Evaluation in Michigan’s Model Steve Goodman National PBIS Leadership Forum October,

Mission Statement To develop support systems and sustained implementation of a data-driven, problem solving model in schools to help students become better readers with social skills necessary for success.

Nicole Matthews Data Entry Nicole Matthews Data Entry Anna Harms Evaluation Coordinator Anna Harms Evaluation Coordinator Ed Huth Data Analyst Ed Huth Data Analyst Jennifer Rollenhagen Measurement and Evaluation Specialist Jennifer Rollenhagen Measurement and Evaluation Specialist Evaluation contributes to Project by: Developing and providing resources to enhance local capacity related to measurement and evaluation, consistent with the implementation research. Evaluation supports the competencies and capacity necessary for implementation specialists and local districts to engage in effective data-based decision making as part of an integrated behavior and reading RtI model. Reporting on program activities and project outcomes to evaluate and improve effectiveness and efficiencies of the project to ensure value added to consumers and stakeholders. This is accomplished by implementing Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles. MiBLSi Project Evaluation Team

Several Purposes of MiBLSi Assessments Audit –for “taking stock” of current strengths/weaknesses and action planning Formative evaluation –for improving program while it is in the process of being implemented Summative evaluation –for improvement of future reiterations

Internal Evaluation (within the project)

Feedback MiBLSi Value-Added Work System Management/CoordinationManagement/Coordination Capital Resources PeopleMaterialsInformation Work Systems: Providing the RtI practices and the supports for the these practices to take place successfully within schools and districts Stakeholders /Funders Investments: Funding Visibility Political support Returns: Addressing critical issues (Discipline/Ethnicity) Addressing program directives (State Performance Plan) Consumers (schools, districts, ISDs) Valued RtI Products/ Services FinancialEvaluation Professional Learning Technical Assistance

Worker Organizational Level Worker Process Level Evaluation Tech. Assistance Prof. Learning Finance Consumers Stake Holders Worker Evaluation At Organizational, Process and Performer (worker) level: At each, measurement takes place at determined interval. This information is compared to established standards and provided as feedback for the system.

Levels of Internal Evaluation LevelDescriptionTools OrganizationalEvaluating impact of the RtI project Stakeholders Addressing critical issues (e.g., Discipline/Ethnicity) Addressing program directives (e.g., State Performance Plan) Consumers Valued results (e.g., Improved quality program, fidelity of implementation, successful student outcomes) Annual reports Measures of program quality Measures of fidelity of implementation Measures of student outcomes Survey of consumer satisfaction ProcessEvaluating operational productivity and efficiency of each unit within organization Project management tools Fasttrack, MS Project Basecamp Performer (worker) Evaluating worker productivity and efficiency Job models

Job Model: Measurement and Evaluation Specialist

File Maker Pro Data Base

External Evaluation (outside the project)

Building Staff Building Leadership Team LEA District Leadership Team Collecting information to evaluate implementation effects and using this information for continuous improvement Fidelity of implementation (across schools) Systems integrity (district-LEA) Student success (district-wide) Fidelity of implementation (state) Systems integrity (project) Student success (project-wide) Fidelity of implementation (across grades) Systems integrity (school) Student success (school-wide) Student success/Intervention effectiveness ISD Leadership Team MiBLSi Project Fidelity of implementation (across districts) Systems integrity (district-ISD) Student success

Assessments Elementary Schools Major Discipline Referrals PBIS Self-Assessment Survey PBIS Team Implementation Checklist Benchmarks of Quality (BOQ) Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET) Benchmarks for Advanced Tiers (BAT) Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Planning and Evaluation Tool (PET) for Effective Schoolwide Reading Programs Effective Reading Support Team Implementation Checklist Special Education Data Collection Form Schoolwide Reading Analysis Support Page Middle/Junior High Schools Major Discipline Referrals PBIS Self-Assessment Survey PBIS Team Implementation Checklist Benchmarks of Quality (BOQ) Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET) ORF/MAZE through AIMSWeb School-Wide Evaluation and Planning Tool for Middle School Literacy (SWEPT) Middle School Reading Team Implementation Checklist Special Education Data Collection Form

Building Level

Assist Teams in Using Data for Decision-making First Year –Winter systems review –Spring Data Review Second Year –Fall data review –Winter data review –Spring data review Third Year –Fall data review –Winter data review –Spring data review

Assessment Booklet Description of assessments Data collection schedule Data summary Data forms and assessment forms

Team Evaluation of Outcome, Process and Systems Data

Assessment Schedule (for Cohort 7 from MiBLSi website)

Video examples for completing and submitting PBIS assessments

Improving the accuracy and Consistency of Recording Office Discipline Referrals

Developing Fluency with Discipline Referral Categories Example Exercise 2: Match the example situation below to the correct problem behavior on the discipline categories answer sheet. Write the letter in the column for Exercise 2.

District Level

Increase 8% Decrease 14.6% Focus on Implementing with Fidelity using Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ)/ODR ’06-’07 and ’07-’08

District Implementation Tracking Form

Leadership-Implementation Support Team Self- Assessment

Lesson Learned Teams need to be taught how to analyze and use data Emphasis on directing resources to need and removing competing activities As we grow, it is even more important to systematic gather data that is accurate and then act on the data for continuous improvement More work is needed in developing feedback cycles

“Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there” - Will Rogers