Teacher Developed Supports for At-risk Students Tim Lewis, Ph.D. Barbara Mitchell University of Missouri pbis.org.

Teacher Developed Supports for At-risk Students      

Tim Lewis, Ph.D.

Barbara Mitchell

University of Missouri

pbis.org

Starting Point

• We can’t “make” students learn or behave

• We can create environments to increase the likelihood students learn and behave

• Environments that increase the likelihood are guided by a core curriculum and implemented with consistency and fidelity

Big Ideas

• Using data at each step of the process

• Intervention selected based on presenting behavior pattern

• Modify environment (classroom) to promote practice opportunities & meet “function”

Essential Features

Understand interaction between behavior and the teaching environment

Behavior is functionally related to the teaching environment

• Build Positive Behavior Support Plans that teach pro-social “replacement” behaviors

• Create environments to support the use of pro-social behaviors (practice, practice, practice)– Around individual student need / self-management– Classroom – School-wide

Basic Steps in FBA-BIP Process

1. Conduct functional behavioral assessment

2. Create plan based on functional assessment outcome

1. Develop infra-structure to support behavior change (system change)

Positive Behavior Support Plan Teach replacement behavior(s) that result in

same/similar outcome

Environment should not allow problem behavior to result in previous outcomes

Ideally replacement behavior should be more efficient than problem behavior

How do schools get there?

Build parallel systemic processes • Provide school/district teams with a process

to address the presenting challenge

• Develop a parallel process for districts/states to support school implementation and continue to expand with integrity

Are School Teams Ready?

• 80% or better on SET• Action plan to maintain Universals• Use data in team meetings• Create a decision rule to identify students in need• Assessment to identify what supports students

need• Strategy to implement classroom-based supports• Equal emphasis on systems, data and practice

supports

Classroom Systems of Support within SW-PBS:

Universals & Targeted

Classroom Challenges

• Students spend majority of their school day in the classroom

• Majority of “discipline problems” originate in the classroom and often result in removal from instruction

• Remaining engaged in instruction essential to student academic and social success

• “Culture” of education often reinforces ineffective practices and creates barriers to implementing effective practices

Universals: Classroom

• Behavior management– Teaching routines– Positive student-adult interactions

• Instructional management– Curriculum & Instructional design

• Environmental management• Student Self-Management

Universals: Classroom

1. Classroom expectations/rules defined and taught

2. Classroom routines defined and taught

3. “4:1” positive feedback

4. Active supervision

5. Students actively engaged

6. Multiple opportunities to respond

7. Minors addressed quickly and quietly/privately

8. School wide procedures for majors are followed

Connecting Classrooms to SW-PBS Efforts

• Tie academic and social behavior prevention efforts

• Maximize time student spends in instruction & learning (i.e., keeping in class vs. sending them out)

• Build expertise within the school via the PBS team

• Focused professional development– Brief in-service, multiple practice opportunities, structured feedback

• Move to collaborative problem solving– Peer coaching, model/demonstrations

Structural Analysis Setting Factors Assessment Tool

• Level 1: Classroom Set-up and Structure

• Level 2: Context Specific Activities

• Level 3: Instructional Delivery and Tasks

• Level 4: Student Behavior

Stichter, J. P., Lewis, T. J., Johnson, N., & Trussell, R. (2004). Toward a structural assessment: Analyzing the merits of an assessment tool for a student with E/BD. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 30, 25-40.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Baseline Level 1 Level 1 & 2 Level 1, 2 & 3 Follow-Up

Mea

n Pe

rcen

t of

Teac

her

Beh

avio

r

High Structure Materials Accessiblity Rules Visible Assistance Consistent Answering Consistent

Applied Work in Progress

A Systematic Process to Implement Individual Plans

Background and Context

• PBS in Columbia Public Schools– 18 elementary buildings– 3 middle schools– 3 junior highs– 3 high school programs– 17,000 students

Gentry Middle School

• Three core teams per grade level– Five general education teachers– One special education

• Elective team

• Literacy support center

• Self-contained/Special education

• Administrative team

PBS at Gentry Year 1-6

• Universal Features– PBS team– Building wide expectations (RRKS) & Matrix– Lesson plans and teaching schedule– Track discipline data– System for acknowledging (RRKS Ribbon)– Continuum of response– Document minors (RRKS TOC)

Building a System to Implement Individual Plans

SAT-STAT-RRKS

RRKS Team

STAT Team

Core Team RepresentativeDistrict PBS Support

Building Administrator and Counselors

* Meets Monthly

Core Team Facilitator,

SAT Partner, &Core Team Teachers

* Meets Weekly

SAT TeamCounselors,

Administrators,

School Psych, &

Behavior Specialist

* Meets Weekly

Method for Communicating Practice

SAT Process•Teacher Assistance and Support•Targeted/Small Group Interventions•Individual Student Plans

Core Team/Classrooms•Implement AIS•Monitor Progress•Evaluate Outcomes

School-Wide Systems•Matrix•Lesson Plans•School-Wide Data•Acknowledgement•Communication

Provide Ongoing Support

• Periodic, intensive, with follow-up• Classroom/team universals

• AIS process

• Follow-up AIS

• Feedback and systems maintenance

• Weekly, skills-based, with modeling and feedback

Designing a Process for Implementing Individual Plans

Gentry AIS and FBA Matrix

Intervention Strategy Process

Intervention Strategy Process

Intervention Strategy Process

Problem Behavior Function Replacement

Behavior Intervention Outcome for Replacement

Behavior Off-task, Non-disruptive

Peer Attention On-task, work completion

RRKS lesson – “on-task” Pre-correct @ start of class Self-monitor: on-task Periodic praise by teacher

for on-task Quick de-brief at end of

class on self-monitoring

Earn time with peers for meeting self-management goals

Off-task, Disruptive Peer Attention On-task, respectful responses, work completion

RRKS lesson – “on-task” RRKS lesson – “conflict

management/respect” Pre-correct @ start of class Self-monitor: on-task &

RRKS Periodic praise by teacher

for on-task Quick de-brief at end of

class on self-monitoring

Earn time with peers for meeting self-management goals

Off-task, Non-disruptive, work completion

Escape (avoids teacher and peers during instruction)

On-task, work completion

RRKS lesson – “on-task” Pre-correct @ start of class Self-monitor: on-task +

work completion Quick de-brief at end of

class on self-monitoring

Earn a ‘skip a homework’ pass Earn other preferred activity for meeting self-management and work completion goals

Off-task, Non-disruptive, work completion

Attention (responds to teacher directions, engages peers)

On-task, work completion

RRKS lesson – “on-task” Pre-correct @ start of class Self-monitor: on-task +

work completion Periodic praise by teacher

for on-task +work completion

Quick de-brief at end of class on self-monitoring

Earn “a work with peer” activity Earn other preferred activity for meeting self-management and work completion goals

Gentry FBA Matrix

Lewis, 2008

Outcomes and Results

Student Data

ODR-RRKS TOC-Attendance-Grades

Intervention Strategies Implemented

• Targeted Classroom Intervention– Increase precorrects & feedback

• Small Group Intervention– Check-in/Check-out

• Individualized Intervention– CICO with modified course schedule

Monitor Progress

KK

0

1020

30

40

5060

70

8090

100

3/3/2008 3/4/2008 3/5/2008 3/6/2008 3/7/2008

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Po

ints

Week 9 3/3/08 3/4/08 3/5/08 3/6/08 3/7/08 Weekly Average

Student 1 94% 94% 95% 97% No School 95%

Student 1

Evaluate Outcomes

• Questions to Consider…– Is intervention being implemented with

integrity?– Does intervention match the function of student

behavior?– Does the student need more intensive,

individualized support?

Lessons Learned

Use data

Select intervention

Modify environment

Build Buy-In

• Start small• Training on function based intervention• Same things we do for students…

– Teach expected behavior– Provide support– Reinforce reasonable approximation– Acknowledge success

• Outcome data

Big Ideas

• Using data at each step of the process

• Intervention selected based on presenting behavior pattern

• Modify environment (classroom) to promote practice opportunities & meet “function”

Teacher Developed Supports for At-risk Students      

Tim Lewis, Ph.D.

Barbara Mitchell

University of Missouri

RRKS Team

STAT Team

Core Team RepresentativeDistrict PBS Support

Building Administrator and Counselors

* Meets Monthly

Core Team Facilitator,

SAT Partner, &Core Team Teachers

* Meets Weekly

SAT TeamCounselors,

Administrators,

School Psych, &

Behavior Specialist

* Meets Weekly

Method for Communicating Practice

SAT Process•Teacher Assistance and Support•Targeted/Small Group Interventions•Individual Student Plans

Core Team/Classrooms•Implement AIS•Monitor Progress•Evaluate Outcomes

School-Wide Systems•Matrix•Lesson Plans•School-Wide Data•Acknowledgement•Communication