dean fixsen, karen blase, rob horner, and george sugai university of north carolina – chapel hill...
TRANSCRIPT
Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase,Rob Horner, and George Sugai
University of North Carolina – Chapel HillUniversity of Oregon
University of Connecticut
Scaling Up Innovations
MI3 Forum 2009
Purpose
Define the role of Implementation Science (scaling up) within each district’s improvement effort.
Clarify impact goals
District capacity to implement evidence-based practices.
Early Literacy
School-wide Positive Behavior Support
Define steps for moving forward
Scaling Up
From temporary islands of excellence (it can be done)
To new ways of providing education embedded in education organizations and systems (it is being done statewide)
Implementation
The full and effective use of evidence-based practices and other innovations in typical education and community settings to benefit students
All students in all schools
© Fixsen & Blase, 2008
Performance Assessment
Coaching
Training
Selection
Systems Intervention
Facilitative Administration
Decision Support Data System
Adaptive
Technical
Integrated & Compensatory
Com
pete
ncy
Driv
ers
Com
pete
ncy
Driv
ers Organization D
rivers
Organization D
rivers
LeadershipLeadership
Use Innovations for Student Benefits Teachers & Staff
Graphics by Steve Goodman
Scaling Up
The full and effective use of evidence-based implementation practices in typical education and community organizations and systems to assure widespread benefits to society
© Fixsen & Blase, 2008
Performance Assessment
Coaching
Training
Selection
Systems Intervention
Facilitative Administration
Decision Support Data System
Adaptive
Technical
Integrated & Compensatory
Com
pete
ncy
Driv
ers
Com
pete
ncy
Driv
ers Organization D
rivers
Organization D
rivers
LeadershipLeadership
Regional Implementation Team MembersDistrict Leadership and Implementation Teams School Leadership and Implementation Teams
Graphics by Steve Goodman
Scaling Up
Scaling up is minimally achieved when at least 60% of the students/ schools that could benefit from an innovation have full and effective access to that innovation.
Intensive Development
Saturation
State Capacity Development
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Years
Reg
iona
l Im
pl. T
eam
s RITs
STTs
Intensive Development
We are Here
Implementation Science
Impl. Team NO Impl. Team
Effective
NOT Effective
IMPLEMENTATION
INT
ER
VE
NT
ION
80%, 3 Yrs 14%, 17 Yrs
Implementation Team
Implementation Team
Prepare Communities
Prepare schools and staff
Work with Researchers
Assure Implementation
Prepare Districts Assure Student Benefits
Create Readiness
Parents and Stakeholders
© Fixsen & Blase, 2009
Costs and Savings
Implementation Costs & Savings(Inflation Adjusted)
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
1 Yr Pre During PostYear 1
PostYear 2
PostYear 3
Ch
ang
e in
Bu
dg
et (
Per
cen
t)
System Change
Innovative practices do not fare well in existing organizational structures and systems
Organizational and system changes are essential to successful use of innovations
Expect it
Plan for it
System ChangeEXISTING SYSTEM
EFFECTIVE INNOVATIONS
ARE CHANGED TO
FIT THE SYSTEM
EXISTING SYSTEM IS
CHANGED TO SUPPORT
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
THE INNOVATION
EFFECTIVE INNOVATION
Leadership Team
Implementation Team
InnovationTeachersStudents
Po
licy En
abled
P
ractice (PE
P)
Pra
ctic
e In
form
ed
Po
licy
(P
IP)
Sys
tem
C
han
ge
SIS
EP
Sys
tem
Ch
ang
e S
up
po
rt
Adaptive Leadership Based on a meta-analysis of 30 years of
leadership studies, transformation leaders make changes that “disturb every element of a system.” They:
break with the past,
operate outside of existing paradigms,
conflict with prevailing values and norms,
find solutions that are emergent, unbounded, and complex.
Waters, Marzano, McNulty (2003)
© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2009
Capacity Development
To scale up interventions we must first scale up implementation capacity
Building implementation capacity is essential to maximizing the use of EBPs and other innovations
Large scale, real time change
A Caution
Teachers and Staff 0.80
School Team 0.80
District Team 0.80
Regional Team 0.80
State Transformation Team 0.80
Outcome = .33
Scale Up Website
www.scalingup.org“Just for States”
Selection criteria/ rationales
“Resources” Concept paper
Annotated bibliography
Scaling up, Readiness, & Intensive Technical Assistance “Briefs”
Scaling up in Oregon:School-wide Positive Behavior Support
Ten year history of initial development, targeted demonstration, and recent movement into large-scale implementation.
School-wide PBS now used in over 10,000 schools in 48 states nationally
Schools Implementing School-wide Positive Behavior SupportSeptember 2009: 10,487
Schools implementing SWPBS in Oregon
46% of all schools in Oregon are using
School-wide Positive Behavior Support
Measuring Implementation
Regular assessment (every 2 months) of whether the training and coaching staff receive is translating into real change in schools
Regular assessment (every month) of whether change in schools is benefiting students.
Elementary Middle
K (8-12) High Schools
National Means .34 .87 1.27 1.06
N = 343
National Means .34 .87 1.27 1.06
Ethnicity and DisciplineElementary Schools: Oregon
Ethnicity and DisciplineMiddle Schools: Oregon
Ethnicity and DisciplineHigh Schools: Oregon
© Fixsen & Blase, 2008
Performance Assessment (Fidelity)
Coaching
Training
Selection
Systems Intervention
Facilitative Administration
Decision Support Data System
Adaptive
Technical
Integrated & Compensatory
Com
pete
ncy
Driv
ers
Com
pete
ncy
Driv
ers O
rganization Drivers
Organization D
rivers
LeadershipLeadership
Implementation Drivers
Steve GoodmanMargie McGlincheyKathy Schallmo
The Role of District Capacity
Most school reform focuses on (a) curriculum, (b) teaching practices or (c) school building practices.
Effective implementation of evidence-based practices that sustain over time and are used at useful scales requires more attention to the capacity of districts to host and support these practices.
A
Dr. Steve Goodman
Dr. Margi McGlinchey
Dr. Kathy Schallmo
June 24, 2009
Participating Schools
2004 Schools (21)2005 Schools (31)2006 Schools (50)
2000 Model Demonstration Schools (5)
2007 Schools (165)2008 Schools (95)2009 Schools (150*)
Total of 512 schools in collaboration with 45 of 57 ISDs (79%)
The Organization of Implementation Needed to
Change as Scale of Adoption Increased.
Average Major Discipline Referrals per 100 Students by Cohort
Percent of Students meeting DIBELS Spring Benchmarkfor Cohorts 1 - 4 (Combined Grades)
5,943 5,943 studentsstudentsassessedassessed
5,943 5,943 studentsstudentsassessedassessed
8,330 8,330 studentsstudentsassessedassessed
8,330 8,330 studentsstudentsassessedassessed
16,078 16,078 studentsstudentsassessedassessed
16,078 16,078 studentsstudentsassessedassessed
32,257 32,257 studentsstudentsassessedassessed
32,257 32,257 studentsstudentsassessedassessed
Spring ’09: 62,608 students Spring ’09: 62,608 students assessed in cohorts 1 - 4assessed in cohorts 1 - 4
Spring ’09: 62,608 students Spring ’09: 62,608 students assessed in cohorts 1 - 4assessed in cohorts 1 - 4
Percent of Students at DIBELS Intensive Level across year by Cohort
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Perc
ent
of
stud
en
ts
School District
Participating School Example: Fourth Grade Reading MEAP Results
Began MiBLSi Implementation
Main Messages
Oregon is actively engaged in large-scale implementation of early literacy and school-wide positive behavior support.
Current efforts indicate that as a result of these efforts:
A) District capacity is improving
B) Schools are implementing with success
C) Students are benefiting