1. SWPBS (aka EBS) 10 Year Perspective George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS University of Oregon Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut March 11, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org George.sugai@uconn.edu

2. PURPOSE: Acknowledge what we have learned over last 10 years Where did SWPBS come from? Has triangle been useful? What about academic achievement? Is SWPBS program or system? What about next 10 years?

3. World Events for 1997 Deep Blue defeats Garry Kasparov in chess rematch Hong Kong reverts to China after 156 years as British Colony Space station 'Mir' experiences life threatening malfunctions & accidents 1 st Harry Potter book published Clinton US president of US & Chretien Canadian prime minister Seinfeld, Men in Black, Candle in the Wind (E. John) Millions commemorate 20th anniversary of Elvis' death Princess Diana killed in Paris car crash 3 high school students killed in Paducah KY Iowa woman gives birth to septuplets; all survive Adult sheep named Dolly successfully cloned in Scotland Center on PBIS awarded to university collaborative

4. Where did SWPBS come from?

5. Before1997 No such thing as www No such thing as PBIS Center “Pre-PowerPoint”…transparencies Concern about school climate & problem behavior EBS “Effective Behavior Support”

6. 1985

7. 2008

8. Evolution School-wide Positive Behavior Support 1986 Bohemia Elementary (1) 1988 Project PREPARE (4) 1994 Effective Behavior Support Project (6) 1996 Fern Ridge Middle 1998 OSEP TA PBIS Center (~15/~1000) 2001 OR Behavior Research Center 2003 OSEP TA PBIS-2 Center (~40/~6600) 2007 USF Scaling Up Center 2008 OR PBS & PBIS-III?

9. Fern Ridge Middle School Taylor-Greene et al., 1996 Circa 1996

10. Pre Post

11. SWPBS Conceptual Foundations Behaviorism ABA EBS/PBS SWPBS

12. PBIS objective…. Redesign & support teaching & learning environments that are effective, efficient, relevant, & durable –Outcome-based –Data-guided decision making –Evidence-based practices –Systems support for accurate & sustained implementation

13. Has “triangle” been useful?

14. Circa 1996

15. Original logic: public health & disease prevention (Larson, 1994) Tertiary (FEW) –Reduce complications, intensity, severity of current cases Secondary (SOME) –Reduce current cases of problem behavior Primary (ALL) –Reduce new cases of problem behavior

17. Primary Prevention: School-/Classroom- Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings Secondary Prevention: Specialized Group Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior Tertiary Prevention: Specialized Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior ~80% of Students ~15% ~5% CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT

18. “Triangle” ?’s you should ask! Where did it come from? Why not a pyramid or octagon? Why not 12 tiers? 2 tiers? What’s it got to do w/ sped? Where those % come from?

19. 84% 58% 11% 22% 05% 20% SWPBS schools are more preventive

20. SWIS 06-07 (Majors Only) 1974 schools; 1,025,422 students; 948,874 ODRs Grades# SchMean Enroll Mean ODRs/100/Day K-61288446.34 (.37) 1/300/day 6-9377658.98 (1.36) 1/100/day 9-121241009.93 (.83) 1/107/day K-(8-12)183419.86 (1.14) 1/120/day Rule violations happen

21. 3% 8% 89% 10% 16% 74% 11% 18% 71% K=6 (N = 1010) 6-9 (N = 312) 9-12 (N = 104) Mean Proportion of Students ODR rates vary by level

22. K-6 (N = 1010) 6-9 (N = 312) 9-12 (N = 104) 32% 43% 25% 48% 37% 15% 45% 40% 15% A few kids get many ODRs

23. ODR rates vary by grade

24. What about academic achievement?

25. It’s not just about behavior! Good TeachingBehavior Management STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Increasing District & State Competency and Capacity Investing in Outcomes, Data, Practices, and Systems

26. Academic SystemsBehavioral Systems 1-5% 5-10% 80-90% Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based High Intensity Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual Students Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Universal Interventions All students Preventive, proactive Universal Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success Circa 1996

28. RtI

29. RtI: Good “IDEiA” 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

30. Quotable Fixsen “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”

32. RtI Application Examples EARLY READING/LITERACYSOCIAL 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 measurementSSBD, record review, gating PROGRESS MONITORING Curriculum based measurement 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, intensivePrimary, secondary, tertiary tiers

33. Responsiveness to Intervention Academic + Social Behavior

34. All Some Few RTI Continuum of Support for ALL Dec 7, 2007

35. RCT etc. Algozzine et al., Horner et al., Leaf et al., Improvements in school climate – Decreases in ODR – Improvements in perceived school safety Improvements in achievement – Standardized achievement tests High levels of implementation fidelity

36. Is SWPBS Program or System?

37. SYSTEMS PRACTICES DATA Supporting Staff Behavior Supporting Decision Making Supporting Student Behavior Positive Behavior Support Circa 1996

38. SYSTEMS PRACTICES DATA Supporting Staff Behavior Supporting Student Behavior OUTCOMES Supporting Social Competence & Academic Achievement Supporting Decision Making Basics: 4 PBS Elements

39. Agreements Team Data-based Action Plan ImplementationEvaluation GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS: “Getting Started”

40. Sample Implementation “Map” 2+ years of school team training Annual “booster” events Coaching/facilitator support @ school & district levels Regular self-assessment & evaluation data On-going preparation of trainers Development of local/district leadership teams Establishment of state/regional leadership & policy team

41. Organization of behavioral subsystems Circa 1996

42. Classroom SWPBS Subsystems Non-classroom Family Student School-wide What does SWPBS look like?

43. 1.Common purpose & approach to discipline 2.Clear set of positive expectations & behaviors 3. Procedures for teaching expected behavior 4.Continuum of procedures for encouraging expected behavior 5. Continuum of procedures for discouraging inappropriate behavior 6. Procedures for on-going monitoring & evaluation School-wide

44. Reinforcement Wisdom! “Knowing” or saying “know” does NOT mean “will do” Students “do more” when “doing works”…appropriate & inappropriate! Natural consequences are varied, unpredictable, undependable,…not always preventive

45. Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged Active supervision by all staff –Scan, move, interact Precorrections & reminders Positive reinforcement Non-classroom

47. Classroom-wide positive expectations taught & encouraged Teaching classroom routines & cues taught & encouraged Ratio of 6-8 positive to 1 negative adult- student interaction Active supervision Redirections for minor, infrequent behavior errors Frequent precorrections for chronic errors Effective academic instruction & curriculum Classroom

48. Romanowich, Bourett, & Volmer, 2007

49. 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 Individual Student

52. 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 Family

53. ~80% of Students ~15% ~5% CONTINUUM of SWPBS SECONDARY PREVENTION Check in/out Targeted social skills instruction Peer-based supports Social skills club TERTIARY PREVENTION Function-based support Wraparound/PCP Special Education PRIMARY PREVENTION Teach & encourage positive SW expectations Proactive SW discipline Effective instruction Parent engagement Audit 1.Identify existing practices by tier 2.Specify outcome for each effort 3.Evaluate implementation accuracy & outcome effectiveness 4.Eliminate/integrate based on outcomes 5.Establish decision rules (RtI)

54. What about next 10 years?

55. How do we….. Increase adoption of effective behavioral instructional technologies in classrooms & schools? Ensure high fidelity of implementation of these technologies? Increase efficient, sustained & scaled implementation of these technologies? Increase accurate, efficient, & durable institutionalized use of these technologies?

56. School Days Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior Class B Results Fairbanks, Sugai, Gardino, & Lathrop, 2007.

57. Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior Study 2 Results School Days

58. Leadership Team Active Coordination Funding Visibility Political Support Training Coaching Evaluation Local School Teams/Demonstrations PBS Systems Implementation Logic

59. Valued Outcomes Continuous Self-Assessment Practice Implementation Effective Practices Relevance Priority Efficacy Fidelity SUSTAINABLE IMPLEMENTATION & DURABLE RESULTS THROUGH CONTINUOUS REGENERATION

60. Questions Pre-service preparation & induction process Educator expectations, learning histories, outcomes, & reinforcers Administrative leadership Collaborative inter-agency interactions Values, culture, context, learning histories, & reinforcers of organization Policy guidance & accountability Research & development –Urban ghettos, rural isolation, high schools, mental health, etc., etc.

61. Also on Horizon: NCLB-II