Response to Intervention: What’s Behavior Got to Do with It? George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut May 25 2011 www.pbis.org www.scalingup.org www.cber.org TITLE: "SWPBS Sustainability: Sailing the Ship through Climate Change"  

PURPOSE Describe features, practices, research, & examples related to RtI, PBIS, & pre-/in-service professional development DESCRIPTIONS: The purpose of this presentation is to consider SWPBS implementation in the context of school reform, competing initiatives, and limited resources. The importance of recognizing our accomplishments, integrating initiatives with common outcomes, using information for continuous progress monitoring, establishing local expert capacity, and working from a continuum of action will be emphasized.

“BIG PICTURE” RESEARCH & THEORY to PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT to * Responsiveness to intervention * Positive behavioral interventions & supports PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT to * Evidence-based practice * Classroom management * School discipline * Disability & diversity PRACTICE * Implementation fidelity * Evaluation

“Notes to Self” Describe how PBIS got start Review PBIS & RtI definition & features Link outcomes, data, practices, & systems Describe examples Model evidence-based approach Stress importance of implementation fidelity Remember IHE audience

Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports Foundations of Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports

Emphasis on punishment 1980s SW Discipline Problem Reactive Non-constructive Emphasis on punishment Poor implementation fidelity Limited effects Special Education & BD “Drowning Frogs” “Green to Yellow to Red” Cards “Full to partial to limited” privileges

“Abbreviated” SWPBS History 1980s RTC 1988 PBS 1991 Proj PREPARE 1997 EBS Demo 1997 IDEA-r 1998 PBIS-I 2000 PBIS TA Guide 2001 OR Beh Res Ctr 2002 PBIS-II 2004 PBS Impl Blue 2007 SISEP 2008 PBIS-III Jan 2010 SWPBS Eval Blue Mar 2010 SWPBS Impl Blue May 2010 SWPBS Train Blue 2011 Implementation Sustainability & Scaling

SWPBS Foundations Colvin, G., & Sugai, G. (1992). School-wide discipline: A behavior instruction model. 1992 Oregon conference monograph. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (1994). Including students with severe behavior problems in general education settings: Assumptions, challenges, and solutions. In J. Marr, G. Sugai, & G. Tindal (Eds.). The Oregon conference monograph (Vol. 6) (pp. 102-120). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon. Colvin, G., Kame’enui, E. J., & Sugai, G. (1993). School-wide and classroom management: Reconceptualizing the integration and management of students with behavior problems in general education. Education and Treatment of Children, 16, 361-381. Walker, H. M., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Bullis, M., Sprague, J. R., Bricker, D., & Kaufman, M. J. (1996). Integrated approaches to preventing antisocial behavior patterns among school-age children and youth. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 193-256.

“Big Ideas” from Early Years Teach & recognize behavior directly, school-wide Colvin & Sugai (1992) Focus adult behavior in team-based SW action planning Colvin, Kame’enui, & Sugai (1993) Consider ALL as foundation for some by establishing local behavioral expertise Sugai & Horner (1994) Integrate evidence-based practices in 3-tiered prevention logic Walker, Horner, Sugai, Bullis, Sprague, Bricker, & Kaufman (1996)

“Early Triangle” (p. 201) Walker, Knitzer, Reid, et al., CDC

Prevention Logic for All Walker et al., 1996 Decrease development of new problem behaviors Prevent worsening of existing problem behaviors Eliminate triggers & maintainers of problem behaviors Teach, monitor, & acknowledge prosocial behavior Redesign of teaching environments…not students

Changing Adult Behavior 1. “Change is slow, difficult, gradual process for teachers 2. “Teachers need to receive regular feedback on student learning outcomes” 3. “Continued support & follow-up are necessary after initial training” Guskey, 1986, p. 59

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

Host Environment Features Achieve desired outcome? Effective Doable by real implementer? Efficient Contextual & cultural? Relevant Lasting? Durable Transportable? Scalable Conceptually Sound? Logical

PREVENTION SCIENCE LITERATURE VIOLENCE PREVENTION Positive predictable school-wide climate High rates 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) PREVENTION SCIENCE LITERATURE

SWPBS (aka PBIS/RtI) is for enhancing adoption & implementation of Continuum of evidence-based interventions to achieve Academically & behaviorally important outcomes for All students Framework

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

Response-to-Intervention & Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports

Need for better Implementation Fidelity Comprehensive screening Data-based decision making Early & timely decision making Comprehensive screening Support for non-responders Implementation Fidelity Instructional accountability & justification Assessment-instruction alignment Resource & time use

RtI: Good “IDEA” 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

EARLY INFLUENCES CBM Precision Teaching Early Screening & Intervention Prereferral Interventions Teacher Assistance Teaming Diagnostic Prescriptive Teaching Behavioral & Instructional Consultation Applied Behavior Analysis Precision Teaching

RtI IMPLEMENTATION W/ FIDELITY CONTINUUM OF EVIDENCE-BASED CONTINUOUS INTERVENTIONS CONTENT EXPERTISE & FLUENCY TEAM-BASED IMPLEMENTATION CONTINUOUS PROGRESS MONITORING UNIVERSAL SCREENING DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING & PROBLEM SOLVING RtI

Quotable Fixsen on Policy “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”

Curricular & instructional decisions SOUNDS SIMPLE, BUT IMPLICATIONS FOR…. Curricular & instructional decisions Special education functioning General education functioning Measurement, assessment, & evaluation Implementation accountability Families & community interactions

Questions to Ponder What is “scientifically/evidence-based” intervention/practice? How do we measure & ensure “fidelity of implementation?” How do we determine “non-responsiveness?” Can we affect “teacher practice?” Do we have motivation to increase efficiency of “systems” organization? ???

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 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, self-management DECISION MAKING RULES Core, strategic, intensive Primary, secondary, tertiary tiers

Academic-Behavior Connection Algozzine, B., Wang, C., & Violette, A. S. (2011). Reexamining the relationship between academic achievement and social behavior. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 13, 3-16. Burke, M. D., Hagan-Burke, S., & Sugai, G. (2003). The efficacy of function-based interventions for students with learning disabilities who exhibit escape-maintained problem behavior: Preliminary results from a single case study. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 26, 15-25. McIntosh, K., Chard, D. J., Boland, J. B., & Horner, R. H. (2006). Demonstration of combined efforts in school-wide academic and behavioral systems and incidence of reading and behavior challenges in early elementary grades. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 8, 146-154. McIntosh, K., Horner, R. H., Chard, D. J., Dickey, C. R., and Braun, D. H. (2008). Reading skills and function of problem behavior in typical school settings. Journal of Special Education, 42, 131-147. Nelson, J. R., Johnson, A., & Marchand-Martella, N. (1996). Effects of direct instruction, cooperative learning, and independent learning practices on the classroom behavior of students with behavioral disorders: A comparative analysis. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 53-62. Wang, C., & Algozzine, B. (2011). Rethinking the relationship between reading and behavior in early elementary school. Journal of Educational Research, 104, 100-109.

“Viewed as outcomes, achievement and behavior are related; viewed as causes of each other, achievement and behavior are unrelated. In this context, teaching behavior as relentlessly as we teach reading or other academic content is the ultimate act of prevention, promise, and power underlying PBS and other preventive interventions in America’s schools.” Algozzine, Wang, & Violette (2011), p. 16.

Responsiveness to Intervention 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% Circa 1996

23 RTI Behavior Continuum Academic Continuum Integrated Continuum NOTICE GREEN GOES IS FOR “ALL” Mar 10 2010

Responsiveness to Intervention Etc. Literacy & Writing Numeracy & Sciences SWPBS Specials Social Sciences

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

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

Continuum of Support for ALL “Theora” Universal Targeted Intensive Math Science Spanish Reading NOTICE GREEN GOES IS FOR “ALL” Soc skills Soc Studies Basketball Label behavior…not people Dec 7, 2007

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

Continua of Responsiveness & Support Student Behavior Teacher Practice CONTEXT or SETTING Continua of Responsiveness & Support School Reform District Operations

Message Apply RtI Logic to School Improvement - Current Practice - Large # priorities Large # interventions Large professional development plan Large data collection plan + Rti Logic + Screening for unresponsiveness Small # priorities Continuous progress monitoring Continuous implementation fidelity Increase priority teaching & learning time

Adopting an Implementation Framework

Problem Statement “We give schools strategies & systems for improving practice & outcomes, but implementation is not accurate, consistent, or durable, & desired outcomes aren’t realized. School personnel & teams need more than exposure, practice, & enthusiasm.”

www.scalingup.org Dean Fixsen Karen Blase UNC

SWPBS Implementation Blueprint www.pbis.org

GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS: “Getting Started” Team GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS: “Getting Started” Agreements Data-based Action Plan Evaluation Implementation

Jul ‘09 Jan ‘10 Jul ‘10 Jan ’11 614 trained schools (149 districts) 448 (73% of 614) implementing (SAS/TIC/BoQ) 129 (28.8% of 448) implementing w/ fidelity (SAS/TIC/BoQ)

Jul ‘09 Jan ‘10 Jul ‘10 Jan ’11

Are outcomes measurable?

Where are you in implementation process Where are you in implementation process? Adapted from Fixsen & Blase, 2005 We think we know what we need, so we ordered 3 month free trial (evidence-based) EXPLORATION & ADOPTION Let’s make sure we’re ready to implement (capacity infrastructure) INSTALLATION Let’s give it a try & evaluate (demonstration) INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION That worked, let’s do it for real (investment) FULL IMPLEMENTATION Let’s make it our way of doing business (institutionalized use) SUSTAINABILITY & CONTINUOUS REGENERATION

SWPBS Implementation “Infidelity” “SWPBS is intervention” “Let’s schedule Rob Horner for our in-service day” “Let’s do SWPBS during morning advisory” “Can I visit your school & see SWPBS in action?” “SWPBS is about giving kids tangible rewards” “She’s a tier 3 kid; give her 2 day suspension” “Shut up, & show me some respect”

Implementation Challenge Lack of expert capacity Competing initiatives Lacking implementation framework Nondata-based decision making Insufficient resources Limited differentiation No theory of action or change

Evidence-based Practices & Implementation Fidelity

Detrich, Keyworth, & States (2007). J. Evid.-based Prac. in Sch. Start w/ What Works Focus on Fidelity Research to Practice is dependent on good research. Detrich, Keyworth, & States (2007). J. Evid.-based Prac. in Sch.

Maximum Student Benefits “Making a turn” IMPLEMENTATION Effective Not Effective PRACTICE Maximum Student Benefits Fixsen & Blase, 2009

RCT & Group Design PBIS Studies Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Thornton, L.A., & Leaf, P.J. (2009). Altering school climate through school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10(2), 100-115 Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Bevans, K.B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P.J. (2008). The impact of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462-473. Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133-148. Bradshaw, C.P., Reinke, W. M., Brown, L. D., Bevans, K.B., & Leaf, P.J. (2008). Implementation of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in elementary schools: Observations from a randomized trial. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 1-26. Horner, R., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A., & Esperanza, J., (2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133-145. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality, 42(8), 1-14. Reduced major disciplinary infractions Improvements in academic achievement Enhanced perception of organizational health & safety Improved school climate Reductions in teacher reported bullying behavior

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

EVIDENCE- BASED INTERVENTION PRACTICES SCHOOL-WIDE 1. 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 EVIDENCE- BASED INTERVENTION PRACTICES 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. Continuum of strategies for responding to inappropriate behavior. 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 NONCLASSROOM Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged Active supervision by all staff (Scan, move, interact) Precorrections & reminders Positive reinforcement FAMILY ENGAGEMENT 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

54 A 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

ESTABLISHING CONTINUUM of SWPBS TERTIARY PREVENTION Function-based support Wraparound Person-centered planning ~5% ~15% 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 ~80% of Students

Classroom Management: Self-Assessment Teacher__________________________ Rater_______________________ Date___________ Instructional Activity Time Start_______ Time End________ Tally each Positive Student Contacts Total # Tally each Negative Student Contacts Ratio of Positives to Negatives: _____ to 1

Classroom Management Practice Rating 1. I have arranged my classroom to minimize crowding and distraction Yes No 2. I have maximized structure and predictability in my classroom (e.g., explicit classroom routines, specific directions, etc.). 3. I have posted, taught, reviewed, and reinforced 3-5 positively stated expectations (or rules). 4. I provided more frequent acknowledgement for appropriate behaviors than inappropriate behaviors (See top of page). 5. I provided each student with multiple opportunities to respond and participate during instruction. Yes No 6. My instruction actively engaged students in observable ways (e.g., writing, verbalizing) 7. I actively supervised my classroom (e.g., moving, scanning) during instruction. 8. I ignored or provided quick, direct, explicit reprimands/redirections in response to inappropriate behavior. 9. I have multiple strategies/systems in place to acknowledge appropriate behavior (e.g., class point systems, praise, etc.). 10. In general, I have provided specific feedback in response to social and academic behavior errors and correct responses. Overall classroom management score: 10-8 “yes” = “Super” 7-5 “yes” = “So-So” <5 “yes” = “Improvement Needed” # Yes___

Non-Classroom Management: Self-Assessment Name______________________________ Date_____________ Setting □ Hallway □ Entrance □ Cafeteria □ Playground □ Other_______________ Time Start_________ Time End _________ Tally each Positive Student Contacts Total # Ratio of Positives to Negatives: _____: 1 Tally each Negative Student Contacts

Did I have at least 4 positive for 1 negative student contacts? Yes No 2. Did I move throughout the area I was supervising? 3. Did I frequently scan the area I was supervising? 4. Did I positively interact with most of the students in the area? 5. Did I handle most minor rule violations quickly and quietly? 6. Did I follow school procedures for handling major rule violations? 7. Do I know our school-wide expectations (positively stated rules)? 8. Did I positively acknowledge at least 5 different students for displaying our school-wide expectations? Overall active supervision score: 7-8 “yes” = “Super Supervision” 5-6 “yes” = “So-So Supervision” <5 “yes” = “Improvement Needed” # Yes______

Some Data

Data Decision Making Educationally relevant outcomes Implementation fidelity Clearly defined & relevant indicators System for easy input & output Data rules for decision making Team-based mechanism for action planning Data Decision Making