session e4 tfi-rp sprague slides apbs 2017 · school‐to‐prison pipeline what it is: school...

2/27/2017

1

Integrating and Aligning PBIS and Restorative Practices:

The TFI‐RestorativePractice Companion & More

14th International Conference on APBSDenver, Colorado

March 2, 2017, Session E4, 4:40‐5:45, Plaza Ballroom FJeffrey Sprague, Ph.D., [email protected] Tary Tobin, Ph.D., [email protected]

Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior, University of OregonAnne Gregory, Ph.D., [email protected]

Rutgers University

Overview of Topics

1. Responses to disruptive behaviors in schools: Typical and alternative interventions

2. Using assessments of fidelity of implementation of interventions

3. Assessment with a focus on Restorative Practice (RP)

4. Assessing PBIS combined with Restorative Practices (RP)

5. Discussion

References are available in a separate Word file.

22/27/2017The TFI‐Restorative Practice Companion ([email protected],

[email protected])

Topic 1. Responses to disruptive behaviors in schools: Typical and alternative interventions


[email protected])

“Consequences” for disruptive behavior

• Too many office discipline referrals, suspensions, and expulsions

•Paradoxically, actually increase aggressive behavior, truancy, vandalism, and school dropout/disengagement

•Disproportionately used with students of color, with a disability, and from lower income families


[email protected])

•If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you always got.• “Moms” Mably

Exclusion as “punishment”


[email protected])

•Exclusionary discipline practices appear to “work” in the short term•Removes student•Provides relief to teachers, students, administrators•BUT, we attribute responsibility for change to student &/or others (family)


[email protected])

2/27/2017

2

• What are the preconditions for suspension risk?

• Special Education/Disability• Low academic performance

• Low income/poor

• Male

• Minority• History of disciplinary exclusion• “Reputation”

• What do suspensions really do?• Truancy

• Tardiness

• Fewer class credits

• 2/3 of suspended students do not graduate in 4 years

• Long term suspension in middle school associated with 3X probability in high school

• Do NOT put students “back on track”

• Damages teacher‐student relationships

7

Does Exclusionary Discipline Work Without A Balance of Teaching and Restoration?


[email protected]) 82/27/2017

The TFI‐Restorative Practice Companion ([email protected], [email protected])

The dilemmaIt makes sense to• remove students if disruptive or unsafe• to protect other students and staff members

• for students to experience the consequences of their behavior• The event is not the “consequence” but many think it is

• to alert parents about concerns• Not to ask parents “what are you going to do about X”


[email protected])

The dilemma, continued

Yet the temporary “relief” vanishes and things get worse later!• The student returns with the same challenging behaviors.•Referrals, suspensions, and expulsions fail to teach students appropriate ways to behave. • Students miss out on instruction so that they typically fall further behind.


[email protected])


[email protected]) 12

Early Adverse Experiences

Behavioral and Academic Failure at point of school entry

Disruptive Behavior

Teacher and peer social rejection

Punitive and exclusionary discipline practices

Loss of instruction

Shame

Lack of Restoration

Disengagement from school (dropout)

Affiliation with deviant Peers

Lack of Parental Monitoring

Court Involvement, detention, recidivism, negative life outcomes

School‐to‐Prison Pipeline

What it is: School policies and practices that tend to push students out of traditional school settings into more restrictive settings, including juvenile justice settings


[email protected])

2/27/2017

3

Rule Violation

Ed Code? Subjectively Interpretable?

Suspend? Suspension Alternative?

Follow district policy and protocol for suspension• Complete

suspension forms

• Notify required parties

Arrange Reintegration Conference

Can this be handled using Restorative Practices?• Check in with individuals harmed• Check in with person who harmed• Arrange restorative conference

Can this be handled without out of school suspension?• In school suspension• Restitution (assigned)• Saturday school• (list your options here)

Handle using Restorative Practices• Check in with individuals harmed• Check in with person who harmed

• Brief restorative chat• “Right way” do‐over• Restorative conference

Suspension Alternatives Flowchart



Solution may be combining PBIS and Restorative Practices (RP)

•If done well !!!•If not, leads to cynicism and discouragement•That’s why assessing fidelity is so important!


[email protected])

Definitions• “PBIS is a framework or approach for assisting school personnel in adopting and organizing evidence‐based behavioral interventions into an integrated continuum that enhances academic and social behavior outcomes for allstudents” https://www.pbis.org/school/swpbis‐for‐beginners/pbis‐faqs

• “Restorative practices are processes that proactively build healthy relationships and a sense of community to prevent and address conflict and wrongdoing” http://www.otlcampaign.org/restorative-practices


[email protected])

Restorative justice practices in society at large has led to the development of Restorative Practices (RP) in schools • Emphasizes preventing and repairing harm caused by destructive behavior.

• Includes sanctions, but does not focus on punishment as the sole solution.

•Building relationships & providing support are essential.• Justice is the outcome• Practices is how we achieve social justice


[email protected])

Examples of restorative practices – which ones have you used? 1. Restorative justice (righting a wrong & repairing

harm done)

2. Community conferencing (participation of each person affected by the behavior; allows all stakeholders to contribute to resolution process)

3. Circle process (can be proactive or reactive)


[email protected])

Examples of restorative practices, – which ones have you used? Or can you see using with PBIS? continued

4. Use affective statements & questions (communicate about feelings)

5. Preventive and post‐conflict resolution activities (teach problem solving & self‐control)

6. Peer mediation (train students to help other students resolve differences)

7. Community service (to restore a harm by providing a meaningful service)


[email protected])

2/27/2017

4

Topic 2. Assessing fidelity of implementation of interventions


[email protected])

What does it mean to assess fidelity of implementation?

• Fidelity of implementation: “the extent to which the delivery of an intervention adheres to the protocol or program model originally developed” (Mowbray et al. 2003, p. 315)

•Have you ever been involved in some kind of assessment of fidelity of an intervention?


[email protected])

Why bother with assessment of fidelity of implementation?

•Used to develop action plans (Deno and Mirkin 1978; Horner et al. n.d.)

• Improvement occurs during an iterative process as specific components needing change are identified (Fixsen et al., 2005)


[email protected])

Topic 3. Assessment with a focus on RP


[email protected])

A tool with a focus on restorative practices:RP‐Assess: Quantity, Quality, Equity (Gregory, 2017)



What if you want to focus on Restorative Practices?

• Anne Gregory is developing a tool for that!• Gregory, A. (2017). RP‐ASSESS: A tool to measure RP fidelity of implementation. (in development). Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ.

• It will focus on quality, quantity, and equity.



2/27/2017

5

RP‐Assess

• RP Quantity: How many circles and conferences have the school staff facilitated? What percentage of instructional staff has implemented circles?

• RP Quality: School staff and students report on indicators of high quality RP on “exit slips” after circles and conferences. Indicators include: • Sense of safety, belonging, student voice, relevancy, etc.


[email protected])

Students complete a short “exit slip” on the quality of community‐building circles

• Did you personally care about the topic you discussed? (Relevancy)

• Was the topic relevant to what you experience outside of school? (Relevancy)

• Did you learn something from this circle, including learning about each other? (Learning)

• Were people in the circle respectfully listening to one another? (Safety)

• Did you feel that adults respected the student ideas and opinions? (Voice)

• Do you feel the circle helped build positive relationships in the classroom? (Belonging)


[email protected])

Include studentperspectives on thequality of conferences:


[email protected])

Why consider equity of RP implementation?

•When less punitive practices are brought into schools, Black students may have less access to them than students in other racial groups (Vincent et al., 2011; 2012).

• In a large urban district, Black students were significantly more likely than their peers to receive restorative discipline consequences coupled with out‐of‐school suspension than White students who were more likely to receive stand‐alone restorative consequences (p <.001, Gregory & Anyon, under review).


[email protected])

RP Equity in RP‐Assess

• Equitable access: Do traditionally over‐disciplined groups have access to high quality RP at all levels (e.g., proactive and reactive)?

• RP‐Assess will help schools identify the degree to which community building circles were spread across classrooms with varying racial composition and ability groupings.

• Diverse representation: Are the voices of diverse groups represented on RP implementation teams?

• Explicit practices to address the racial and social justice climate in the school: To what degree do the content of circles, conferences, or community events acknowledge and redress historical harms?


[email protected])

Topic 4. Assessing PBIS combined with Restorative Practices (RP)

Using the TFI‐RP


[email protected])

2/27/2017

6

Has anyone used the Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI)?

•Anyone helped with developing the Action Plan?• The items we are going to go over are organized under headers (will be shown in green font) that are from the basic TFI (Algozzine et al., 2014).

•We are thinking about the basic structure of the PBIS system as outlined in the Tiered Fidelity Inventory – for Tier 1 of PBIS – and looking as specific aspects of Restorative Practices implementation in each area.



Has anyone used the new PBIS Cultural Responsiveness Field Guide?

• The inspiration for our tool came from an initial draft of the SWPBIS Cultural Responsiveness Companion (TFI‐CR, Leverson et al., 2015). This has since been revised into the PBIS Cultural Responsiveness Field Guide: Resources for Trainers and Coaches. (Leverson, M., Smith, K., McIntosh, K.,

Rose, J., & Pinkelman, S., 2016). Available from the OSEP ta Center on PBIS: http://www.pbis.org/Common/Cms/files/pbisresources/PBIS%20Cultural%20Responsiveness%20Field%20Guide.pdf



Directions for the Tiered Fidelity Inventory‐Restorative Practices (TFI‐RP)

1. First complete the basic TFI; available athttps://www.pbisapps.org/Applications/Pages/PBIS‐Assessment‐Surveys.aspx#tfi

2. Fill out the Action Plan that goes with it. Keep this handy as may be added to after finishing the TFI‐RP.

332/27/2017


Evaluate how well each RP element is being implemented within your PBIS framework, using the following scale: 0 = Not implemented, 1 = Partially implemented, 2 = Fully implemented

When finished, think of ways to improve (or sustain/celebrate, if well done).

Add your ideas to the Action Plan that you created based on the basic TFI.


[email protected])

TFI‐RP is online on Qualtrics – just the items; for explanations, see the manual.• Sprague, J., & Tobin, T. (2016). Restorative practices in a Tiered Fidelity Inventory Framework (TFI‐RP): An evaluation tool. University of Oregon, College of Education, Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior, Eugene. http://tinyurl.com/tfirp

• Sprague, J., & Tobin, T. (2017). Aligning positive behavioral interventions and supports and restorative practices: An implementation fidelity manual. University of Oregon, Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior.

Will be posted soon at http://pages.uoregon.edu/ttobin/



With Qualtrics, a graph for the main categories is automatically created.



2/27/2017

7



Individual items also can be studied to see specific RP that are improving – or not – and make decisions about the school’s Action Plan accordingly.

One school found that of the specific items on the TFI‐RP:

• 5 practices were in place from the beginning and maintained

• 16 improved after one term.

• 18 still needed attention.



3 schools provided TFI‐RP data twice (so far): Spring Term of 2016 and Winter Term 2017

• 1 High School• 2 Middle Schools

•All were implementing both PBIS and RP

•All improved



Year to year progress examples



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Not Implemented Partial Full

High School A

S16 W17

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Not Implemented Partial Full

Middle School A

S16 W17

Spring Term 2016

5.13%

23.08%

5.13%

76.92% 38.46%

51.28%

17.95%

38.46% 43.59%

HS A MS A MS B

Not implemented Partially implemented Fully implemented



Winter 2017

0.00% 2.56% 5.13%

51.28% 41.03%46.15%

48.72%56.41%

48.72%

HS A MS A MS B

Not implemented Partially implemented Fully implemented



2/27/2017

8

We will not have time today to discuss every single item, but will explain key items and then give you a chance to use and discuss the TFI‐RP with a partner or in a group.


[email protected])

TFI 1.1 Team CompositionRP 1.1a Someone with Restorative Practices (RP) expertise is on the school's Tier I team.

0 = No one on the school's Tier 1 team has any RP expertise.

1 = At least one person on the school's Tier 1 team has some level of RP expertise but could use more training or experience.

2 = One or more Tier 1 team members have a high level of RP expertise (professional training and experience).


[email protected])

TFI 1.3 Behavioral ExpectationsRP 1.3a Behavioral expectations are not just rules but agreements developed with input from students and staff for school and for classroom.

0 = Rules or behavioral expectations are not developed as "agreements" with input from students and staff.

1 = Some of our school or classroom behavioral expectations were developed as agreements with some input from students or staff.

2 = Behavioral expectations are agreements that were developed with input from students and staff for school and classroom. 452/27/2017


RP 1.3b Behavioral expectations include relationship topics.

0 = Behavioral expectations for school and classrooms do not include any relationship topics.

1 = Behavioral expectations for school or for classrooms include at least one relationship topic.

2 = Behavioral expectations for school and for classrooms include topics about peer relationships and student‐staff relationships.


[email protected])

2/27/2017 47The TFI‐Restorative Practice Companion ([email protected],

[email protected])

TFI 1.6 Discipline Policies

(1.6e) When addressing harm, administrators will use RP to address harm, using a formal process such as the one recommended by Riestenberg (2012).

See next slide ͢͢



2/27/2017

9

The formal process recommended by Riestenberg (2012) has these steps:

•Meet individually, in pre‐conference sessions, with each person involved to assess the readiness of all parties to participate.

•Use restorative questions* in face‐to‐face meetings.

* See next 2 slides for “restorative questions” ͢͢



Restorative Questions for Person Who Caused the Harm

•What happened?

•What were you thinking at the time?

•What have you thought about since then?

•Who has been affected by what you did?

• In what way have they been affected? •What do you think you need to do to make things right?

502/27/2017


Restorative Questions for the Person who Was Harmed:

•What did you think when you realized what happened?

•What impact has this incident had on you and others?

•What has been the hardest thing for you?

•What do you think needs to happen to make things right?


[email protected])

The formal process recommended by Riestenberg (2012) has these steps, continued

• If appropriate, involve teachers or other staff affected in the formal conferences.

• Afterwards, provide teachers of the students, whether involved in the conference or not, with appropriate information on the agreements reached in the conference.

• These agreements are related to the answers to the questions about what should happen to make things right. We’ll talk more about them shortly.



The formal process recommended by Riestenberg (2012) has these steps, continued

• Keep track of data: office referrals, restorative meetings, agreements kept, and evaluation of the restorative process.

• Involve the community (staff, students, family, community members) in reintegrating students into school and classroom.



The next item is about whether or not a checklist is used to assess fidelity of implementation for a formal RP conference with an administrator. Here is an example:


[email protected])

2/27/2017

10

Checklist for Restorative Conferences

1. All relevant stakeholders (e.g., person(s) affected or harmed, person(s) who caused the harmful incident, school staff person with professional training in leading formal restorative conferences, advocate(s) or support person(s) for the person(s) affected or harmed, advocate or support person(s) for the person(s) who caused the harmful incident) are invited to participate. ___ Yes ___ No


[email protected])

Checklist for Restorative Conferences, continued

2. Participation in a formal RP conference is voluntary although preliminary individual talks with teacher or principal may lead to all relevant stakeholders deciding to participate. ___ Yes ___ No

3. RP conference is held as soon as reasonably possible after the harmful incident it concerns. ___ Yes ___ No


[email protected])


4. Responses to the Restorative Questions and discussion result in an agreement, a consensus, on a plan to repair the harm. ___ Yes ___ NoThe plan includes measurable descriptions of (6 things):

4a. How the harm will be repaired. ___ Yes ___ No4b. How the harm will be avoided in the future. ___ Yes ___ No4c. How the person(s) who caused the harmful incident will give back to the community. ___ Yes ___ No and . . . ͢


[email protected])


4d. Specific supports for the person(s) who was affected or harmed. ___ Yes ___ No

4e. Specific supports for the person(s) who caused the harmful incident. ___ Yes ___ No

4f. Timeline for completion of responsibilities, including, if needed, follow‐up meetings. ___ Yes ___ No


[email protected])

RP 1.6g Restorative conferences are documented and assessed using a checklist (examples shown in previous slides).

0 = No records or verbal reports or interviews indicating that any checklists are used to document or assess RP conferences.

1 = Some indication that some type of checklist is used sometimes for conferences but not systematically.

2 = Records and/or verbal reports or interviews clearly indicate that restorative conferences are regularly assessed using a checklist.


[email protected])

The next question deals with how Tier 2 and Tier 3 in PBIS relate to RP support and follow up activities after a conflict resolution agreement is reached.

Before we go to that question, let’s clarify the differences.

• In PBIS, secondary (Tier 2) and tertiary (Tier 3) prevention efforts are concerned with ongoing characteristics, disabilities, or learning needs of an individual student.

• In RP the focus is on a specific incident and what can be done to make up for that specific harm.


[email protected])

2/27/2017

11

RP 1.6h RP support plans include consideration of possible use (or modification) of the school's PBIS Tier II and Tier III interventions and relevant follow‐up activities for that.0 = Restorative support plans do not include any consideration of possible use (or modification) of the school's PBIS Tier II and Tier III interventions.

1 = Restorative support plans include consideration of possible use (or modification) of the school's PBIS Tier II and Tier III interventions but no relevant follow‐up activities.

2 = Restorative support plans include consideration of possible use (or modification) of the school's PBIS Tier II and Tier III interventions and relevant follow‐up activities are scheduled.


[email protected])

RP 1.6b The school's Office Discipline Referral (ODR) form includes an RP option for a consequence / administrative decision.

0 = There is nothing about RP on the ODR form.

1 = RP is not listed on the ODR form as an option for a consequence / administrative decision but sometimes a comment is written in that mentions RP.

2 = The school's ODR form includes an RP option for a consequence / administrative decision.


[email protected])

RP 1.6i A process is described in the school’s discipline policy, for follow‐through on plans made as part of a restorative practice to track accountability for repairing harm and provision of any promised support.

0 = No such process about follow‐through is described.

1 = Some mention is made of RP follow‐up but it's not a clear description of a process for tracking accountability for repairing harm or providing any promised support.

2 = A process is clearly described for follow‐through on agreed‐upon plans made as part of a restorative practice to track accountability for repairing harm and provision of any promised support.


[email protected])

RP 1.6j A process is described for organizing use of a "peace room" or special place for RP activities (e.g., circles, conferences, mediation) including (a) decision rules for use, (b) physical space, (c) staffing, and (d) invitations to attend.

0 = No such process about a special place for RP activities is described.

1 = Some mention is made of a special place for RP activities but the process for using that place is not spelled in detail.

2 = A process is clearly described, in detail, for use of a special place for RP activities.


[email protected])

RP 1.8b At least once a week, at least 15‐20 minute RP circles or class meetings occur school wide according to an agreed upon schedule.

0 = Classroom teachers are not formally implementing RP circles or class meetings.

1 = Classroom teachers are informally implementing RP circles or class meetings but no school wide or scheduled system exists or it is not at least once a week for at least 15 minutes.

2 = Classrooms teachers are formally conducting RP circles or class meetings according to school wide, agreed upon schedule for at least once a week for at least 15 minutes.


[email protected]) 2/27/2017 66


2/27/2017

12

Before we go on to the next item, which will be about whether or not checklists for RP circles in classrooms are used, we’ll look at an example.Note: Compare your results for these checklists, completed by adults, with the exit survey (discussed in Section 3, slide 20) for students that Anne Gregory is using along with this checklist.


[email protected])

Restorative Circle Checklist (Gregory et al., 2013)

1. Safety: Are circle agreements kept? If broken, can they be restored? ___Yes ___No

2. Is there positive rapport (friendly tone) between teacher and student? ___Yes ___No

3. Do students listen to each other and show empathy? ___Yes ___No

͢


[email protected])

4. Do students have a voice in circle topics and process? ___Yes ___No

5. Do students share personal experiences appropriately? ___Yes ___No

6. If the circle involves problem‐solving, is the problem clearly identified and are possible solutions considered in a respectful way? ___Yes ___No

7. Do students have a positive attitude and stay focused? ___Yes ___No


[email protected])

RP 1.8c Quality and fidelity of use of RP circles in the classroom is assessed and documented using a checklist .

0 = Classroom RP circles are not being assessed or documented.

1 = Classroom RP circles are informally assessed or documented but not using any kind of checklist.

2 = Classroom RP circles are formally assessed and documented using a checklist.


[email protected])

• The next question is about a “talking piece.”

•A talking piece could be a feather or a teddy bear or anything that is meaningful.

• It is used to show who “has the floor” or the right to speak.

• It is passed around so that only one person speaks at a time. (Okay to pass if wish to remain silent.)

2/27/2017 71The TFI‐Restorative Practice Companion ([email protected],

[email protected])

RP 1.8d At least once per week, a talking piece is used to share or teach or for an RP circle.

0 = Classroom teachers never use a talking piece.

1 = Classroom teachers sometimes use a talking piece but not often, not every week.

2 = Classrooms teachers use a talking piece at least once a week.


[email protected])

2/27/2017

13

TFI 1.9 Feedback and Acknowledgment RP 1.9a Students and staff receive feedback on their participation in RP and acknowledgement for following agreements and cooperating with the school's efforts to create a culture of care using RP.

• Feedback and acknowledgement, sometimes spoken of as including "rewards" and "positive reinforcement," are key elements of PBIS. These have not often been addressed directly in literature on RP.

• However, social attention is a key part of RP and that can function positively (or negatively). RP is used with the intention of affecting behavior by way of social attention .


[email protected])

RP 1.9a Students and staff receive feedback on their participation in RP and acknowledgement for following agreements and cooperating with the school's efforts to create a culture of care using RP, continued

0 = The school has no systematic plan that involves providing students or staff with feedback or acknowledgement related to participation in RP.

1 = Some school staff sometimes provide some feedback or acknowledgement related to participation in RP to some students or to some other staff members, but it is sporadic and not guided by any school plan.

2 = The school has developed a systematic plan that coordinates RP with PBIS and assures that students and staff receive feedback on their participation in RP and acknowledgement for following agreements and cooperating with the school's efforts to create a culture of care using RP.


[email protected])

RP 1.12d The school has a system for consistently documenting use of RP in connection with (or instead of) an office discipline referral, in‐school suspension, or out‐of‐school suspension (See Anyon et al., 2016, for interesting research on this).

0 = Nothing like this is happening.

1 = We are starting to do this but it is not all worked out yet or it is not being consistently used yet.

2 = The school has a system for consistently documenting use of RP in connection with (or instead of) an ODR, ISS, or OSS.


[email protected])

TFI 1.13 Data‐based Decision MakingRP 1.13a The school leadership team reviews the exclusionary discipline outcomes and related RP data monthly.

0 = Nothing like this is happening.

1 = This happens but not monthly.

2 = The school leadership team reviews the exclusionary discipline outcomes and related RP data monthly.


[email protected])

TFI 1.15 Annual EvaluationRP 1.15a Tier I team documents fidelity of implementation of RP and evidence related to its effect on student outcomes and school climate, at least annually (including year‐by‐year comparisons), shares the evaluation with stakeholders (staff, families, community, district), and makes decisions regarding future processes related to RP based on the evaluation.

0 = No evaluation of fidelity of RP implementation takes place or evaluation occurs without data.

1 = Evaluation of fidelity of RP implementation conducted, but not annually, or outcomes are not used, or not shared with stakeholders.

2 = Evaluation of fidelity of RP implementation is conducted annually, shared with stakeholders, and used to make relevant decisions.


[email protected])

Topic 5. Discussion: What do you think?

•Depending on participants and space in the room, perhaps work with a partner or in a group to mark a paper version of the TFI‐RP for someone’s school and discuss items.

•Or as a whole group, share ideas and questions. •We are interested in your thoughts!


[email protected])

session e4 tfi-rp sprague slides apbs 2017 · school‐to‐prison pipeline what it is: school...

Documents