1. School-wide Positive Behavior Support: Discipline & Beyond George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education and Research University of Connecticut July 28, 2008 www.pbis.org www.cber.org George.sugai@uconn.edu

2. Purpose Describe rationale, features, & outcomes of SWPBS (PBIS) Prevention Continuum of Evidence-based Practices Academic-Behavior Link Systems Capacity

3. 4 Challenges Negative school-wide disciplinary climate “Get Tough” discipline “Train-n-Hope” professional development Lack of effective minutes

4. 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)

5. Non-responsive problem behavior….”Get Tough!” Disciplinary RtI Clamp down & increase monitoring Re-re-re-review rules Extend continuum & consistency of consequences Establish “bottom line”

6. When behavior doesn’t improve, we “Get Tougher!” Zero tolerance policies Increased surveillance Increased suspension & expulsion In-service training by expert Alternative programming …..Predictable systems response !

7. But….false sense of safety/security! Fosters environments of control Triggers & reinforces antisocial behavior Shifts accountability away from school Devalues child-adult relationship Weakens relationship between academic & social behavior programming

8. Science of behavior has taught us that students…. Are NOT born with “bad behaviors” Do NOT learn when presented contingent aversive consequences …….. Do learn better ways of behaving by being taught directly & receiving positive feedback

9. Prevention

10. SWPBS is about….

11. 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

12. What is RtI? SWPBS detour

14. RtI

15. 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

16. 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”

18. Where’d “triangle” come from….a PBIS perspective?

19. “Triangle” ?’s Why triangle? Why not pyramid or octagon? Why not 12 tiers? 2 tiers? What’s it got to do w/ education? Where’d those %’s come from?

20. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. Responsiveness to Intervention Academic + Social Behavior

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

28. SWPBS Features

30. Implementation Levels Student Classroom School State District

31. SWPBS Conceptual Foundations Behaviorism ABA PBS SWPBS

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

33. ~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)

34. “Train & Hope”

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

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

39. Referrals by Problem Behavior

40. Referrals per Location

41. Referrals per Student

42. Referrals by Time of Day

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

44. 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

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

46. 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

47. 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

48. 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

49. Who does SWPBS look like?

50. Pre Post

51. Elementary School Suspension Rate

52. Elementary School

54. Middle School Suspension Rate

55. Middle School

56. .64.85 Schools doing SW-PBS well report a 25% lower rate of ODRs

57. Schools doing SW-PBS well report associated in increases reading achievement

58. N =23N = 8 N = 23 N = 8 Schools doing SW-PBS well report associated in increases reading achievement

59. 84% 58% 11% 22% 05% 20% SWPBS schools are more preventive

60. 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

61. 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

63. SWPBS investments in Prevention Continuum of Evidence-based Behavioral Interventions Systems Capacity for Accurate & Sustainable Implementation