MU Center for SW-PBS College of Education University of Missouri Missouri SW-PBS Annual Reporting pbismissouri.org.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Using the PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI) E-12
Advertisements

Measuring Performance within School Climate Transformation Grants
Student Services Personnel and RtI: Bridging the Skill Gap FASSA Institute George M. Batsche Professor and Co-Director Institute for School Reform Florida.
Missouri Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support (MO SW-PBS) Implementation Mary Richter MO SW-PBS State Coordinator.
Fidelity Instruments and School Burden Patricia Mueller, Ed.D., Brent Garrett, Ph.D., & David Merves, C.A.S. Evergreen Evaluation & Consulting, LLC AEA.
Establishing an Effective Network of PB4L: School wide Coaches
Moving School-wide PBIS Forward with Quality, Equity and Efficiency 2011 Tennessee School-wide PBIS State Conf Rob Horner, University of Oregon
Schoolwide Positive Behavior Interventions and Support -SWPBIS- Mitchell L. Yell, Ph.D. University of South Carolina
1 Implementing a Three-Tiered State Evaluation Structure Bob Putnam The May Institute Karen Childs University of South Florida 2009 National PBIS Leadership.
The SWIFT Center SCHOOLWIDE INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK FOR TRANSFORMATION.
Ingham RtI District Leadership Team November 4, 2009.
The Role and Expectations for School-wide PBS Coaches Rob Horner and George Sugai OSEP TA-Center on PBS Pbis.org.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © DE-PBS Key Features Evaluation: Matching Philosophy & Measurement Sarah K. Hearn, M.Ed., Delaware Positive.
MARY BETH GEORGE, USD 305 PBIS DISTRICT COORDINATOR USD #305 PBIS Evaluation.
Coaching: Tier 2 and 3 Rainbow Crane Dr. Eleanore Castillo-Sumi.
Title I Needs Assessment and Program Evaluation
Leadership within SW-PBS: Following the Blueprints for Success Tim Lewis, Ph.D. University of Missouri OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Intervention.
PBIS Applications NWPBIS Washington Conference November 5, 2012.
Northern California PBIS Symposium November 18, 2013.
Washington PBIS Conference Northwest PBIS Network Spokane, WA November 2013 Nadia K. Sampson & Dr. Kelsey R. Morris University of Oregon.
Using Data to Problem Solve Susan Barrett
TIMELESS LEARNING POLICY & PRACTICE. JD HOYE President National Academy Foundation.
Leanne S. Hawken, University of Utah Danielle Starkey, Missouri, SWPBS Ericka Dixon, Winfield Primary Illinois PBIS Forum, 2012.
Pat Mueller David Merves October 6, 2008 NH RESPONDS Evaluation Component.
Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Rob Horner, and George Sugai University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill University of Oregon University of Connecticut Scaling.
The District Role in Implementing and Sustaining PBIS
9/15/20151 Scaling Up Presentation: SIG/SPDG Regional Meeting October 2009 Marick Tedesco, Ph.D. State Transformation Specialist for Scaling Up.
SCHOOLWIDE INTEGRATED FRAMEWORK FOR TRANSFORMATION
Coaches Training Introduction Data Systems and Fidelity.
Scaling up and sustaining an integrated behavior and reading schoolwide model of supports November 18, 2008.
Measuring Implementation: School-Wide Instructional Staff Perspective Amy Gaumer Erickson, Ph.D. University of Kansas Evaluator: Kansas & Missouri SPDGs.
Continuous Improvement Data Review Workday Spring 2015.
Developing a Comprehensive State-wide Evaluation for PBS Heather Peshak George, Ph.D. Donald K. Kincaid, Ed.D.
Improving Academics and Social Outcomes through a Systems Integrated Approach to RTI Carol Massanari Susan Barrett Steve Goodman.
Monitoring Advanced Tiers Tool (MATT) University of Oregon October, 2012.
Effective Behavioral & Instructional Support Systems Overview and Guiding Principles Adapted from, Carol Sadler, Ph.D. – EBISS Coordinator Extraordinaire.
PBIS Team Training Baltimore County Public Schools Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports SYSTEMS PRACTICES DA T A OUTCOMES July 16, 2008 Secondary.
SW-PBIS Cohort 8 Spring Training March Congratulations – your work has made a difference Cohort 8.
IN NORTH THURSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS KATY LEHMAN PBIS SPECIALIST MAY 22, 2013 PBIS Implementation.
 This is a presentation of the IL PBIS Network. All rights reserved. Recognition Process Materials available on
E VALUATION FOR S CHOOL - WIDE PBIS Bob Algozzine University of North Carolina: Charlotte Rob Horner University of Oregon December 9, 2011.
DEVELOPING AN EVALUATION SYSTEM BOB ALGOZZINE AND STEVE GOODMAN National PBIS Leadership Forum Hyatt Regency O’Hare Rosemont, Illinois October 14, 2010.
Bob Algozzine Rob Horner National PBIS Leadership Forum Chicago Hyatt Regency O’Hare October 8, /
Establishing Multi-tiered Behavior Support Frameworks to Achieve Positive School-wide Climate George Sugai Tim Lewis Rob Horner University of Connecticut,
DEVELOPING AN EVALUATION SYSTEM FOR SWPBS Rob Horner and Bob Algozzine.
“Sustaining & Expanding Effective Practices: Lessons Learned from Implementation of School-wide Positive Behavior Supports” Susan Barrett Cyndi Boezio,
Data-Based Decision Making: Using Data to Improve Implementation Fidelity & Outcomes.
Evaluation Planning & Reporting for School Climate Transformation Grant (SCTG) Sites Bob Algozzine University of North Carolina at Charlotte Steve GoodmanMichigan's.
DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING STATE-LEVEL EVALUATION SYSTEMS BOB ALGOZZINE, HEATHER REYNOLDS, AND STEVE GOODMAN National PBIS Leadership Forum Hyatt Regency.
State and District-level Role in Implementation, Scaling and Sustaining PBIS Session A-3 Washington Leadership Discussion Rob Horner University of Oregon.
Goal Attainment Scales as a way to Measure Progress Amy Gaumer Erickson & Monica Ballay December 3, 2012.
Leadership Teams Implementing PBIS Module 14. Objectives Define role and function of PBIS Leadership Teams Define Leadership Team’s impact on PBIS implementation.
Aligning PBIS to Achieve Educational Excellence Rob Horner University of Oregon Acknowledge: George Sugai, Lucille Eber, Susan Barrett, Justyn Poulos,
SW-PBIS Cohort 10 Spring Training & Celebration February and March 2016.
Module 2 : Using Data to Problem-Solve Implementation Issues Session 3 Phase I Team Training Presented by the MBI Consultants.
District Implementation of PBIS C-1 Rob Horner Brian Megert University of Oregon Springfield School District.
V 2.1 Version 2.1 School-wide PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory.
Judy Boggs Carrie Wade Karen Bush Kelly Staten KYCID Pendleton County.
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS Wauwatosa School Board – January 9, 2012.
Compilation of Slides for Data Measures
Current Issues Related to MTSS for Academic and Behavior Difficulties: Building Capacity to Implement PBIS District Wide at All Three Tiers OSEP conference.
Missouri’s Interagency Statewide Planning Team: Improving Quality of Life for Individuals Across the Lifespan Julia LePage and Terri Rodgers Missouri DDD.
RtI Innovations: Evaluation Anna Harms & Jose Castillo
State and District Role in
RESEARCH IMPLEMENTATION PRACTICE
NC DPI Exemplar Recognition Criteria
Implementation Guide for Linking Adults to Opportunity
North Carolina Positive Behavior Support Initiative
Wisconsin Evaluation
Northern California PBIS Symposium November 18, 2013
Presentation transcript:

MU Center for SW-PBS College of Education University of Missouri Missouri SW-PBS Annual Reporting pbismissouri.org

MO SW-PBS Context Evaluation of the context details the goals, objectives, and activities of the program. Context serves as a foundation for identifying required resources, assessing expected and actual implementation, and analyzing expected and actual outcomes and evidence of performance (Algozzine, B., et.al., 2010, p. 3). The answers to the following questions show evidence of our action plan and the people who provided and received support through MO SW-PBS for

MO SW-PBS Context Question 1: What are/were the goals and objectives for MO SW-PBS implementation? Question 2: Who provided support for MO SW-PBS implementation? Question 3: Who received support from MO SW-PBS?

MO SW-PBS Aligning Goals/Indicators to Evaluation Blueprint questions: For example we write to the question & indicate at the end of the question section how the information aligns to goals and/or indicators: MO SW-PBS Goal: 11; MO Department Goal: 2; SPP Indicators: 6, 7

MO SW-PBS Context Question 1: What are/were the goals and objectives for MO SW-PBS implementation? Question 2: Who provided support for MO SW-PBS implementation? Question 3: Who received support from MO SW-PBS?

MO SW-PBS Q2: Organizational Chart

MO SW-PBS Q2: Regional Professional Development Centers (RPDCs)

MO SW-PBS Context Question 1: What are/were the goals and objectives for MO SW-PBS implementation? Question 2: Who provided support for MO SW-PBS implementation? Question 3: Who received support from MO SW-PBS?

MO SW-PBS Q3: Schools & Districts

MO SW-PBS Q3: Schools By Grade Level

MO SW-PBS Q3: Student Demographics

MO SW-PBS Q3: Free & Reduced Lunch

MO SW-PBS Q3: Students w/IEPs

MO SW-PBS Input Input details what was done to meet the needs, address the problems, and manage the opportunities of SW-PBS. Input is a basis for planning and re-planning efforts, allocating resources and assessing fidelity and outcomes (Algozzine, B., et.al., 2010, p. 8). MO SW-PBS has answered the following questions to evaluate our professional development efforts.

MO SW-PBS Input Question 4: What professional development was part of MO SW-PBS implementation support? Question 5: Who participated in the professional development? Question 6: What was the perceived value of the professional development?

MO SW-PBS Q4: Training Phases

MO SW-PBS Input Question 4: What professional development was part of MO SW-PBS implementation support? Question 5: Who participated in the professional development? Question 6: What was the perceived value of the professional development?

MO SW-PBS Q5: PD Participants

MO SW-PBS Q5: PD Participants

MO SW-PBS Input Question 4: What professional development was part of MO SW-PBS implementation support? Question 5: Who participated in the professional development? Question 6: What was the perceived value of the professional development?

MO SW-PBS Q6: Perceived Value

MO SW-PBS Fidelity Fidelity details how faithfully the program was implementation based on its original design and the resources that were directed to it (Algozzine, B., et.al., 2010, p. 12). The answers to the following questions show evidence that the Missouri SW-PBS essential components were in place.

MO SW-PBS Fidelity Question 7: To what extent was SW-PBS implemented as designed? Question 8: To what extent was SW-PBS implemented with fidelity?

MO SW-PBS Q7: Design School-wide Positive Behavior Support Implementers’ Blueprint and Self-Assessment (Sugai, et al., 2005) Effective Behavior Support Self-Assessment Survey (EBS/SAS) (Sugai, Horner, & Todd, 2003) Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (Sugai, Lewis-Palmer, Todd, & Horner, 2005) Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ) (Kincaid, Childs, & George, 2005) Benchmarks for Advanced Tiers (Anderson, Childs, Kincaid, Horner, George, Todd Sampson, & Spaulding, 2010).

MO SW-PBS Fidelity Question 7: To what extent was SW-PBS implemented as designed? Question 8: To what extent was SW-PBS implemented with fidelity?

MO SW-PBS Q8: Tier 1 Data Collection Participation

MO SW-PBS Q8: Tier 1 Fidelity Participation (SET or BoQ)

MO SW-PBS Q8:Tier 1 SET at Fidelity

MO SW-PBS Q8:Tier 1 BoQ

MO SW-PBS Q8: SAS by Rec

MO SW-PBS Q8: Tier 2-3 BAT

MO SW-PBS Q8: Recognition

MO SW-PBS Impact Information from impact evaluation indicators reflects the extent to which targeted outcomes are being and/or likely to be achieved. Office discipline referrals (ODRs), suspensions, expulsions, levels of behavior risk, attitude surveys, and end-of-grade and other achievement assessments are widely used markers for behavior and other changes resulting from high fidelity implementation of SW-PBS. Impact indicators and assessments represent data gathered after a SWPBS program is implemented as evidence of its outcomes and the extent to which intended outcomes were achieved (Algozzine, B., et.al, 2010, p.25).

MO SW-PBS Impact Question 9: To what extent is SW-PBS associated with changes in student (behavioral) outcomes? Question 10: To what extent is SW-PBS associated with changes in academic performance, dropout rates and other areas of schooling?

MO SW-PBS Q9: Stu Outcomes -Behavior

MO SW-PBS Q9: ODRs – Per Day Per Month (Majors Only)

MO SW-PBS Q9: ODRs – Triangle (Majors Only)

MO SW-PBS Impact Question 9: To what extent is SW-PBS associated with changes in student (behavioral) outcomes? Question 10: To what extent is SW-PBS associated with changes in academic performance, dropout rates and other areas of schooling?

MO SW-PBS Q10: MAP - ALL

MO SW-PBS Replication, Sustainability, and Improvement Replication, sustainability, and improvement emphasize the extent to which efforts to implement SW-PBS can be replicated with sustained impact (Algozzine, B., et.al., 2010, p. 32). Missouri SW-PBS has answered the following questions to show evidence of replication, sustainability and improvement

MO SW-PBS Replication, Sustainability, and Improvement Question 11: To what extent did SW-PBS implementation improve capacity for the state/region/district to replicate SW-PBS practices, sustain SW-PBS practices, and improve social and academic outcomes for students? Question 12: To what extent did SWPBS implementation change educational/behavioral policy?

MO SW-PBS Q11: Personnel

MO SW-PBS Q11: State Map

MO SW-PBS Q11: Tier 1 at Criteria

MO SW-PBS Q11: Train Tiers

MO SW-PBS Replication, Sustainability, and Improvement Question 11: To what extent did SW-PBS implementation improve capacity for the state/region/district to replicate SW-PBS practices, sustain SW-PBS practices, and improve social and academic outcomes for students? Question 12: To what extent did SWPBS implementation change educational/behavioral policy?

MO SW-PBS Policy District level teams with SW-PBS as part of their CSIP MO SW-PBS participation in SPDG development and implementation MO SW-PBS participation in state level MTSS framework development MO SW-PBS participation in Systems of Care process in numerous regions statewide

MO SW-PBS Summary “Can and have schools in Missouri implemented the essential features of SW-PBS and sustained that implementation over time?” YES “Have students in Missouri experienced improved outcomes social/behaviorally as well as academically?” YES “Can Missouri take the SW-PBS work to scale?” YES

The twist…because sometimes the other shoe drops when you least expect it…

MO SW-PBS Q2: Organizational Chart

MO SW-PBS Mary Miller Richter, Ph.D. Missouri Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support stands on a firm foundation built by our former State Director Mary Richter. We are indebted to her dogged determination to build from research and to focus on the basics.

MO SW-PBS Moving Forward In June 2014 Missouri SW-PBS began a transition in staffing. The result for the school year is nearly 50% of personnel either: new to their role within the team or completely new to the statewide team (the final regional hires were made in the last 2 weeks)

MO SW-PBS Moving Forward Sustaining & providing HQ standardized curriculum focusing on goals and fidelity in design & implementation (Q’s 1, 4, 7 & 8) Leveraging technology to build capacity at state and district levels (Q’s 3 & 11) Facilitating data based dialogs at all levels with regard to issues of equity (Q’s 2, 9 & 10) Participating in state level work on articulating an integrated MTSS framework and Systems of Care supports (Q 12)

MO SW-PBS Contact Us #MOSWPBS Gordon Way, MO SW-PBS Web-Data Consultant Nanci W. Johnson, MO SW-PBS State Director