SW-PBS & RtI: Lessons Being Learned George Sugai Rob Horner OSEP Center on PBIS University of Connecticut & Oregon August 1, 2007 www.pbis.org www.swis.org [email protected]
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
SW-PBS & RtI:Lessons Being Learned
George Sugai
Rob HornerOSEP Center on PBIS
University of Connecticut & OregonAugust 1, 2007
www.pbis.org
www.swis.org
Purpose
Discuss "big ideas" & "lessons learned" about
SWPBS & RtI
• Define RtI & features
• Describe SWPBS v. RtI
• Show applied research examples
pbis.org
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
SYST
EMS
PRACTICES
DATASupportingStaff Behavior
SupportingStudent Behavior
OUTCOMES
Supporting Social Competence &Academic Achievement
SupportingDecisionMaking
Basics: 4 PBS
Elements
Crystal’s “Hope” • Show me love/hope…..now!
• Difference & diversity are good!
• Behaviors are communications!
• Change is hard!
• Social/interpersonal culture is big deal!
• Behaviors set climate
• Experiences shape behavior…son!
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
IndividualizedSystems for Students
with High-Risk Behavior
~80% of Students
~15%
~5%
CONTINUUM OFSCHOOL-WIDE
INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR
SUPPORT
It’s not just about behavior!
Good Teaching Behavior Management
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
Increasing District & State Competency and Capacity
Investing in Outcomes, Data, Practices, and Systems
Academic Systems Behavioral Systems
1-5% 1-5%
5-10% 5-10%
80-90% 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
RtI: Good “IDEA” Policy• Approach to increase efficiency,
accountability, & impact of effective practices• NOT program, curriculum, strategy, intervention
• NOT limited to special education
• NOT new– Problem solving process
– Diagnostic-prescriptive teaching
– Curriculum based assessment
– Precision teaching
– Applied behavior analysis
• Demonstrations– Systemic early literacy
– School-wide positive behavior support
jRtI Logic
Teach w/ best curriculum & instruction
Intervene early at all levels
Use student behavior as
progress indicator
Screen universally &
frequently
Modify & specialize for
non-responders
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”
RtI: Defining Features
Sounds simple, but IMPLICATIONS
General Educator
Functioning
Special Educator
Functioning
Implementation Fidelity
Measurement Requirements
Curricular & Instructional Decisions
Implications & Cautions(E.g., Gresham, Grimes, Kratochwill, Tilly, etc.)
• Psychometric features of measures for student outcomes & universal screening?
• Standardized measurement procedures?
• Valid & documented “cut” criteria for determining responsiveness?
• Interventions efficacy, effectiveness, & relevance?
• Students with disabilities?
• Professional development?
• Applications across grades/schools & curriculum areas?
• Treatment integrity & accountability?
• Functioning of general v. special education?
RtI Applications
EARLY READING/LITERACY SOCIAL BEHAVIOR
TEAMGeneral educator, special
educator, reading specialist, Title 1, school psychologist, etc.
General educator, special educator, behavior specialist, Title 1, school
psychologist, etc.
UNIVERSAL SCREENING
Curriculum based measurement SSBD, record review, gating
PROGRESS MONITORING
Curriculum based measurementODR, 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, intensive Primary, secondary, tertiary tiers
Academic Systems Behavioral Systems
1-5% 1-5%
5-10% 5-10%
80-90% 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
PBSFeatures
Local Implementers,
Context, & Culture
3-tiered Prevention
LogicEvidence-
Based BehavioralPractices
Applied Behavior AnalysisContinuum of
Behavior Support
Science of Human
Behavior
SystemsChange&
Durability
Self-assessed Action
Planning
Carr, Dunlap, Horner, Sailor, etc.
Local Capacity Building
Valued Outcomes & Life Quality
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
IndividualizedSystems for Students
with High-Risk Behavior
~80% of Students
~15%
~5%
CONTINUUM OFSCHOOL-WIDE
INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR
SUPPORT
“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?
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
http://rtckids.fmhi.usf.eduKutash, K., Duchnowski, A. J., & Lynn, N. (2006). School-based mental health: An empirical guide for decision makers. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida. Louis De la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, Department of Child & Family Studies, Research & Training Center for Children’s Mental Health.
http://cfs.fmhi.usf.eduDuchnowski, A. J., Kutash, K., & Romney, S., (2006). Voices from the field: A blueprint for schools to increase involvement of families who have children with emotional disturbances. Tamp, FL: University of South Florida, The Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, Department of Child and Family Studies.
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
IndividualizedSystems for Students
with High-Risk Behavior
~80% of Students
~15%
~5%
CONTINUUM OFSCHOOL-WIDE
INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR
SUPPORT
Prevention Logic for All(Walker et al., 1996)
• Decrease development of new problem behaviors
• Prevent worsening of existing problem behaviors
• Redesign learning/teaching environments to eliminate triggers & maintainers of problem behaviors
• Teach, monitor, & acknowledge prosocial behavior
SYST
EMS
PRACTICES
DATASupportingStaff Behavior
SupportingStudent Behavior
OUTCOMES
Supporting Social Competence &Academic Achievement
SupportingDecisionMaking
Basics: 4 PBS
Elements
IMPLEMENTATIONPHASES
Need,Agreements, Adoption, &Outcomes
LocalDemonstration
w/ Fidelity
Sustained Capacity,
Elaboration, &Replication
4. SystemsAdoption, Scaling,
& ContinuousRegeneration
2.
3.
1.
Leadership Team
Active Coordination
Funding Visibility PoliticalSupport
Training Coaching Evaluation
Local School Teams/Demonstrations
PBS Systems Implementation Logic
Academic-Behavior Message
Good Teaching Behavior Management
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
Increasing District & State Competency and Capacity
Investing in Outcomes, Data, Practices, and Systems
Lessons Learned: 2006 White House Conference on School Safety
• Students, staff, & community must have means of communicating that is immediate, safe, & reliable
• Positive, respectful, predictable, & trusting student-teacher-family relationships are important
• High rates of academic & social success are important
• Positive, respectful, predictable, & trusting school environment/climate is important for all students
• Metal detectors, surveillance cameras, & security guards are insufficient deterents
Messages• RtI logic is “good thing”
– Continuous progress monitoring
– Prescriptive problem solving & data-based decision making
– Assessment-based intervention planning
– Consideration of all students
• However, still much work to be done
• SWPBS approach is good approximation of RTI approach
Related Documents
