectations 3. BEHAVIOR EXAMPLES

Define Expectations for Each Setting & Routine (Project REACH)

Typical Contexts/ Routines Classroom-Wide Rules/Expectations Respect Others Respect Property Respect Self All Use inside voice. Raise hand to answer/talk. Recycle paper. Put writing tools inside desk. Do your best. Ask. Morning Meeting Eyes on speaker. Give brief answers. Put announcements in desk. Keep feet on floor. Put check by my announcements. Homework Do own work. Turn in before lesson. Put homework neatly in box. Touch your work only. Turn in lesson on time. Do homework night/day before. Transition Keep hands to self. Put/get materials first. Have plan. Go directly. “I Need Assistance” Raise hand or show “Assistance Card”. Wait 2 minutes & try again. Have materials ready. Ask if unclear. Teacher Directed Use materials as intended. Independent Work Return with done. Use time as planned. Problem to Solve Stop, Step Back, Think, Act

Family Teaching Matrix SETTING At home Morning Routine Homework Meal Times In Car Play Bedtime Respect Ourselves Respect Others Respect Property Expectations

Teaching Academics & Behaviors 57

Acknowledge & Recognize

Recognize Expected Behavior (Students & Staff) Examples of acknowledgement (“gotcha”) tickets from a few Project REACH schools, plus an example of the Wall of Fame.

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

“Good morning, class!” Teachers report that when students are greeted by an adult in morning, it takes less time to complete morning routines & get first lesson started.

McCormick Elementary School, MD Monitoring Dismissal

Data & Examples

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 and Support. http://www.pbis.org/files/101007evidencebase4pbs.pdf.

Pre Post

SET: Project REACH How accurate is implementation? This is an example of one of our Project REACH schools (Role Expansion and Enhancement for Counselors intending to Help). Project REACH ran from 9/2003 until 6/2006. It was funded by the Department of Education (ESEA) as a counselor training grant. Nine schools were involved in the development of SWPBS. Schools were brought in in a staggered manner so 3 schools received three years of training and TA, 3 schools received two years and 3 schools received only 1 year. This is an example of one of our 3 year school SETs.

Key-to-Success Project 1999-2001 Here is actual data count from the first example of SWPBS in Philadelphia – Key Elementary School. Data is published in JPBI. Key still has some elements of SWPBS (according to website) but not sure how well implemented. Unfortunately, at the time, we knew little about sustainability. This project began in 1999 and completed in 2001. It’s also one of the first urban examples of SWPBS.

Key-to-Success Project See previous notes – also from Key. These are actual counts of ODRs (as is previous slide). We didn’t use SWIS back then – nor did we know of it.

Schools using SW-PBS report a 25% lower rate of ODRs .85 .64

N =23 N = 8 N = 8 N = 23

LC Elementary School Suspension Rate End of the year data shows a decrease in suspensions

LC Elementary School And an increase in reading scores among third graders

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

ODR Admin. Benefit MD Middle School 2001-2002 2277 2002-2003 1322 = 955 42% improvement = 14,325 min. @15 min. = 238.75 hrs = 40 days Admin. time

ODR Instruc. Benefit MD Middle School 2001-2002 2277 2002-2003 1322 = 955 42% improvement = 42,975 min. @ 45 min. = 716.25 hrs = 119 days Instruc. time

What does SWPBS look like? >80% of students (& staff) can tell you what is expected & behavioral example because they have been taught, actively supervised, practiced, & acknowledged Positive adult-to-student interactions exceed negative Function based behavior support is foundation for addressing problem behavior Data- & team-based action planning & implementation are operating High rates of continuous active supervision & positive reinforcement Administrators are active participants. Full continuum of behavior support is available to all students

PBIS Messages Measurable & justifiable outcomes On-going data-based decision making Evidence-based practices Systems ensuring durable, high fidelity of implementation

George.sugai@uconn.edu Robh@uoregon.edu www.pbis.org