POSITIVE BEHAVIOR INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORTS (PBIS)

Dana Kuehl Technical Assistance Coordinator

Tina Taylor Internal Coach-CrandonJessica Keao Internal Coach-Crandon

Amanda Smithson Internal Coach-Green Bay

In Partnership with OSEP’s TA Center on Positive Behavior Support

Co-Director’s: Rob Horner, University of Oregon, and George Sugai, University of Connecticut

www.pbis.orgwww.swis.org

The Wisconsin PBIS Network (CFDA #84.027) acknowledges the support of the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction in the development of this presentation and for the continued support of this federally-funded grant program. There are no copyright restrictions on this document; however, please credit the Wisconsin DPI and support of federal funds when copying all or part of this material.

Wisconsin RtI Center

Our mission is to support schools through the phases and sustainability of their RtI system implementation.

The core reason that the Wisconsin RtI Center exists is to develop, coordinate and provide high-quality professional development and technical assistance…

as well as to gather, analyze and disseminate RtI implementation data to enhance the support of schools’ implementation.

Principles for RtI in Wisconsin:1.RtI is for ALL children and ALL educators.

2.RtI must support and provide value to effective practices.

3.Success for RtI lies within the classroom through collaboration.

4.RtI is a framework for academics and behavior together.

5.RtI supports and provides value to the use of multiple assessments to inform instructional practices.

6.RtI is something you do and not necessarily something you buy.

7.RtI emerges from and supports research and evidence based practice.

An organizational framework that guides implementation of a multi-level system of support to achieve academic and behavioral success for all

Wisconsin RtI

Response to Intervention

Is what?

An organizational frameworkthat

guides implementation of a multi-level system of support

Does what?

toachieve academic and

behavioral successfor all

For what?

Schools face a set of difficult challenges today when dealing with behavioral needs

Multiple expectations (Academic accomplishment, Social competence, Safety)

Students arrive at school with widely differing understandings of what is socially acceptable.

Traditional “get tough” and “zero tolerance” approaches are insufficient.

Faculty come with divergent visions of effective discipline

MOST EFFECTIVE TRENDS IN SCHOOL DISCIPLINE PRACTICES

• Proactive school-wide discipline systems• Social skills instruction• Academic/curricular restructuring• Behaviorally based interventions• Early screening & identification of antisocial

behavior patterns

(Biglan, 1995; Gottfredson, 1997; Colvin, et al., 1993; Lipsey, 1991, 1992; Mayer, 1995; Sugai & Horner, 1994; Tolan & Guerra, 1994; Walker, et al., 1995; Walker, et al., 1996)

What is PBIS ?

“PBIS” is a research-based systems approach designed to enhance the capacity of schools to…

effectively educate all students, including students with challenging social behaviors

adopt & sustain the use of effective instructional practices

What has research shown for schools implementing PBIS?

• Creates learning environments that proactively deal with behaviors.

• Improves support for students with specialized behavioral needs.

• Maximizes on-task behavior and increases learning time for all students.

What does PBIS emphasize?

• The PBIS decision-making process emphasizes 3 integrated elements to provide measureable outcomes for students:– DATA sources to support decision-making,– PRACTICES that support student behavior, and– SYSTEMS that support staff behavior.

Data Collection (Big 5 x 2)

• PBIS teams should analyze the following five data points and should be disaggregated by disability and ethnicity status for disproportional trends:1. Referrals by Problem Behavior,2. Referrals by Location,3. Referrals by Time,4. Referrals by Student, and5. Average referrals by Day and by Month

Improving Decision-Making

Problem Solution

From:

To:

Problem

Problem

Solving

Using

Data

Solution

Monitor

Outcome

Supporting Student Behavior

– Universal (Tier 1) instruction support for all district learners

– Targeted (Tier 2) layered interventions for areas of need determined from data analysis

– Individualized (Tier 3) layered supports required for individual students with high-needs or specific situations.

Tier 3/Intensive Level 1-5%

Tier 2/Selected Level 5-15%

Tier 1/Universal 80-90%

Increasing Intensity

LAYERS OF SUPPORT

Attendance

Math (Acceleration)

A Student’s Snapshot

Reading (Intervention)

PE

Hallway Behavior

Strengths &Challenges

Language Arts

Science

Supporting Staff Behavior

• Reduce teacher stress• Increase teacher efficacy in

teaching replacement behaviors• Support teachers in designing

classroom management systems

Six Key Elements of PBIS

1. Define, teach and acknowledge positive behaviors.

2. On-going collection and use of data for decision-making regarding implementation of systems that support effective practices.

3. Continuum of universal supports, targeted interventions, and individualized supports.

Six Elements (cont.)

4. Implement evidenced-based behavioral practices with fidelity and accountability

5. Arrange the environment to prevent the development and occurrence of problem behavior

6. Screen universally and monitor student performance and progress continually.

1. Systems - How Things are Done

• Procedures for non-classroom settings (lunchroom, bus, bathroom, assembly, transition/hallway)

• Procedures for reinforcing expected behavior

• Procedures for responding to office discipline referrals.

• Procedures for meeting the needs of all students (AKA., The Triangle)…

2. Data - How Decisions Are Made

Components of decision making with PBIS:

A problem-solving teamData at every meeting no older than 48 hour

Data collectionT-chartODR form

Data useBig Five reports

Communication with school community about data, patterns, and decisions

3. Practices - How Staff Interact With Students

Every time any adult interacts with any student, it is an instructional moment!

PBIS emphasizes…– Teaching behaviors like we teach academics

– Modeling and practicing expected behaviors

– Reinforcing expected behaviors

– Pre-correcting to ensure positive behaviors are displayed

- Actively supervising to prevent problem behaviors

West Elementary, Alton, ILReduced ODRs by 719, ISSs by 47, OSSs by 27*

3965 mins. 66.1 hrs. 11 days

135 mins. 2.3 hrs.

235 mins.3.9 hrs.

3595 mins.59.9 hrs.

Staff

41020 mins. 683.7 hrs. 144 days

9720 mins.162 hrs.

16920 mins.282 hrs.

14380 mins.239.7 hrs.

Student

9345 mins.155.8 hrs. 25.9 days

1215 mins. 20.3 hrs.

940 mins. 15.7 hrs.

7190 mins.119.8 hrs.

Admin

Total TimeGained Back

OSSsISSsODRs

Current Status Nationally

• Main Messages:– SWPBIS is possible (over 18,200 schools)

– SWPBIS is effective at (a) reducing problem behavior, (b) improving academic achievement, and (c) improving perceived faculty effectiveness

– Coaching is critical to (a) implementation with fidelity and (b) sustained use of SWPBIS

– Coaching is perceived a major contributor to the cultural “fit” of SWPBIS to a community/ school.

SWPBIS in 13,331 schools 8/10’Al

abam

a

Alas

ka

Ariz

ona

Arka

nsas

Calif

orni

a

Colo

rado

*

Conn

ectic

ut

Del

awar

e

Flor

ida*

Geo

rgia

Haw

aii

Idah

o

Illin

ois

Indi

ana

Iow

a*

Kans

as*

Kent

ucky

Loui

sian

a*

Mai

ne

Mar

ylan

d*

Mas

sach

usett

s

Mic

higa

n

Min

neso

ta

Mis

siss

ippi

Mis

sour

i*

Mon

tana

*

Neb

rask

a

Nev

ada

New

Ham

pshi

re

New

Jers

ey*

New

Mex

ico

New

Yor

k

Nor

th C

arol

ina*

Nor

th D

akot

a*

Ohi

o

Okl

ahom

a

Ore

gon*

Penn

sylv

ania

Rhod

e Is

land

Sout

h Ca

rolin

a*

Sout

h D

akot

a

Tenn

esse

e

Texa

s

Uta

h*

Verm

ont

Virg

inia

Was

hing

ton

Stat

e

Was

hing

ton

DC

Wes

t Vir

gini

a

Wis

cons

in

Wyo

min

g

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

WisconsinIllinois

#of schools implementing PBIS by state (incomplete August 2012)Al

abam

a

Alas

ka

Ariz

ona

Arka

nsas

Calif

orni

a

Colo

rado

*

Conn

ectic

ut

Del

awar

e

Flor

ida*

Geo

rgia

Haw

aii

Idah

o

Illin

ois

Indi

ana

Iow

a*

Kans

as*

Kent

ucky

Loui

sian

a*

Mai

ne

Mar

ylan

d*

Mas

sach

usett

s

Mic

higa

n

Min

neso

ta

Mis

siss

ippi

Mis

sour

i*

Mon

tana

*

Neb

rask

a

Nev

ada

New

Ham

pshi

re

New

Jers

ey*

New

Mex

ico

New

Yor

k

Nor

th C

arol

ina*

Nor

th D

akot

a*

Ohi

o

Okl

ahom

a

Ore

gon*

Penn

sylv

ania

Rhod

e Is

land

Sout

h Ca

rolin

a*

Sout

h D

akot

a

Tenn

esse

e

Texa

s

Uta

h*

Verm

ont

Virg

inia

Was

hing

ton

Stat

e

Was

hing

ton

DC

Wes

t Vir

gini

a

Wis

cons

in

Wyo

min

g

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

• District commitment, school staff buy-in

• Coaching capacity

• Professional development plan

• Efficient data tool

How Do We Get There?

District Commitments

• High priority in District Improvement Plans• 3-5 year commitment• Continuation of the district leadership team• Ongoing staff development • Allocation of resources

Big Ideas-District

• Long term planning is essential• Funding sources• Coaching and ADMINISTRATIVE

commitment at all 3 tiers

Three-five year focus to get sustainable change Active administrative support and participation Administrative leadership for PBIS teams Commitment from staff (80%) Ongoing communication and support with staff Completion and use of data collection (discipline and

academic data, survey, checklists) Staff participation in ongoing training

Building Level CommitmentsHandout--PBIS Commitment for Success

Family Involvement or Engagement in a PBIS School?

Family involvement is often more of a “doing to,” while engagement is a “doing with.”•Involvement – schools tend to lead with their mouth – generally telling family members what to do•Engagement – schools lead with their ears – listening to family members’ ideas, and eliciting what they have found works best with their children

Larry Ferlazzo, Education Week, March 2012

Components of Family Engagement• Family member/parent academic aspirations

and expectations for children • Family member/parent-child communication

about school• Home structure that supports behavior and

learning• Family member/parent participation and

connection in school activities

Four Concepts of Family Engagement that Educators Need to Know

1.The positive effect of family engagement on student performance (academic and behavior).2.The home and cultural context of the students they teach.3.Family beliefs about ways to support children's learning.4.Specific strategies to support children’s learning.

Remember

• PBIS involves all of us

– we decide what our focus will be– we decide how we will monitor– we decide what our goals are– we decide what we’ll do to get there– we evaluate our progress– we decide whether to keep going or change

PBIS APPROACH WORKS!

• Data driven building decision-making• Clear expectations that are universally known• Focuses on positive interaction and

acknowledges appropriate behavior.• Proactive rather than reactive• Supports a positive learning environment• Delivers results

PBIS Growth in Green Bay

• Committed staff who are willing to learn and reframe what they know about behavior

• Continuous efforts toward staff and student engagement– Monthly staff meeting to share data and action

planning steps– Using staff and student surveys to drive next steps– Multiple ways to collect information: web-based

surveys, as grade-level teams, paper documents

PBIS Growth in Green Bay (Continued)

• Effective Team Meetings – start positive and keep the pace going, with all involved

• Constant reflection – it’s easy to always think “What’s next?” but keep the perspective of where you have been as you keep going!

• “Sharing” of all things – willingness to partner with each other through networking

• Include all stakeholders: as much as possible!!!

Septem

ber

October

November

December

January

Febru

aryMarc

hApril

May0

50

100

150

200

250

2010-2011 2011-20122012-2013

Number of Minors

Septem

ber

October

November

December

January

Febru

aryMarc

hApril

May0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Number of Majors

Minors September October November December January February March April May June Totals2010-2011 60 78 91 39 24 17 50 62 121 0 5422011-2012 51 61 67 66 58 102 29 62 92 1 5892012-2013 86 138 133 102 201 129 78 172 132 4 1175Difference 35 77 66 36 143 27 49 110 40 3 Majors September October November December January February March April May June Totals2010-2011 8 46 43 11 20 6 36 28 34 0 2322011-2012 31 50 24 19 37 56 23 31 69 2 3422012-2013 29 41 20 16 25 16 17 28 21 0 213Difference -2 -9 -4 -3 -12 -40 -6 -3 -48 -2

PBIS 2010-2013 Comparison Majors/Minors Reported

Students September October November December January February March April May June Totals2010-2011 31 44 47 28 21 17 37 38 66 0 3292011-2012 49 50 50 45 45 70 34 43 74 2 4622012-2013 50 52 64 57 71 51 53 77 69 4 548Difference 1 2 14 12 26 -19 19 34 -5 2  Referrals September October November December January February March April May June Totals2010-2011 68 124 134 50 44 23 86 90 155 0 7742011-2012 82 111 91 85 95 158 53 93 161 3 9322012-2013 117 179 153 118 226 142 95 201 153 12 1396Difference 33 68 62 33 131 -15 42 108 -8 1  

PBIS 2010-2013 Comparison # Students/# Referrals Reported

Septem

ber

October

November

December

January

Febru

aryMarc

hApril

May0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2010-2011 2011-20122012-2013

Number of Students with Minors

Septem

ber

October

November

December

January

Febru

aryMarc

hApril

May0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

2010-20112011-20122012-2013

Number of Students with Majors

Students w/Minors September October November December January February March April May June Totals2010-2011 31 40 45 24 13 13 28 31 58 0 2832011-2012 36 38 38 38 38 57 22 34 56 1 3582012-2013 45 52 60 54 70 50 47 76 64 4 522Difference 9 14 22 16 32 -7 25 42 8 3 Students w/Majors September October November December January February March April May June Totals2010-2011 5 16 21 9 9 5 16 17 20 0 1182011-2012 22 31 16 13 22 37 19 17 39 2 2182012-2013 12 8 16 10 9 7 12 13 13 0 100Difference -10 -23 0 -3 -13 -30 -7 -4 -26 -2

PBIS 2010-2013 Comparison of Students Majors/Minors Reported

What Can We Learn From This Data?

• Over the past three years, there has been a increase in Minor referrals and students, yet a decrease in Major referrals (every month in 2012-13)

• Almost a 3:1 ratio of students to number of referrals – there are repeat offenders with multiple offenses

• Our staff has become more consistent in teaching expectations and documenting behaviors

Building PBIS in Crandon

• Created K-12• Strong administrative and school board support• Workdays• Subcommittees• Committed team and coaches• Staff given information in phases

Successes

• Attendance (hyperlink to graph)

• Tardies (hyperlink to graph)

• HS Major referrals dropped from 2,042 to 1,097 in one year

• Community involvement

Challenges

• Maintaining momentum

• High school buy in

• Looking beyond the team

National and State Resources

• www.pbis.org• www.wisconsinPBISnetwork.org• www.SWIS.org• www.pbisassessment.org• www.apbs.org