1. Sustaining Change: RtI & SWPBS George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education and Research University of Connecticut March 10, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org George.sugai@uconn.edu

3. Purpose RtI & SWPBS & sustaining change: –Promoting effective, efficient, & relevant teaching & learning environments –Working from continuum of behavior support for all students –Building capacity for adoption & sustained Implementation of evidence-based practices

4. Sustaining Change Know your basics Implement with fidelity Give priority to what matters Know your outcomes Integrate for efficiency Build durable capacity

5. Questions

6. Who is he?

7. www.pbis.org

8. PRE SCH ELEM (K-6) MID (6-9) HS (9-12) ALT- JJ 14540431465708311 7138 schools across 45 states (3/08) Over 110,000 public schools…..6.4%!!

9. www.cber.org

10. What is RtI? Basics

12. RtI

13. 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

14. 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”

16. Public Health & Disease Prevention Kutash et al., 2006; 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

18. 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

19. 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 Academic SystemsBehavioral Systems

20. 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

21. Responsiveness to Intervention Academic + Social Behavior

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

23. Questions to Ponder What is “scientifically/evidence-based” intervention/practice? How do we measure & ensure “fidelity of implementation?” How do we determine “non-responsiveness?” Can we affect “teacher practice?” Do we have motivation to increase efficiency of “systems” organization? ???

24. What is SWPBS?

25. Implementation Levels Student Classroom School State District

26. SWPBS Conceptual Foundations Behaviorism ABA PBS SWPBS

27. SW-PBS Logic! Successful individual student behavior support is linked to host environments or school climates that are effective, efficient, relevant, & durable (Zins & Ponti, 1990)

28. SWPBS is about….

29. WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT PREVENTING VIOLENCE? Surgeon General’s Report on Youth Violence (2001) Coordinated Social Emotional & Learning (Greenberg et al., 2003) Center for Study & Prevention of Violence (2006) White House Conference on School Violence (2006) Positive, predictable school-wide climate High rates of academic & social success Formal social skills instruction Positive active supervision & reinforcement Positive adult role models Multi-component, multi-year school-family-community effort

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

31. 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

32. ~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)

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

34. 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

35. Major SWPBS Tasks Establish leadership team Establish staff agreements Build working knowledge & capacity of SW-PBS practices & systems Develop individualized action plan for SW-PBS

36. Classroom SWPBS Subsystems Non-classroom Family Student School-wide

37. 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

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

39. 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

40. 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

41. 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

42. Who does SWPBS look like?

43. School Rules NO Food NO Weapons NO Backpacks NO Drugs/Smoking NO Bullying Redesign Learning & Teaching Environment

44. Saying & doing it “Positively!” Keep off the grass!

45. Few positive SW expectations defined, taught, & encouraged

46. LC: Expectations & behavioral skills are taught & recognized in natural context

47. SETTING All Settings HallwaysPlaygroundsCafeteria Library/ Computer Lab AssemblyBus Respect Ourselves Be on task. Give your best effort. Be prepared. Walk.Have a plan. Eat all your food. Select healthy foods. Study, read, compute. Sit in one spot. Watch for your stop. Respect Others Be kind. Hands/feet to self. Help/share with others. Use normal voice volume. Walk to right. Play safe. Include others. Share equipment. Practice good table manners Whisper. Return books. Listen/watch. Use appropriate applause. Use a quiet voice. Stay in your seat. Respect Property Recycle. Clean up after self. Pick up litter. Maintain physical space. Use equipment properly. Put litter in garbage can. Replace trays & utensils. Clean up eating area. Push in chairs. Treat books carefully. Pick up. Treat chairs appropriately. Wipe your feet. Sit appropriately. TEACHING MATRIX Expectations & behavioral skills are taught & recognized in natural context Expectations

48. Acknowledge & Recognize

49. 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

50. SWPBS Outcomes?

51. Pre Post

52. 84% 58% 11% 22% 05% 20% SWPBS schools are more preventive

53. 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

54. 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

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

57. School Days Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior Class B Results + Composite Peers Peer

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

59. Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior Peer Study 2 Results + Composite Peer