1. Addressing Individual Challenging Behavior through Function-based Support George Sugai US Dept. of Educ.Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut July 1 2011 www.pbis.org www.cber.org www.swis.org George.sugai@uconn.edu

2. PURPOSE Provide overview of defining features of function-based approach to addressing behavior. Prerequisites & Foundations review FBA basics BIP basics

3. Basics Review

4. SWPBS (aka PBIS/RtI) is Framework

5. SYSTEMS PRACTICES DATA Supporting Staff Behavior Supporting Student Behavior OUTCOMES Supporting Social Competence & Academic Achievement Supporting Decision Making Integrated Elements

6. 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 CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT ALL SOME FEW

7. Redesign of teaching environments…not students

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

9. Continuum of Support for ALL “Theora” Dec 7, 2007 Science Soc Studies Reading Math Soc skills Basketball Spanish Label behavior…not people

10. Continuum of Support for ALL: “Molcom” Dec 7, 2007 Prob Sol. Coop play Adult rel. Anger man. Attend. Peer interac Ind. play Label behavior…not people Self-assess

11. 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 Responsiveness to Intervention Academic SystemsBehavioral Systems Circa 1996

12. Classroom SWPBS Practices Non-classroom Family Student School-wide Smallest # Evidence-based Biggest, durable effect

13. SCHOOL-WIDE 1.1. Leadership team 2.Behavior purpose statement 3.Set of positive expectations & behaviors 4.Procedures for teaching SW & classroom-wide expected behavior 5.Continuum of procedures for encouraging expected behavior 6.Continuum of procedures for discouraging rule violations 7.Procedures for on-going data-based monitoring & evaluation EVIDENCE- BASED INTERVENTION PRACTICES CLASSROOM 1.All school-wide 2.Maximum structure & predictability in routines & environment 3.Positively stated expectations posted, taught, reviewed, prompted, & supervised. 4.Maximum engagement through high rates of opportunities to respond, delivery of evidence- based instructional curriculum & practices 5.Continuum of strategies to acknowledge displays of appropriate behavior. 6.Continuum of strategies for responding to inappropriate behavior. INDIVIDUAL STUDENT 1.Behavioral competence at school & district levels 2.Function-based behavior support planning 3.Team- & data-based decision making 4.Comprehensive person-centered planning & wraparound processes 5.Targeted social skills & self-management instruction 6. Individualized instructional & curricular accommodations NONCLASSROOM 1.Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged 2.Active supervision by all staff (Scan, move, interact) 3.Precorrections & reminders 4.Positive reinforcement FAMILY ENGAGEMENT 1.Continuum of positive behavior support for all families 2.Frequent, regular positive contacts, communications, & acknowledgements 3.Formal & active participation & involvement as equal partner 4.Access to system of integrated school & community resources

14. 1.Leadership team 2.Behavior purpose statement 3.Set of positive expectations & behaviors 4.Procedures for teaching SW & classroom-wide expected behavior 5.Continuum of procedures for encouraging expected behavior 6.Continuum of procedures for discouraging rule violations 7.Procedures for on-going data-based monitoring & evaluation School-wide

15. Teaching Academics & Behaviors DEFINE Simply DEFINE Simply MODEL PRACTICE In Setting PRACTICE In Setting ADJUST for Efficiency ADJUST for Efficiency MONITOR & ACKNOWLEDGE Continuously MONITOR & ACKNOWLEDGE Continuously

16. Teaching Matrix SETTING All Settings HallwaysPlaygroundsCafeteria Library/ Compute r 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. Expectations 1. SOCIAL SKILL 2. NATURAL CONTEXT 3. BEHAVIOR EXAMPLES

17. www.scalingup.org Dean Fixsen Karen Blase UNC

18. “Making a turn” IMPLEMENTATION EffectiveNot Effective PRACTICE Effective Not Effective Maximum Student Benefits Fixsen & Blase, 2009

19. Detrich, Keyworth, & States (2007). J. Evid.-based Prac. in Sch. Start w/ What Works Focus on Fidelity

20. Evaluation Criteria

21. Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Thornton, L.A., & Leaf, P.J. (2009). Altering school climate through school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10(2), 100-115 Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Bevans, K.B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P.J. (2008). The impact of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462- 473. Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133-148. Bradshaw, C.P., Reinke, W. M., Brown, L. D., Bevans, K.B., & Leaf, P.J. (2008). Implementation of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in elementary schools: Observations from a randomized trial. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 1-26. Horner, R., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A., & Esperanza, J., (2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133-145. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality, 42(8), 1-14. RCT & Group Design PBIS Studies Reduced major disciplinary infractions Improvements in academic achievement Enhanced perception of organizational health & safety Improved school climate Reductions in teacher reported bullying behavior

22. Algozzine, B., Wang, C., & Violette, A. S. (2011). Reexamining the relationship between academic achievement and social behavior. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 13, 3-16. Burke, M. D., Hagan-Burke, S., & Sugai, G. (2003). The efficacy of function-based interventions for students with learning disabilities who exhibit escape-maintained problem behavior: Preliminary results from a single case study. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 26, 15-25. McIntosh, K., Chard, D. J., Boland, J. B., & Horner, R. H. (2006). Demonstration of combined efforts in school-wide academic and behavioral systems and incidence of reading and behavior challenges in early elementary grades. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 8, 146-154. McIntosh, K., Horner, R. H., Chard, D. J., Dickey, C. R., and Braun, D. H. (2008). Reading skills and function of problem behavior in typical school settings. Journal of Special Education, 42, 131-147. Nelson, J. R., Johnson, A., & Marchand-Martella, N. (1996). Effects of direct instruction, cooperative learning, and independent learning practices on the classroom behavior of students with behavioral disorders: A comparative analysis. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 53-62. Wang, C., & Algozzine, B. (2011). Rethinking the relationship between reading and behavior in early elementary school. Journal of Educational Research, 104, 100-109. Academic-Behavior Connection

23. “Viewed as outcomes, achievement and behavior are related; viewed as causes of each other, achievement and behavior are unrelated. In this context, teaching behavior as relentlessly as we teach reading or other academic content is the ultimate act of prevention, promise, and power underlying PBS and other preventive interventions in America’s schools.” Algozzine, Wang, & Violette (2011), p. 16.

24. SWPBS Implementation Blueprint www.pbis.org

25. ~80% of Students ~15% ~5% ESTABLISHING CONTINUUM of SWPBS SECONDARY PREVENTION Check in/out Targeted social skills instruction Peer-based supports Social skills club TERTIARY PREVENTION Function-based support Wraparound Person-centered planning PRIMARY PREVENTION Teach SW expectations Proactive SW discipline Positive reinforcement Effective instruction Parent engagement SECONDARY PREVENTION TERTIARY PREVENTION PRIMARY PREVENTION

26. PBIS & RtI

28. School Days Percent of Intervals Engaged in Problem Behavior Class B Results

29. GOALS8:309:3010:3011:3012:301:30 1. RESPECT OTHERS2 1 0 2. MANAGE SELF2 1 0 3. SOLVE PROBLEMS RESPONSIBLY 2 1 0 Name________________ Date ________ Rating Scale 2 = Great 1 = Ok 0 = Goal Not Met Goal _____ Pts Possible _____ Pts Received_____ % of Pts _____ Goal Met? Y N Check In/Out Pt Card

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

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

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