SWPBS: Preventing & Reducing Effectiveness of Bullying Behavior George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut Nov 5, 2010 www.pbis.org www.cber.org www.swis.org

PURPOSE To improve our understanding of & responding to bullying behavior from perspective of school-wide positive behavior support. Re/over-view of SWPBS Bullying behavior in SWPBS Strategies

SWPBS: Re/over-view

8 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)

SWPBS is Framework for enhancing adoption & implementation of Continuum of evidence-based interventions to achieve Academically & behaviorally important outcomes for All students

All about implementation

Implementation must be culturally responsive & shaped 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. www.pbis.org

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

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

EVIDENCE- BASED INTERVENTION PRACTICES 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 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

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

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

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

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

Continuum of Support for ALL 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 & classroom discipline Positive reinforcement Effective instruction Parent engagement Active supervision PRIMARY PREVENTION ~80% of Students

SWPBS look at bullying behavior

Our Starting Point Current efforts must be conceptually grounded Research-evidence base should be examined An operational/measurable definition of “bullying” needs to be found/developed Relevant & doable guidelines for responding to bullying behavior are needed

Increased problem awareness More emphasis on prevention Good “things” about Bullying efforts Increased problem awareness More emphasis on prevention More curriculum development & research Greater focus on all students

“Bullying” Issues Labeling kids Generic intervention responses Limited examination of mechanism Over-emphasis on student responsibility for change Non-data based intervention decisions Too much attention on student, not enough on recipients

Is Behavior an Issue? Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Implement SWPBS continuum w/ fidelity Review SW data at least monthly Step 2 Modify implementation plan based on data Implement modifications w/ fidelity Step 3 Monitor implementation fidelity Monitor student progress & responsiveness Modify as indicated by data

Median ODR/100/School Day SWIS summary 2009-10 (Majors Only) 4,019 schools; 2,063,408 students; 1,622,229 ODRs Grade Range # Schools Mean Enroll/School Median ODR/100/School Day K-6 2565 452 .22 6-9 713 648 .50 9-12 266 897 .68 K-(8-12) 474 423 .42

Most are responsive…but some need a bit more. Mean % Students 2009-2010 Majors Only Most are responsive…but some need a bit more. 9% 19% 24% 18% 91% 81% 76% 82% N = 2565 713 266 474

Mean % ODRs 2009-2010 Majors Only And we know who they are! 74% 82% 84% 79% Students: 9% 19% 24% 18%

K-6 Problem Behavior ODR Aggression-fighting & disrespect

6-9 Problem Behavior ODR Disrespect

Disrespect + tardy, skip, truant 9-12 Problem Behavior ODR Disrespect + tardy, skip, truant

Avg Ref/Day/Month

Office Discipline Referrals Definition Kid-Teacher-Administrator interaction Underestimation of actual behavior Improving usefulness & value Clear, mutually exclusive, exhaustive definitions Distinction between office v. classroom managed Continuum of behavior support Positive school-wide foundations W/in school comparisons

# Ref by Problem Behavior

SWIS Definition of Bullying Behavior

# Ref by Location

# Ref by Time of Day

# Ref by Student

Reconceptualizing Bullying from Behavior Analytic Perspective for SWPBS Emphasize overt observable behavior Consider sets of behavior w/ similar function Examine behavior in context Specific relationship between behavior & context Describe behavioral learning histories Change context to change probability of behavior

OUR BEHAVIORAL PERSPECTIVE “Do” Learning history “Context” or environment Context manipulation Data-based decision making

What is “bullying?” Remember Behavior “Label behavior, not people…’ So, say, “bully behavior” Behavior Verbal/physical aggression, intimidation, harassment, teasing, manipulation

Continuum of Support for “Manuella” Universal Targeted Intensive Anger man. Harassment Ind. play Adult rel. NOTICE GREEN GOES IS FOR “ALL” Baker, 2005 JPBI Attend. Coop play Peer interac Label behavior…not people Dec 7, 2007

E.g., same…but less likely Why do bully behavior? Get/obtain E.g., stuff, things, attention, status, money, activity, attention, etc. Escape/avoid E.g., same…but less likely Victim attention Bystander attention Self-delivered praise Tangible access

Why is “why” important? PREVENTION Teach effective, efficient, relevant alt. SS Remove triggers of BB Add triggers for alt. SS Remove conseq. that maintain BB Add conseq. that maintain SS PREVENTION De-emphasis on adding consequence for problem behavior

Continuum of Behavior Fluency Target Initiator Context or Setting Continuum of Behavior Fluency Bystander Staff

Three basic strategies….if you do nuthin’ else….

Doesn’t Work Works Label student Exclude student Blame family Punish student Assign restitution Ask for apology Teach targeted social skills Reward social skills Teach all Individualize for non-responsive behavior Invest in positive school-wide culture

1. Teach common strategy to all “Stop-Walk-Talk” “Talk-Walk-Squawk” “Whatever & Walk” MUST….. Be easy & do-able by all Be contextually relevant Result in early disengagement Increase predictability Be pre-emptive Be teachable Be brief

www.pbis.org

BP-PBS The use of the Bullying Prevention in Positive Behavior Supports (BP-PBS) has resulted in clear decreases in bullying behavior, as well as increases in adaptive student responses to bullying.

72% Number of Incidents of Bullying Behavior 3.14 1.88 .88 48 Baseline Acquisition Full BP-PBS Implementation Rob School 1 Number of Incidents of Bullying Behavior Bruce Cindy School 2 Scott Anne School 3 Ken 72% 48 3.14 1.88 .88 Scott Ross, University of Oregon School Days

Scott Ross, University of Oregon 21% increase 22% decrease Recipients of bullying said “stop” 30% of the time (a 28% increase from baseline), helped the victim “walk” away 13% of the time (a 10% increase), delivered a positive response 8% of the time (an 11% decrease), delivered a negative response 15% of the time (a 19% decrease), and delivered no response 34% of the time (a 9% decrease). Bystanders of bullying said “stop” 22% of the time (a 21% increase), helped the victim “walk” away 13% of the time (an 11% increase), delivered a positive response 17% of the time (a 22% decrease), delivered a negative response 8% of the time (a 10% decrease), and delivered no response 41% of the time (a 1% increase). 49 BP-PBS, Scott Ross Scott Ross, University of Oregon

Before During After 2. Precorrect Analyze problem setting Describe problem behavior Identify triggers & function Identify acceptable alternative behavior Modify setting to prevent Check-in w/ student to remind of desired behavior During Monitor Remind Reinforce Redirect After Correct Reinforce approximations Reteach

3 middle school age students (2 boys, 1 girl, AA, W, Hisp) Problem Behavior: talking, annoying others, out of seat, sleeping, etc. DV: % intervals on-task 10 minutes (15s momentary t.s.) Multiple Baseline Design IV: Greeting: Student name + positive statement, then normal routines Allday & Pakurar (2007)

3. Actively Supervise Move Scan Interact positively Model expectations Reward appropriate behavior Remind & precorrect

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______

PBIS Prevention Goals & Bullying Behavior Establish positive, predictable, consistent, rewarding school culture for all across all settings Goal 2 Teach social skills that work at least as well as or better than problem behavior Goal 3 Respond to nonresponsive behavior positively & differently, rather than reactively & more of same Goal 4 Actively supervise & precorrect for problem behaviors & settings, especially nonclassroom Goal 5 Individualize support based on responsiveness & effect

pbis.org swis.org cber.org George.sugai@uconn.edu Robh@uoregon.edu pbis.org swis.org cber.org