1. POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS Wauwatosa School Board – January 9, 2012

2. 2010-11 Review  Following statewide model for PBIS  Wisconsin PBIS Network  Monitors fidelity of implementation  Creating the foundation for school-wide PBIS  Explicitly teach expectations  Reinforce desired behaviors at a high rate  Improve data collection on system-wide behaviors  Assess each school’s current systems of support

3. Fidelity of Implementation  Benchmarks of Quality Assessment Tool  Schools reached Tier One Fidelity in Spring 2011:  East, West, Madison, Roosevelt, Washington, and Wilson/WSTEM  PBIS Network “School of Merit” Recognition Award:  Wauwatosa West  Wilson/WSTEM  Unique success of our high school implementation

4. Self-Assessment Survey  Completed by all staff every Fall  Assesses status and priority of individual features of safe and effective schools  Four sections: Systems of Support  School-wide  Non-Classroom  Classroom  Individual

5. School-wide Systems Current StatusFeaturePriority for Improvement In Place Partial in Place Not in Place School-wide is defined as involving all students, all staff, & all settings. HighMedLow 1. A small number (e.g. 3-5) of positively & clearly stated student expectations or rules are defined. 2. Expected student behaviors are taught directly. 3. Expected student behaviors are rewarded regularly. 4. Problem behaviors (failure to meet expected student behaviors) are defined clearly. 5. Consequences for problem behaviors are defined clearly. 6. Distinctions between office v. classroom managed problem behaviors are clear. 7. Options exist to allow classroom instruction to continue when problem behavior occurs. 8.Procedures are in place to address emergency/dangerous situations. 9. A team exists for behavior support planning & problem solving. 10. School administrator is an active participant on the behavior support team. 11. Data on problem behavior patterns are collected and summarized within an on-going system. 12. Patterns of student problem behavior are reported to teams and faculty for active decision-making on a regular basis (e.g. monthly). 13. School has formal strategies for informing families about expected student behaviors at school. 14. Booster training activities for students are developed, modified, & conducted based on school data. 15. School-wide behavior support team has a budget for (a) teaching students, (b) on-going rewards, and (c) annual staff planning. 16. All staff are involved directly and/or indirectly in school-wide interventions. 17. The school team has access to on-going training and support from district personnel. 18. The school is required by the district to report on the social climate, discipline level or student behavior at least annually.

6. Self-Assessment Survey: East

7. Compared with National Average

8. Office Discipline Referrals Overall 7.2% reduction in office-managed problem behaviors.

9. Time Regained for Student Learning  Assuming one office referral averages:  20 minutes of student time away from class  15 minutes of administrator time

10. Self-Assessment Survey: West

11. Compared with National Average

12. Office Discipline Referrals Overall 24.9% reduction in office-managed problem behaviors.

13. Time Regained for Student Learning  Assuming one office referral averages:  20 minutes of student time away from class  15 minutes of administrator time

14. Self-Assessment Survey: Longfellow

15. Compared with National Average National Average Grades 6-9

16. Total Behavioral Incidents* * This includes both office-managed (major) and classroom-managed (minor) behaviors.

17. Elementary School Data Collection  Using fidelity data to drive implementation  Improving behavioral data system  Professional development  Documentation of problem behaviors  Accurate collection and input of data  Requires a shift in perspective!  Data is for decision-making to give us a picture of what’s going on school-wide, not just with individual students!

18. Self-Assessment Survey: Eisenhower

19. Self-Assessment Survey: Jefferson

20. Self-Assessment Survey: Lincoln

21. Self-Assessment Survey: Madison

22. Self-Assessment Survey: McKinley

23. Self-Assessment Survey: Roosevelt

24. Self-Assessment Survey: Underwood

25. Self-Assessment Survey: Washington

26. Self-Assessment Survey: Wilson/WSTEM

27. 2011-12 Implementation  Continue building and sustaining Tier One  Improving data system Data-based decision-making Targeting school-wide behaviors and system-wide features  Training for Whitman and Jefferson  Assess implementation fidelity in Spring  Layer Tier 2 training and support

28. Thank you! “Stay close to the data… … but have fun.” - Rob Horner, PhD. - Co-Director of the National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports