Impacting Outcomes for Students with the Most Challenging Behaviors through Schoolwide PBS: OSEP - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Impacting Outcomes for Students with the Most Challenging Behaviors through Schoolwide PBS: OSEP PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 8ddf9-ZDc1Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Impacting Outcomes for Students with the Most Challenging Behaviors through Schoolwide PBS: OSEP

Description:

Revised March 2008 IL-PBIS. Adapted from T. Scott, 2004. Functional assessment tools ... clean up data (e.g. ODR form) review data trends and ask questions; ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:95
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 79
Provided by: cher8
Learn more at: http://www.pbis.org
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Impacting Outcomes for Students with the Most Challenging Behaviors through Schoolwide PBS: OSEP


1
Impacting Outcomes for Students with the Most
Challenging Behaviors through Schoolwide PBS
OSEPs Model Demonstration Projects
  • Lucille Eber, Statewide Director
  • Illinois Statewide Technical Assistance Center
    PBIS Network
  • Jennifer Doolittle, Project Officer
  • Office of Special Education Programs

2
Timeline of OSEPs PBS Investments
  • 1997 IDEA reauthorized
  • 1998 OSEP funds the Center on Positive
    Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS).
  • Provides a framework for schoolwide behavior
    support practices
  • 2002 OSEP funds the Center for Evidence-based
    Practice Young Children with Challenging
    Behavior
  • 2004 PBS Blueprint for Practice emphasizes
    developing State and district level
    infrastructures that can promote large-scale
    implementation and sustainability
  • 2006 Tertiary Behavior Model Demonstration Sites
  • 2008 Technical Assistance Center for
    Social-Emotional Intervention for Young Children
    (TACSEI)
  • Scaling up evidence-based behavior support
    practices at the preschool level
  • IDEA performance measures for social-emotional
    outcome for birth to five
  • The Future
  • Continue to scale-up school-wide PBS
  • Assist schools to identify and implement more
    tertiary-level, intensive behavior support
    strategies.

3
OSEPs Model Demonstration Projects (MDPs)
  • Model Demonstration Coordinating Center
  • Creating cross-site evaluation plans,
    instruments, and procedures to assess the
    context, implementation, and efficacy of each
    model and across models within a cohort.
  • Identifying key issues in translating research to
    practice and analyzing and synthesizing data
    across MDPs and cohorts
  • Applying multiple analytic methods to answer
    evaluation questions regarding both the efficacy
    of models and bridging the gap between research
    and practice.
  • Producing high-quality, useful, and accessible
    products that communicate findings to key
    audiences.

4
Cohorts
  • Each year a new cohort of three to four MDPs is
    added each cohort has a different focus
  • 2006 1st cohort is focusing on progress
    monitoring for preschool through 4th grade in
    general and special education classrooms.
  • 2007 2nd cohort is developing tertiary behavior
    interventions for elementary/middle schools for
    students with challenging behaviors.
  • 2008 3rd cohort will develop, implement and
    evaluate early childhood language interventions.
  • Documenting model development, model
    implementation, and model outcomes for each
    cohort, and analyzing MDP experiences and results
    across cohorts
  • Help OSEP bridge the gap between identifying
    evidence-based practices and achieving their
    widespread use.

5
Tertiary Behavior MDPs
  • Illinois PBIS Network and the University of
    Kansas
  • The University of Oregon
  • The University of Washington

6
Tertiary Behavior MDPs Big Ideas
  • School-wide intensive PBS approach guided by a
    three-tiered prevention model
  • Individualized, function-based behavior support
    to children who exhibit the most challenging
    behaviors and have not been responsive to primary
    or secondary prevention efforts
  • Emphasis on collecting and using data for
    decision-making
  • Systematic strategies for professional
    development
  • TA that improves student behavior to help schools
    promote student learning and other positive
    outcomes
  • Cost effective and efficient process for school
    districts to implement and sustain
  • A response to intervention (RtI) logic model to
    show student progress

7
RTI for Behavior and Academics
  • Key components
  • Evidence-based instruction and supports for all
    students
  • Universal screening to determine which students
    are not meeting benchmarks
  • Targeted instruction and support that goes beyond
    what all students receive
  • Progress monitoring
  • Intensive and individualized instruction and
    support for students who are still not making
    progress - special education?
  • Decision points throughout

8
CEC ? Boston ? April 4, 2008 Lucille Eber,
Illinois PBIS Network Wayne Sailor, University
of Kansas
  • The Kansas-Illinois
  • SW-PBS Tertiary Demonstration Center
  • A Response to Intervention (RtI) Continuum of
    Support Model

9
K-I Center Team Leaders
  • Jamie Bezdek, University of Kansas
  • Kimberli Breen, IL PBIS Network
  • Jen Rose, Loyola University-IL PBIS Network
  • Amy McCart, University of Kansas
  • Evaluation
  • Kelly Hyde (SIMEO)
  • Holly Lewandowski (PoI and SWIS data)

10
Big Ideas for this Session
  1. How the K-I Center is applying the RtI approach
    to both behavior and academics to ensure tertiary
    capacity
  2. Implementation experiences and data from IL (Year
    One and Year Two)
  3. What the K-I Center hope to deliver in terms of
    knowledge, tools etc.

11
Key Questions
Does building a school-wide system of PBIS
increase schools abilities to effectively
educate students with more complex needs? What
systems, data and practice structures are needed
to ensure that positive behavior support being
applied in needed dosage for ALL students?
12
School-Wide Systems for Student Success A
Response to Intervention Model
Academic Systems
Behavioral Systems
1-5
1-5
5-10
5-10
80-90
80-90
13
Positive Behavior Interventions Supports A
Response to Intervention (RtI) Model





Universal School-Wide Assessment School-Wide
Prevention Systems


  • Secondary
  • Tertiary


Small group interventions (CICO, SSI,
etc)
SWIS other School-wide data
Intervention
Assessment
Group interventions with individualized focus
(CnC, etc)
BEP group Intervention data

Simple individual interventions (Simple FBA/BIP,
schedule/curriculum changes, etc)
Functional assessment tools/ Observations/scatter
plots etc.

Multiple-domain FBA/BIP

Wraparound
Revised March 2008 IL-PBIS Adapted from T. Scott,
2004
SIMEO tools HSC-T, RD-T
3.5.08
14
Core Features of a Response to Intervention (RtI)
Approach
  • Investment in prevention
  • Universal Screening
  • Early intervention for students not at
    benchmark
  • Multi-tiered, prevention-based intervention
    approach
  • Progress monitoring
  • Use of problem-solving process at all 3-tiers
  • Active use of data for decision-making at all
    3-tiers
  • Research-based practices expected at all 3-tiers
  • Individualized interventions commensurate with
    assessed level of need

15
Continuum of Support for Secondary-Tertiary
Level Systems
  • Group interventions (BEP, social or academic
    skills groups, tutor/homework clubs, etc)
  • Group Intervention with a unique feature for an
    individual student, (BEP individualized into a
    Check Connect mentoring/tutoring, etc.)
  • Simple Individualized Function Based Behavior
    Support Plan for a student focused on one
    specific behavior (simple FBA/BIP-one behavior
    curriculum adjustment schedule or other
    environmental adjustments, etc)
  • Complex Function-based Behavior Support Plan
    across settings (i.e. FBA/BIP home and school
    and/or community)
  • Wraparound More complex and comprehensive plan
    that address multiple life domain issues across
    home, school and community (i.e. basic needs, MH
    treatment, as well as behavior/academic
    interventions) multiple behaviors

3.8.08
16
ILLINOS SW-PBS History
  • The Context for Implementing the Tertiary Demo
    process

17
IL PBIS Schools Over Nine Years Trained
Partially or Fully Implementing
Implementing Tertiary Demos The IL Context for
18
IL PBIS Expansion History
June 30, 2005
  • 444 schools in 143 districts
  • 92 new schools trained
  • 520 schools in 155 Districts
  • 97 new schools trained in FY06
  • 12 new districts

June 30, 2006
  • 654 schools in 170
  • 72 schools trained in FY07
  • 15 new districts

June 30, 2007
  • 744 Schools in 196 Districts
  • Approximately 90 schools trained in 1st half of
    FY08
  • Approximately 26 new districts in 1st half of FY08

January, 2008
19
Illinois PBIS Schools
Mean Percentage of Students with Major ODRs
2006-07, Statewide
The differences between fully and partially
implementing schools were statistically
significant in all three levels of ODRs (0-1
ODR, Mann-Whitney U3035.0, p0.004 2-5 ODR,
Mann-Whitney U3050.0, p0.005 6ODR,
Mann-Whitney U3062.0, p0.005).
20
Illinois PBIS Schools
Illinois PBIS Schools Completing School Profile
Forms Implementing Secondary/Tertiary
Interventions across Five Years
21
Comparison of Partial Fully Implementing
Schools on Suspensions/Expulsions FY07 per 100
Students
Illinois PBIS Schools
22
Comparing School Safety Survey Partial vs. Full
Implementation
Illinois PBIS Schools
23
Illinois PBIS Schools
Illinois 2005-06 Proportion of Students who Meet
or Exceed Third Grade ISAT Reading Standard
The difference between the two types of schools
was significant (t3.72, df159, plt0.001).
24
Illinois PBIS Schools
Illinois 2005-06 Proportion of Schools that Met
AYP
Findings suggest that fully implementing PBIS
schools met AYP at a significantly higher
percentage than partially implementing schools
(?219.17, df1, plt.001).
25
Small Group Individual Interventions Rated
"High" or "Very High" in Fully Partially
Implementing PBIS Schools 2006-07
Illinois PBIS Schools
26
Small Group Interventions Rated as "Very High
"High in Fully Partially Implementing PBIS
Schools 2006-07
Illinois PBIS Schools
27
Individual Interventions Rated Very High
High in Fully Partially Implementing PBIS
Schools 2006-07
Illinois PBIS Schools
28
Technical Features Database Development
  • SIMEO Database
  • (Systematic Information Management of Education
    Outcomes)

online data collection and graphing database
system for individual student receiving intensive
level planning and supports
29
Challenges.
30
Tertiary Demos
Mean Percentage of Students for Tertiary Demo
School A by Major ODRs 2005-06 Grades K-6 (285
students)
31
Tertiary Demos
Mean Percentage of Students for Tertiary Demo
School A by Major ODRs 2006-07 Grades K-6 (293
students)
32
Examples of Ineffective or Weak Secondary/Tertiary
Systems
  • Referrals to Sp.Ed. seen as the intervention
    beyond universals
  • FBA seen as required paperwork vs. a critical
    step in designing effective interventions

33
Some Big Picture Challenges?
  • Low intensity, low fidelity interventions for
    behavior/emotional needs
  • Habitual use of restrictive settings (and poor
    outcomes) for youth with disabilities
  • High rate of undiagnosed MH problems (stigma,
    lack of knowledge, etc)
  • Changing the routines of ineffective practices
    (systems) that are familiar to systems

34
Investing in Tertiary Demos?
Tertiary Demos
  • ISBE is investing
  • ICMHP is investing
  • USDOE-OSEP is investing

We need replicable Systems, Data, and Practices
so we can effect long term change.
35
(No Transcript)
36
(No Transcript)
37
A Focus on Tertiary Impacts Implementation at
All Levels
  • Notable progress was observed in tertiary demo
    schools implementation of PBIS.
  • Building-based teams met frequently to action
    plan and significant gains were made during year
    one.
  • The Illinois PBIS Phases of Implementation Tool
    is being used by schools to self-assess their
    systems, data and practices and guide their
    implementation.
  • As schools invest in developing tertiary
    structures, they are also taking steps to improve
    their universal and secondary systems.

38
Tertiary Demo School Reduces ODRs Increases
Simple Secondary Interventions
IL Tertiary Demo
CICO Check in, Check Out
39
Results of Implementation of Wraparound within
SW-PBS in IL
Wraparound
  • Three year pilot
  • Enhance SOC wraparound approach
  • data-based decision-making as part of wraparound
    intervention
  • Development of strength-needs data tools
  • Web-based system

40
IL PBIS Tertiary Demos-07
Tertiary Interventions Linked to Immediate
Sustainable ODR Decreases
41
Wraparound-07
Immediate Sustainable Change Noted in Placement
Risk
42
Wraparound-07
School Risk Behaviors Substantially Decline for
Student Engaged in Wrap
Avg of episodes
43
IL Wraparound Data-07
Positive Classroom Behavior Academic
Achievement Linked
44
IL PBIS Tertiary Demos
Shift in Responsibility for Individual Student
Data Management at Tertiary Demo Sites
45
Andy Using Data to Keep the Team
Moving Celebrate Success of current plan
46
Andy Next Steps
  • Team will use data to plan for academic supports.
  • Lower intensity of some supports
  • Transition from frequent adult feedback to
    self-monitoring to boost self-confidence and
    feel/be less dependent on adults.

47
Mary Ellen Home, School, Community Tool
48
SIMEO -Educational Information Tool
49
AJ
  • 0 ODRs (from 3)
  • 0 Time-outs (from 22)
  • Passing grades in all classes (from Ds Fs)
  • Parents report that this is different
  • Improved partnerships with community service
    providers
  • MH partner participating and providing effective
    strategies

50
Henry Reason Referred to Tertiary Supports
  • Henry, an elementary school student, had
  • extremely poor attendance
  • failing grades
  • poor homework completion
  • trouble with the law in the community
  • and had a court assigned probation officer and a
    mandated Department of Children and Family
    Services (DCFS) counselor

51
Henry Engagement and Team Preparation
  • Wraparound team initially included
  • Henry
  • his mother
  • the school social worker
  • his primary classroom teacher
  • school principal, bi-lingual liaison
  • district SWPBS tertiary-tier coach
  • Team met consistently to identify strengths, big
    needs and develop a wraparound plan for Henry.

52
Henry Identifying Strengths and Big Needs
  • Henrys strengths identified by team included
  • a good relationship with his teacher
  • responsiveness to positive attention from adults
    he likes
  • leadership among his peers
  • and effective self-advocacy
  • Henrys big needs as identified by the
    wraparound team
  • Henry needs to feel as if he fits in with the
    other kids at school
  • Henry needs to feel successful at school
  • Henry to be invested in his education

53
Henry Ongoing Plan Implementation and
Refinement
  • Henry was included in the Check-and-Connect
    intervention which was being delivered to other
    students in the school
  • In addition, Henry and his teacher talked about
    individual behavior goals listed on his daily
    point card.
  • He was put on safety patrol in which he was an
    older youth selected to be a positive role model
    to help monitor and improve his behavior in the
    hallways.
  • Because Henrys voice was important, the
    suggestion that he work with younger students in
    their classrooms was set aside due to Henrys
    lack of interest.

54
Henry Progress Monitoring
  • Henrys progress was monitored through
  • Office discipline reports
  • Attendance
  • Grades
  • DIBEL scores
  • Check In Check Out behavior card points
  • SIMEO Tools

55
Henry Initial Outcomes
  • From second quarter to third quarter, with
    wraparound in progress, Henrys grades and
    attendance began to increase
  • Spelling 15 to 40
  • Math 15 to 48.5
  • Reading 20 to 63
  • His DIBELS score increased from 55 words per
    minute in the fall to 67 words per minute in the
    winter.
  • Attendance15 in 1st quarter 60 in 2nd quarter,
    75 in 3rd quarter

56
Henrys Risk of Placement Data Referral-Dispositi
on Tool (SIMEO)
57
Henrys Improved Behavior and Emotional
Functioning at Home
58
Henrys Improved Behavior and Emotional
Functioning at School
59
Henrys Improved Behavior and Emotional
Functioning In the Community
60
Educational Environment Data (EE)
  • A key item in IL State Performance Plan for feds
  • More districts to be flagged for monitoring
  • Tertiary demo activities focus on IL SPP data
    points

61
Sparta School District
Six Year Comparison of Least Restrictive
Environment
62
Dewey Elementary School
Changes in Least Restrictive Environment
63
EE Data (continued)
  • First step is accessing the data
  • Next is discussing with range of stakeholders and
    determining accuracy or how to make it accurate
  • Possible tools/procedures to make a difference

64
Getting Started with Data-Based Decision-Making
with EE Data
  • Similar to how we got started with ODR data
  • clean up data (e.g. ODR form)
  • review data trends and ask questions

65
Getting Started (continued)
  • decide what it means by those who live the
    data
  • decide what data points to focus on
  • design actions that seem likely to effect change
  • monitor/revise action plan

66
Why We Need MH Partnerships
  • One in 5 youth have a MH condition
  • About 70 of those get no treatment
  • School is defacto MH provider
  • JJ system is next level of system default
  • 1-2 identified by schools as EBD
  • Those identified have poor outcomes
  • Suicide is 4th leading cause of death among young
    adults

67
Why Do We Need to Go Beyond Use of ODRs?
  • Use of alternative discipline responses often
    w/o documentation
  • Over use of Special Education placement w/o
    adequate dosage of interventions

68
Why Do We Need to Go Beyond Use of ODRs?
(continued)
  • High rate of unidentified MH problems
  • Youth get identified only after crisis which
    makes it harder and more costly to intervene.

69
The Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders
(SSBD) (Walker and Severson, 1992)
  • Developed as a school-wide (Universal) screening
    tool for children in grades 1-6
  • Similar to annual vision/hearing screenings

70
Background
  • Identifies behaviors that may impede academic and
    social functioning
  • Leads to earlier intervention
  • May reduce need for formalized, lengthy requests
    for assistance by using data to identify youth

71
Implementation
  • Between early September-first of November,
    completed screenings in 6 districts and 18
    schools
  • Initial results indicate that approximately
    5-10 of students enrolled in grades 1-6 were
    identified by the SSBD

72
Implementation
  • A Middle school case example
  • Approximately 320 students enrolled in sixth
    grade were screened using the SSBD
  • 38 six graders or 11 passed gate two

73
Implementation
  • Currently, school-based secondary teams are using
    SSBD data to implement low-intensity
    interventions (e.g., check-in/check-out)

74
Ensuring Capacity at All 3 Tiers
  • Begin assessment and development of secondary and
    tertiary tiers at start-up of universal
  • Assess resources and current practices
    (specialized services)
  • Review current outcomes of students with higher
    level needs
  • Position personnel to guide changes in practice
  • Begin planning and training with select personnel
  • All 3 tiers addressed at all district meetings
    and at every training

75
Requirements for IL Tertiary Demos
  • District Commitment
  • Designated Buildings/District Staff
  • External Tertiary Coach/Coordinator
  • Continuum of Skill Sets (training, guided
    learning, practice, coaching, consultation)
  • Commitment to use of Data System
  • Going beyond ODRs (i.e. SSBD)
  • Self assessment/fidelity
  • SIMEO-Student Outcomes

76
District-wide Secondary/Tertiary Implementation
Process
  • District meeting quarterly
  • District outcomes
  • Capacity/sustainability
  • Other schools/staff
  • Building meeting monthly
  • Check on all levels
  • Cross-planning with all levels
  • Effectiveness of practices (CICO/BIP/Wrap, etc)
  • Secondary/Tertiary Coaching Capacity
  • Wraparound Facilitators

77
System Data to Consider
  • LRE
  • Building and District Level
  • By disability group
  • Other places kids are parked
  • Alternative settings
  • Rooms w/in the building kids are sent
  • Sub-aggregate groups
  • Sp. Ed.
  • Ethnicity

78
Ongoing SelfAssessment of Secondary/Tertiary
Implementation
  • Building Level
  • IL Phases of Implementation (PoI) Tool
  • IL Secondary/Tertiary Intervention Tracking Tool
  • Sp. Ed Referral Data
  • Suspensions/Expulsions/Placements (ongoing)
  • Aggregate Individual Student Data (IL SIMEO data)
  • LRE Data trends
  • Subgroup data (academic, discipline, Sp. Ed.
    Referral, LRE, etc)
  • District Level
  • Referral to Sp.Ed. Data
  • LRE Data (aggregate and by building)
  • IL Out-of-Home-School-Tracking Tool (multiple
    sorts)
  • Aggregate SIMEO data
  • Aggregate PoI Data
About PowerShow.com