1

MTSS Advanced for Session for

School Professionals

Maryland School Psychologists’ Association Fall 2018

James McDougal, Psy.DDirector, School Psychology ProgramState University of New York at OswegoBIMAS, Senior Author

Jillian Archer, NCSPSchool Psychologist, Boston Public SchoolsTrainer: Comprehensive Behavioral Health Model

Introducing Jillian Archer, NCSP

Background, Experience, one good story

2

McDougal’s StoryFinally Its time to get real about students’ Emotional-

Behavioral Health

• ESSA Emphasizes children's mental health in the schools- title 1 finds for MTSS, funds for safe/health schools

• The New York State Council of School Superintendents statewide survey of its members Children's’ mental health/emotional well-being #1 priority (the daily star.com)

• McDougal’s story (1998)10/1/2018

Schools often struggle with challenging behavior

We tend to …

• react to crisis rather than work on prevention

• Intervene on an individual basis vs a systemic one

• Implement ineffective strategies: punishment, exclusion, counseling, etc.

• get highly frustrated reducing effective problem solving

We could be…..• Working together on prevention/ early

intervention

• Implementing systemic programming and instruction

• Incorporating clear expectations, SEL instruction, reinforcements, and positive supports across settings

• Use data to improve outcomes and reduce frustration

10/1/2018

3

AGENDA

• Common student problems

• ACES/Trauma

• Components of effective school response

• Review of common Screening & PM measures

• Emphasis on DATA: Screening, PM, DBDM

• MTSS Results

• Resources for tiered intervention

10/1/2018

Review of theschool based factors important to student

outcomes

• Literacy

• Attendance

• Grades

• Behavior

Social/Emotional considerations

• Conduct: externalizing

• Mood/emotional regulation: Internalizing

• Cognitive/ concentration: Attention

• Social Skills

• Adaptive Behaviors

10/1/2018

4

The Reading Problem in America

• 1 in 4 children in America grow up without learning how to read.

• Approximately 75% of students identified with reading problems in the third grade are still significantly reading delayed in the 9th grade

• Many students who cannot read proficiently by the end of 4th grade will end up dropping out of school in jail or on welfare.

• Nearly 85% of the juveniles who face trial in the juvenile court system are functionally illiterate. 60% to 87% of all inmates are functionally illiterate

• A significant proportion of students with literacy delays also have problem behavior. Working on either one in isolation is generally ineffective.

• Behavior Intervention Plans don’t teach decoding 10/1/2018

Attendance

• 1 in 10 kids in Kindergarten and First grade are chronically absent (18 or more days)

• In some schools the rate is 1 in 4 (MD)

• MD in over 25 public schools, more than 75 percent of students were chronically absent during 2016-17 school year (Maryland State DOE).

• How does this effect 3rd grade reading proficiency?

5

Does attendance effect reading?Lets see who can read on grade level after 3rd

grade?

• 84% of kids with good attendance (fewer than 10 days absent, K & 1st)

• 48% of children with at risk attendance (more than 10 absences, K & 1st)

• 41% of “chronically absent” children (18 or more days, in K or 1st)

• 17% of children chronically absent in K and Ist grade

10/1/2018https://books.google.com/books/about/Nuts_Bolts_Multi_Tiered_Systems_of_Suppo.html?id=Wl07DgAAQBAJ

Children and their behavioral health Needs

Children- 2010, there were 74.2 million children 17 or under in the US (26 % of the population).

• 54 % were white, non-Hispanic;

• 23 % Hispanic,

• 14 % African-American,

• 4 % Asian-Pacific, and

• 5% all others

• 21 % experienced the signs and symptoms of a DSM disorder during the course of a year.

• 11 % experienced significant impairment

• 5 % experienced extreme functional impairment.

• 75 to 90% of students in need of services do not receive them.

6

National Center for Children in Poverty

• 75-80 percent of children and youth in need of mental health services do not receive them

• Only 29 percent of youth expressing suicide ideation in the prior year received mental health services

• 31% percent of white children receive mental health services vs 13% of children from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds

• In the child welfare system 85 percent of children in need of mental health services do not receive them

• http://www.nccp.org/publications/pub_929.html#39

10/1/2018

Prevalence & Progression:

Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

About 20% of children present themselves with

diagnosable disorders (i.e., U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services, 1999)

3-6% of children with serious and chronic disorders

(Kauffman, 1997)

Progression of disorders is very predictable

• Externalizing behaviors (severe tantrums,

disobedience)

• Internalizing difficulties (anxiety, depression,

suicide)

7

Conduct problemsNegative Long Term Outcomes

EBD students have the poorest outcomes of the “high incident” disability groups.

Drop-out rate over 50%

After school, 40% are unemployed with no additional training/education.

50% are arrested within 5 years of leaving school

Of EBD drop-outs this figure exceeds 70%!!

(e.g., see Quinn & McDougal, 1998)

Internalizing/affect problemsNegative Long Term Outcomes

• Negative affect can significantly diminish social functioning, student well being, grades, attendance, and later life outcomes (employment, relationships)

• Difficulties include anxiety, depression, compulsive/negative thoughts

• This can lead to the ultimate tragedy

• Students with internalizing difficulties are generally under identified and not referred for support

• Teacher referral and/or nomination procedures still under identify.

• Universal screening procedures dramatically improve identification rates to intervene with students who

are suffering.

8

Internalizing/affect problemsNegative Long Term Outcomes

• Students with internalizing difficulties are generally under identified and not referred for support

• Teacher referral and/or nomination procedures still under identify.

• Universal screening procedures dramatically improve identification rates to intervene with students who are suffering.

Negative affect can significantly diminish social functioning, student well being, grades, attendance, and later life outcomes (employment, relationships)

Difficulties include anxiety, depression, compulsive/negative thoughts

This can lead to the ultimate tragedy

Suicide• Nearly 30,000 Americans commit suicide

every year.

• In the U.S., suicide rates are highest during the spring.

• Suicide is the 3rd leading cause of death for 15 to 24-year-olds and 2nd for 24 to 35-year-olds.

• On average, 1 person commits suicide every 16.2 minutes.

• Each suicide intimately affects at least 6 other people.

10/1/2018

9

Summary: Common Behavioral Health Concerns

Externalizing

• Irritable, ODD, BD, CD, ASPD

• Comorbid/ Co-occurring ADHD, LD, thought disorders, and learning problems

• Also significant number with internalizing problems

Internalizing

• Anxiety, OCD and Depressive disorders all have an increased risk for suicide…

• Comorbid with social, learning, and adaptive problems.

Cognitive/ Attention

also related to problems in

learning, conduct, and social skills

Do these concerns exist in Maryland ?

10/1/2018

10

Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS)conducted by the CDC

• The YRBSS is a national survey, conducted by CDC, provides data representative of 9th through 12th grade students in public and private schools in the United States

• developed in 1990 to monitor health behaviors that contribute markedly to the leading causes of death, disability, and social problems

• surveys are conducted every two years, usually during the spring semester

• From 1991 through 2017, the YRBSS has collected data from more than 4.4 million high school students in more than 1,900 separate surveys

• Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/overview.htm

10/1/2018

2017 Youth Risk Behavior Survey:SURVEY SAYS…..

10/1/2018

Overall High school students report:

• 19.0% had been bullied on school property

• 31% students report persistent feelings of hopelessness

• 17 percent considered suicide

• 7.4% had attempted suicide

11

2017 Youth Risk Behavior Survey: MD Results

In 2017 high school students report that within the last 1-12 months:

• 6-8% carried a weapon in school

• 5-6% carried a gun in school

• 8-12% were threatened/injured with a weapon in school

• 14-16% were bullied

• 8-9% forced to have intercourse

• 28-30% felt hopeless

• 17-19% seriously considered attempting suicide

• 14-15% developed a suicide plan

• Suicide attempt question not asked?

254,000 High School Students in MD

• 18, 000 carried a weapon in school

• 14,000 carried a gun in school

• 25,000 were threatened/injured with a weapon in school

• 38,000 were bullied

• 23,000 forced to have intercourse

• 76,000 felt hopeless

• 45,500 seriously considered attempting suicide

• 38,000 developed a suicide plan

• 17-18,000 will attempt suicide

MD State Report Card, 2016

So in Maryland in high school students within the last 1-12 months:

12

Orienting Activity

Students with social-emotional needs often have challenging

behavior:

• Talk to folks near you about challenging behavior you encounter at school

• What are the top 3 social-emotional/ behavioral concerns students present

10/1/2018

Other Compounding Factors

Factors

• Trauma

• ACES

• Poverty

• Mobility

• Family Community support

• Others

13

Adverse Childhood Experiences and Trauma

What is Trauma?

• For many children, trauma exposure is a common and chronic experience. Chronic trauma exposure during childhood significantly increases the risk for emotional/behavioral disorders and academic failure. Common trauma experienced by children and youth include physical or sexual abuse, neglect, domestic violence, gun violence, and loss of a parent or loved one.

10/1/2018

14

Types of Trauma

• Acute Trauma: Single events, such as a death in the family or a natural disaster that affect an individual.

• Chronic Trauma: Repeated events, such as exposure to violence and assaults to oneself or others around you.

• Complex Trauma: A form of chronic trauma, that is inflicted upon an individual by their caregivers, and the impact that these events have on the individual over time.

10/1/2018

Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs)

10/1/2018

The Kaiser study included over 17,000 students beginning in the mid 90’s and concluded that roughly 13% of children encounter 4 or more ACES.

15

How does ACES impact students?

• ACES are strongly linked to negative outcomes for kids and schools, including:

• Academic Failure & School Dropout

• Behavioral Difficulties

• Aggression

• Physical & Mental Illnesses

• School to Prison Pipeline

• Substance Abuse & Opioid Addiction

• Unhealthy Relationships.

• Risk Taking Behaviors

• Suicide

10/1/2018

16

ACE & School Performance

• Traumatized children are:

• 2.5x more likely to fail a grade in school

• score lower on standardized achievement tests

• more likely to have struggles in receptive & expressive language

• suspended & expelled more often

• more frequently placed in special education

Trauma Informed Care

• Asks what happened to you as opposed to what’s wrong with you

• Trauma informed care takes into account past trauma and the resulting coping mechanisms when attempting to understand and treat a student having difficulties.

• trauma-informed systems approaches that aim to shape organizations to be more trauma-sensitive in their work with children and families

• trauma-specific treatment interventions that can be implemented at the individual-level to address trauma and its symptoms.

10/1/2018

17

• Process by which children and adults acquire and effectively apply the knowledge attitudes and skills necessary to

• Understand and manage emotions

• Set and achieve positive goals

• Feel and show empathy for others

• Establish and maintain positive relationships

• Make responsible decisions

What is Social- Emotional Learning?

• Human development domains:

• Social, emotional, cognitive, linguistic, and academic are all central to learning!

• Strengths/ weaknesses in one area impede development in others

• Students learn more and classrooms are more effective when they have the skills and competencies to manage emotions, focus their attention, build and maintain relationships, persevere, and problem solve (David Osher et al. 2016 &

Stephanie M. Jones and Emily J. Doolittle 2017)

Why is SEL important?

18

• Self Awareness

• Self Management

• Social Awareness

• Social Relationships

• Responsible Decision Making

SEL competencies that are important for student success include:

• Recognizing one’s own emotions, thoughts and values AND how they influence behavior

• Identifying emotions

• Recognizing strengths

• Self-confidence

• Self-efficacy

• Ability to accurately assess one’s strengths and limitations

• “Growth mindset”

Self-awareness

19

• Ability to successfully regulate one’s emotions, thoughts, and behaviors in different situations

• Impulse control

• Stress management

• Self-discipline

• Self-motivation

• Organizational skills

• Ability to set and work towards both personal and academic goals

Self-management

• Ability to take perspective of and empathize with others

• Perspective-taking

• Empathy

• Appreciating diversity

• Respect for others

• Recognizing family, school and community supports

• Understanding social and ethical norms for behavior

Social Awareness

20

• Ability to establish and maintain healthy relationships

• Communication

• Clearly

• Listening

• Social engagement

• Cooperating with others

• Resisting inappropriate social pressure

• Relationship-building

• Seek and offer help when needed

• Teamwork

• Negotiating conflict constructively

Relationship Skills

• Ability to make constructive choices about personal behavior and social interactions based on ethical standards, safety concerns, and social norms.

• Identifying problems

• Analyzing situations

• Solving problems

• Evaluating

• Reflecting

• Ethical responsibility

• Realistic evaluation of consequences of your actions as well as the well-being of yourself and others

Responsible decision-making

21

• Development of strong SEL skills increases the likelihood of academic & behavioral success throughout their education

• Competencies provide a foundation for improved student adjustment and academic performance resulting in:

• Increase in positive social behaviors

• Fewer conduct problems

• Less emotional distress

• Improved test scores and grades

• Shown to positively impact student college and career trajectories

How does SEL instruction influence student outcomes?

• SEL impact is long-term

• Up to 18 years later, students exposed to SEL in school continue to do better than peers in displaying positive social behaviors and attitudes, encompass empathetic, teamwork and academic skills

• Fewer conduct problems, less emotional distress, lower drug use.

• Early prosocial skills decrease the likelihood of living in/ being on a waiting list for public housing, having any involvement with police before adulthood (Jones, Greenberg & Crowley 2015)

• Impact on Academics

• Students involved in SEL programs show an 11% point gain in academic achievement

Research

22

Rethinking what we do

• With the implementation of ESSA, social-emotional learning has been given a precedence in schools

• While it may take time to perfect, schools around the country have already put into effect TIC learning environments that help the students and their families build up their skillset to best help them succeed

• Hopefully these approaches will replace schools’ typical responses to student misbehavior

• Punishment

• Exclusion

• Crisis counseling

10/1/2018

Through what lens do you view behavior: What do you see?

• Incorrigible, unwilling, unmotivated, vengeful, mean

• FBA- antecedents/functions

• PBIS- expectations, training, reinforcement, data-based

• SEL- in need of instruction

• Victim of trauma/ACES/ poverty

23

Student misbehavior

• What do you see?

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6fS73AFnnk

So what can we do about it?

• All for the problems listed prior are able to be reliably identified, are best treated early, and effective prevention and treatment options exist for use in the schools.

• Evolution of models for addressing these types of difficulties…….

• Public Health Model

• RTI

• MTSS

• S/L a good example of preventative service

10/1/2018

24

A Public Health Model http://www.uvm.edu/~

galbee/bio.htm

"No mass disorder afflicting mankind is ever brought under control or eliminated by attempts at treating the individual.“

A Public Health Approach

25

The evolution of 3 tiered models of support

Q: What is the foundation for all effective tiered systems of support?

Think about the Evolution of RTI

• RTI started as a preventative approach targeting LD especially in literacy

• Outcomes of LD students were poor.

• Lack of early identification, intervention, and PM hampered efforts

• CBM research provided the foundation for RTI (screening and PM)

26

RTI/ Tiered models require different kinds of assessment

• Screening and PM vs. mastery an diagnosis

• General Outcome Measures (GOM) evolve during CBM research

• ORF for example is a GOM for overall reading ability

• GOMS are not tied to specific programs or interventions

• Can be used for UA and PM across the 3 tiers and across a range of instructional programs

• GOMs can also help to target areas in need of intervention

RtI and BehaviorNeed for Universal Behavior Screening

• Teachers CAN accurately identify young children at high risk of academic and behavioral problems related to school adjustment with a great deal of accuracy (Taylor et al., 2000).

• Schools ARE the ideal setting for large-scale, broad based mental health screening of children and adolescents (Wu et al., 1999).

• early identification and intervention appear to be the “most powerful course of action for ameliorating life-long problems associated with children at risk for EBD” (Hester et al., 2004)

• Yet Behavioral Health Screening occurs in only 2-3% of Districts across the country.

27

MTSS Measure selection and options

Sexy Statistics for Selecting Measures

GROUP THINK

• We’re mostly psychologists right? Let talk

• What are Important psycho-metric considerations when selecting universal screening and progress monitoring measures?

Roger, your my Valid-tine!

28

Selecting a Universal Screening Measure: Technical Adequacy Considerations

Norms-utility

• sample populations based on census data, includes clinical and typical samples

Reliability-accuracy

• internal consistency

• Test retest

• Inter-scorer

• Validity-meaningful, screening ability

• Content

• Concurrent

• Predictive-Screening Accuracy

Selecting a Universal Screening Measure: Is the measure normed/researched with representative groups?

Norms can tell us..• if the measure is appropriate/ useful for

different groups of students

• How the measure will react to important subgroups e.g., ethnicity, SES

• If the measure culturally biased

• How a student’s performance on the test compares to others in the reference group

• How do students with known difficulties compare to those without

• Norms form the basis for the 2 other important adequacy considerations

If the Measure is Normed: Are the samples adequate?Do they reflect the students in your district?

29

Reliable – not valid Reliable & Valid

Not reliable or

valid

Reliability & Validity-

• Tests can be reliable but not valid

• Yet, unreliable test can never be valid

The accuracy/consistency of scores across items, scales, time, raters, populations, etc.

• Relates to the concept of SEM

• The level of acceptable reliability depends on:• the construct being measured

• the way the test scores will be used

• the method used for estimating reliability

Reliability

30

Validity degree to which a test measures what it

was designed to measure.

Kinds of validity

• Construct- how well a test or tool measures the construct that it was designed to measure (e.g., IQ)

• Content- how well a test measures the domains of behavior for which it is intended (e.g., KBIT vs. WISC)

• Criterion- the relationship between test results and some external variable(s)

Criterion Validity- 2 types• Concurrent Validity – Does the

instrument correlate to another criterion? (e.g., how a screener relates to school grades, ODRs, behavioral health)

• Predictive Validity – Does the instrument predict a criterion in the future (e.g., how well does the screener ID students who will develop problems vs. those that don’t

Behavioral Health Screening:Criterion Validity is very Important

Concurrent Validity

• How well does the measure correlate to other important variables? Attendance, grades, ODRs, emotional well being

• Does the screening technique relate to other measures of behavioral health, and important school and social/behavioral variables

Predictive Validity

• Can the screening technique predict important student outcomes

• How well does the screening technique identify those with risk and those without risk

• Screening: Important considerations-classification stats

31

Screening, Predictive Validity, Classification Stats

• Sensitivity

• ability of a test to correctly identify those with risk/ disorder.

• Specificity

• is the ability of the test to correctly identify those without risk/disorder.

• Efficiency/ Correct classification rate

• percentage or proportion of correct group classifications

• False Positive /False Negative

• Instrument predicts an attribute that does not exist

• Instrument predicts the absence of an attribute that exists

Psychometric Levels for Screening Measures

Classification Statistics- Efficiency, Sensitivity, Specificity

• .7o to .74 Moderate/Acceptable

• .75 to .79 Acceptable

• .8 to .89 High

• .9 and up Very high

10/1/2018

Is it accurate

Is it meaningful

How useful is it for screening purposes

32

Summary: Selecting an MTSS Measure

For Screening• Normed/ Studied with representative groups

• Reliably- accurate

• Valid- meaningful

• Relates to important constructs

• Has adequate content

• Relates well to other variables of interest

• Classification stats available- usefulness for screening

For PM: additional considerations

• Is it sensitive to change? (most diagnostics tests are not)

• Will it reflect student progress/intervention response?

• Easy to administer/ able to be frequently administered?

• Useful across student groups, programs, treatments, & tiers of intervention- will it give school teams useful information? 10/1/2018

Selecting MTSS measures for screening and progress monitoring: Be careful!

• Snake oil is dangerous not because of what it is, but because of what is said about it.

• The metaphor is used for a wide range of pseudoscientific claims

• Use your knowledge of psychometrics to select measures

10/1/2018

Bambauer, J. R. 2018. Snake oil speech. Washington Law Review.

33

Technical Adequacy- Reliability correlations between subscalesIs this measure accurate?

10/1/2018

Technical adequacy: concurrent validity correlationsIs this measure meaningful?

10/1/2018

Blank cells indicate no correlation

34

Technical Adequacy- predicative validity/classification statsIs this measure useful for screening in the schools?

10/1/2018

Technical Adequacy- predicative validity/classification statsIs this measure useful for school screening?

10/1/2018

35

U.S. Statistics On Mental Health

• About 20% of children present themselves with diagnosable disorders (i.e., U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1999).

• 3–6% of children with serious and chronic disorders (Kauffman, 1997).

YET!!!!

• Behavior / Emotional screening occurs in less than 3% of districts across the U.S.

36

Shortcomings of Traditional Behavior Rating Scales

• Behavior Rating Scales were develop for diagnostic purposes-identifying individuals in different groupings

• Lengthy, Not change sensitive, Impractical for PM

• Behavior monitoring parallels the evolution of CBM within RTI Emphasis on reliable and valid procedures for screening and progress monitoring

• These differences are usually “trait-related” and not likely to evidence short term change

• Most diagnostic scales are time consuming – meet with resistance

Common Behavioral Screeners

Free:

• Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)

• Student Risk Screening Scale

Commercially available:

• Behavior and Emotional Screening System (BESS)

• Devereux Student Strengths Assessment System (DESSA)

• Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD)

• Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS)

• Behavior Intervention Monitoring & Assessment System (BIMAS)

10/1/2018

37

• Brief Mental Health screening tool for children and adolescents

• Measures internalizing and externalizing behaviors

• Based on key domains of child symptoms described by the DSM-IV

• Used for universal screening and clinical assessment

• Not recommended for Progress monitoring

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) Goodman, 2001

• Teachers & parents (3-17); self-report (11-17)

• 5 scales, 25 questions, 3-10 minutes to complete

• Conduct Problems*

• Emotional Symptoms*

• Hyperactivity*

• Peer Problems*

• Prosocial Behavior

• *Total Difficulties score computed

• Limited reliability and validity ratings and limited evidence for discriminant validity

SDQ Cont’d

38

• Pros:

• Brief & free

• Technically sound

• Cons:

• Items are skewed toward externalizing behaviors

• Has not been re-normed in a while

• Uses DSM-IV criteria

SDQ Cont’d

• Designed to identify students with antisocial behavior patterns (externalizing)

• Initially designed for elementary students

• Has been found to be an acceptable for use in middle/ high school

• SRSS-IE:

• Internalizing component, but has not been shown to accurately identify students at-risk

• Highly correlated (r=.79) with Aggressive Behavior subscale of the Child Behavior Checklist

• Entire class is screened in 10 minutes

Student Risk Screening Scale (Drummond 1994)

Intensely researched by Kathleen Lane

39

• Four point Likert scale for seven terms

• Steals

• Lies, cheats, sneaks

• Behavior problems

• Peer rejection

• Low academic achievement

• Negative attitude

• Aggressive behavior

• Initial validation studies- SRSS scores predict negative academic and behavioral outcomes (1.5- 10 years later) (Drummond, Eddy, Reid & Bank 1994)

• Moderate to high reliability estimates

SRSS Cont’d

• Pros

• Free

• Quick administration (~15 minutes for an entire class)

• Easy to understand/ interpret

• Technically adequate

• Cons

• Not a good/ accurate tool to use for identifying students with internalizing problems

• Behavioral indicators/ rating scale are not operationally defined… teacher perception

• Not for progress monitoring

SRSS Cont’d

40

• Reliable, quick, and systematic tool used to determine behavioral and emotional strengths and weaknesses.

• Abbreviated version of BASC2

• Items are chosen from the 4 scales on the BASC-2 (externalizing, internalizing, school problems, adaptive skills)

• Accurate classification when using the BESS student form to predict full BASC-2 self-report

Behavior and Emotional Screening System (BESS) Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007

• Ages 3- 18 (Preschool- College)

• 25-30 items; 5-10 minutes per student

• Four domains:

• Externalizing

• Internalizing

• Adaptive Skills

• School Problems

**One T-score computed**

• Reliable (.71-.97); Valid (.51-.94)

BESS Cont’d

41

• Teacher, parent and self-report

• School-wide universal screening tool but..

• Not for progress monitoring

• One T-score computed (T-score of behavioral and emotional risk)

• Inconclusive on where the issue really is

• Poor for intervention purposes

BESS Cont’d

• Pros:

• Measures behaviors associated with internalizing and externalizing problem behaviors and academic competence

• Utilizes large, nationally-representative sample

• Available through AIMSweb

• Cons:

• Can be expensive (online protocols & scoring),

• Time-consuming

• Not designed for intervention design or progress monitoring

BESS Cont’d

42

• Developed as a class wide screener to screen social and academic behaviors of all students in a class.

• States that it can be used for progress monitoring but there is unconvincing evidence that it is sensitive to student change

• Level of performance for the student using criterion-referenced performance is identified for each area.

• Universal Screener

Social Skills Improvement System, Performance Screening Guide (SSIS) Elliot & Gresham, 2008

SSIS Cont’d

• Ages 3-18

• Only teacher forms

• 30 minutes to complete

• Four areas assessed:

• Prosocial Behaviors

• Motivation to Learn

• Reading Skills

• Math Skills

• Paper forms and manuals sold separately

• Compute scoring available, score entry required

10/1/2018

43

SSIS, Cont

Pros

• Strong reliability, adequate validity

• Test-retest reliability range from .59-.67 on 4 scales

• Measures problem behaviors, social and academic competence

• User friendly

Cons

• Subscription based, 10-25 min. to complete, scoring required

• No classification statistics reported

10/1/2018

• Originally designed to be a screening tool for social and emotional behavioral problems of elementary students

• Coined the “gold standard” of behavioral screening

• Identify students at risk for internalizing and externalizing behaviors

• Identifies behaviors that may impede academic and social functioning

• Hopes to lead to earlier intervention

• NOT recommended as a diagnostic tool for Special Education services

Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD) Walker & Severson, 1992

44

• Three stage gated screening process for grades K-9, can be completed in one hour or less

• Stage 1: teacher nominates and rank- orders students

• 10 students (per class) are identified as externalizers

• 10 students (per class) are identified as internalizers

• Top 3 are chosen as students who display these bx’s in each category

• Stage 2: Teacher completes adaptive and maladaptive behavior rating scales on the 3

• Stage 3: Observation of the three students

• Uses a Teacher Nomination system- tends to under identify internalizing students

SSBD Cont’d

• Reliability (.74-.90), Validity-adequate

• Issues with test-retest: Top three listed for externalizing and internalizing behaviors, one month later only 69% of those nominations stayed the same

• Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value validity- not provided

• Requires time to implement all 3 gates. Schools tend to just use gate 1.

• Not designed for Progress Monitoring

SSBD Cont’d

45

Behavior Intervention Monitoring Assessment System (BIMAS2) McDougal, Bardos & Meier 2011

Development

• Developed using Meier’s Intervention Item Selection Rule (IISR) Model for creating “change sensitive measures”

• This model identifies items that are sensitive to gains made in treatment or intervention

• Standardized nationally on roughly 5000 students K-12 including a clinical sample

• Technical manual available

• Adequate to high reliability

• Established validity with the Connors and prediction of clinical sample

• Known classification stats

10/1/2018

Behavior Intervention Monitoring Assessment System (BIMAS2)

• Multi-informant: teacher, parent, self (12-18), clinician

• 34 item Standard Form (Screening)

• Behavioral Scales:

• Conduct,

• Negative Affect,

• Cognitive/ Attention

• Adaptive Scales:

• Social

• Academic Functioning

Flex Form

• Customized brief assessment that can be used for PM (customizable to treatment goals)

• System-wide Interventions

• Small Group Interventions (Tier 2)

• Individual Interventions (Tier 3)

• Server based, automatically scored, reports and graphs available immediately

10/1/2018

46

THE BIMAS2 was designed for Screening, Progress Monitoring, Program Evaluation

• Behavior Screenings allow for quick identification of students for additional assessment

• Progress Monitoring allows school personnel to measure student change over time

• Program Evaluation allows schools to evaluation intervention programs and treatments

Behavior Intervention Monitoring Assessment System (BIMAS2)

Behavior Intervention Monitoring Assessment System (BIMAS2)

Pros• Brief, repeatable, technically adequate, K-12,

multiple rating forms, server based

• Screening- valid, reliable, know classification stats. Measures important constructs for behavioral health

• Progress monitoring-sensitive to change, standard and flex forms available

• Program evaluation- users can compare effects across intervention, students, schools, providers

Cons

• Subscription based- free trials offered by subscription required after 3 months

• Uploading data into the system during initial set up takes some technical skills

10/1/2018

47

Screener Sensitivity Specificity Positive Predictive

Value

Negative Predictive

Value

SDQ Parent .47 .94 .46 .96

Teacher .43 .95 .44 .94

Self .23 .94 .35 .92

SRSS Teacher --

Screening Classification StatsFree

Screener Rater Sensitivity Specificity Positive Predictive

Value

Negative Predictive

Value

BESS Parent .53-.82 .91-.96 .50-.73 .92-.97

Teacher .53-.80 .90-.95 .47-.77 .92-.96

Self .52-.66 .93-.96 .59-.75 .91-.95

BIMAS Parent .80 .78 .55 .92

Teacher .84 .86 .68 .93

Self .76 .69 .55 .85

SSIS Not provided

SSBD Not provided

Screening Classification Stats Commercial Scales

48

Change….

Algozzine, B., Wang, C., & Violette, A. S. (2011). Reexamining the relationship between academic achievement and social behavior. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 13, 3-16.

Burke, M. D., Hagan-Burke, S., & Sugai, G. (2003). The efficacy of function-based interventions for students with learning disabilities who exhibit escape-maintained problem behavior: Preliminary results from a single case study. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 26, 15-25.

McIntosh, K., Chard, D. J., Boland, J. B., & Horner, R. H. (2006). Demonstration of combined efforts in school-wide academic and behavioral systems and incidence of reading and behavior challenges in early elementary grades. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 8, 146-154.

McIntosh, K., Horner, R. H., Chard, D. J., Dickey, C. R., and Braun, D. H. (2008). Reading skills and function of problem behavior in typical school settings. Journal of Special Education, 42, 131-147.

Nelson, J. R., Johnson, A., & Marchand-Martella, N. (1996). Effects of direct instruction, cooperative learning, and independent learning practices on the classroom behavior of students with behavioral disorders: A comparative analysis. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4,53-62.

Wang, C., & Algozzine, B. (2011). Rethinking the relationship between reading and behavior in early elementary school. Journal of Educational Research, 104, 100-109.

Academic-Behavior Connection

49

School Teachers Can Improve Students' Mental Health, Study Finds

• examined 43 studies that evaluated nearly 50,000 students who had received school-based mental health services

• that mental health interventions that were integrated into the regular curriculum were the most effective. These programs typically targeted behavior problems such as aggressiveness and failing to follow directions

9/28/2018

MTSS for Behavior or Delivery of Comprehensive Behavioral Health Services for ALL students

A Comprehensive Behavioral Health Model (CBHM) is a district wide response to the need for behavioral health support for all students in our schools. CBHM is a multi-tiered system designed to give all students access to high-quality behavioral and mental health support.

50

CBHM Outcomes

CO

HO

RT

ON

E

51

CBHM OutcomesC

OH

OR

T O

NE

PROFICIENT

CBHM Outcomes

52

CBHM OutcomesImproved scores on MCAS/PARCC

Increased social skills

Improved School Climate

Increased time on learning

Reductions in suspensions

Reductions in problematic behavior

53

Commonalities between effective models

• Early Screening for identifying students at risk

• Emphasis on tier 1 programming to address needs of all.

• Tiered levels of intervention for matching student need

• A reliance on Data and Data-based decision making to drive implementation

9/27/2018

The Mercedes Benz

54

CBHM at Tier 1

It’s all about the TEAM

55

TIER I PBIS ESSENTIALS• EXPECTATIONS DEFINED1

• EXPECTATIONS TAUGHT2

• REINFORCEMENT SYSTEM3

• CONSEQUENCE SYSTEM4

• DATA SYSTEM5

What is the TFI?• The TFI offers a valid, reliable, and efficient measure of

the extent to which school personnel are applying the core features of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS).

• The TFI is comprised of three sections • Tier I: Universal SWPBIS Features

• Tier II: Targeted SWPBIS Features

• Tier III: Intensive SWPBIS Features

(Algozzine et al., 2014)

56

Why use the TFI?

(Algozzine et al., 2014)

Guide Implementation

Support improved student

outcomes

Enhance the work of PBIS teams

Utilize the most efficient fidelity

measure

57

BEHAVIOR

Trauma

Academic

Difficulties

Peer /Adult

Relationships

Substance

Abuse

….

Universal Screening for CBHM

Twice a year, teachers complete a brief (34 item)

rating scale for each student.

Sample Item:

In the last week, how often did this student appear

comfortable when relating to others?

never / rarely / sometimes / often / very often

58

Work Smarter, Not Harder

Resource Activity: School teams

• Identify all “teams” or meetings that happen in your building

• Identify which “tier” each team is primarily concerned with addressing

• Is there overlap between teams?

• Any recommendations for combining teams?

Resource Activity: Practices

• Identify programs, procedures, and supports for students’ social-emotional, behavioral, and mental health.

• Identify the “tier” that is addressed by each of the practices listed above

• Any recommendations for improving these practices and supports?

59

Resource Mapping Activity

What do you do in your school:

• Talk to folks near you about the programming/ supports you have at each of the 3 tiers

• Are these supports effective? If so indicate the data used to demonstrate effectiveness.

9/28/2018

In the beginning...

So I need to ask every teacher in this building to complete this universal screener for every student twice a year?!?!?!

60

Working to understand the data

Tier 1 Team

61

Purpose

The purpose of Data Based

Decision Making

School teams need to

understand how to use

universal assessment data

to make systematic

decisions about instruction.

Outcomes

The outcomes of Data Based Decision

Making

School teams will become proficient in

identifying the most efficient strategies

that work to create safe and supportive

schools for all students.

62

Process

The process of Data Based Decision

Making

▫ Team Analysis

▫ Team Action Planning

Grow the Green!

● Continuous Improvement

● Developed by schools○ Grade Level Teams

○ Tier 1 Team

● Goals:○ Assessment Literacy & inquiry

cycle

○ Avoid using data as a hammer

○ Help educators/teams reach

consensus & action

Grow the

green

to mellow the

yellow

& stop the

spread

of the

red!

63

Grow the Green!

Step 1. Define the problem

Step 2. Develop a plan

Step 3. Implement the plan

Step 4. Evaluate the progress

64

65

Step 2. Define the problem & develop a plan, continued

Example: Conduct and academic functioning continue to be

opportunities for growth across our school-level data. As a tier 1

team, we have seen improvements with the introduction of our

school-wide reward system (e.g. PRIDE Bucks), but we feel the

next step to support implementation is the introduction of PBIS

lesson plans across the settings of our school.

DATA BASED DECISION MAKING:

Data Review Protocol

66

Step 4. Evaluate the Progress

Review your progress at your team meeting after your end date.

Evaluate the effectiveness of the school strategy by answering the

following questions:.

● Was the implementation plan carried out with fidelity? If not,

state the reason.

● Was the implementation plan effective? Why or Why not?

● Does the data indicate that you need to maintain, decrease or

change the implementation strategy?

DATA BASED DECISION MAKING:

Data Review Protocol

Grade level Teams

67

1st Grade Data Grow the Green - Grade Level Team

68

How to determine effect size

Gene Glass approach

• Uses a standardized value of the effect size of a given treatment

• By standardizing the effect size, we can compare effect sizes obtained from different measurements.

• Similar concept to comparing results from different achievement tests by using standard scores.

D = Mean of control group - Mean of treatment group

Standard deviation of the control group (or pooled SD)

69

.40.30

.15

0

.50

.60

.70

.80

.90

1.0REVER

SE

ZONE OF

DESIRED

EFFECTS

Effect Sizes: Outcomes of Behavioral

Health

Reynolds, Wilson, & Hooper (2012)

Effect Size

refers to the

magnitude of

the impact on

student

outcomes

.40.30

.15

0

.50

.60

.70

.80

.90

1.0REVER

SE

ZONE OF

DESIRED

EFFECT

S

Effect Sizes: CBHM (Boston via Hattie)

Cognitive Attention

+0.8

Effect Size

refers to the

magnitude of

the impact on

student

outcomes

70

Conduct

+1.0

.40.30

.15

0

.50

.60

.70

.80

.90

1.0REVER

SE

ZONE OF

DESIRED

EFFECT

S

Effect Sizes: CBHM

CBHM

Effect Size

refers to the

magnitude of

the impact on

student

outcomes

Negative

Affect

+1.2

.40.30

.15

0

.50

.60

.70

.80

.90

1.0REVER

SE

ZONE OF

DESIRED

EFFECT

S

Effect Sizes: CBHM

Effect Size

refers to the

magnitude of

the impact on

student

outcomes

71

Academic Functioning

+0.9

.40.30

.15

0

.50

.60

.70

.80

.90

1.0REVER

SE

ZONE OF

DESIRED

EFFECT

S

Effect Sizes: CBHM

Effect Size

refers to the

magnitude of

the impact on

student

outcomes

Social

+0.9

.40.30

.15

0

.50

.60

.70

.80

.90

1.0REVER

SE

ZONE OF

DESIRED

EFFECT

S

Effect Sizes: CBHM

Effect Size

refers to the

magnitude of

the impact on

student

outcomes

72

IMPROVED OUTCOMES FOR AT-RISK STUDENTS

• Three years of BIMAS data reveal that students who demonstrate risk on any of the scales measured experience significant improvements.

• While improvement is statistically significant for all scales, students with internalizing concerns experience the most significant improvement.

MTSS

Essential

Components

73

DBDM activity- grow the green. T1

T2

ASSESSMENT:

Universal Screening - Fall 2017

74

Tier 1 + vs. Tier 2

If 25% or more of the

students in the class are in

the yellow or red on

Negative Affect:

Classwide intervention with

support of School

Psychologist or Intern

If less than 25% of the

class is in the yellow or red

based on Negative Affect:

6 week small group

intervention delivered by

the School Psychologist or

Intern

19 students identified for tier 2 groups

1 2nd grade class identified for tier 1+

Tier 1 + vs. Tier 2

Tier 2 groups: 1 time per week for 30 minutes, size of the group

ranged from 2-6 students and length ranged from 4-18 sessions

depending on the needs of the group

5 total intervention groups facilitated by School Psychologist

and 3 School Psychology Interns

Tier 1+: 1 time per week for 40 minutes, whole class, 2 school

psychology interns facilitated the group with support from the

classroom teacher

75

Timeline over one school year

September 2016: Training materials developed

Grade level team meetings

Late September/early October 2016: Baseline data collected

Late October 2016: Tier 1+ started

Early November 2016: Tier 2 groups started

Matching Intervention

to Student Needs:

Factors to Consider

~trauma-informed

practices

~culturally responsive

practices

(Kuypers, 2011)

76

T3 sceening info in psych report

77

DATA BASED DECISION MAKING

Examples

10/1/2018

78

Tier 1Reviewing Screening Data:

• See data Review Sheet:

• Review data

• Define a problem

• Set a goal

• Develop a plan (implement and evaluate)

10/1/2018

Examining the data: what do you see?

156

79

Examining the data: what do you see?

157

Tier one: Intervene with Conduct

scale items

appeared angry.

engaged in risk taking behavior(s).

fought with others (verbally, physically, or both).

lied or cheated.

lost his/her temper when upset.

was aggressive (threatened or bullied others).

was suspected of using alcohol and/or drugs.

was sent to an authority for disciplinary reasons.

was suspected of smoking or chewing tobacco.

• Increase reinforcement for positive expectations

• Teach social problem solving, anger management, cooperation.

• Emphasize prosocial skills

• Create connections with “at risk” students

• Special roles, responsibilities, jobs

10/1/2018

80

Your turn!!!

159

What do you see now?

160

What do you see now?

81

The Social Scale

shared what he/she was thinking about.

spoke clearly with others.

maintained friendships.

appeared comfortable when relating to others.

was generally friendly with others.

worked out problems with others.

attended his/her scheduled therapy appointments. (Clinician Form)

161

Tier one: Intervene with Social Skills

scale items

shared what he/she was thinking about.

spoke clearly with others.

maintained friendships.

appeared comfortable when relating to others.

was generally friendly with others.

worked out problems with others.

• Team Time: Working with others near you create 3-5 intervention approaches for increasing social skills

• Given that 36% of students are in the red level what is your goal for the spring

10/1/2018

82

UA data is also reviewed to ID at risk students

163

To assess ch

ang

e over tim

e.

164

Press to reveal

score

comparisons

83

And to assess the magnitude of change.

165

Tiers 2Progress monitoring for students at risk

• Review students at risk in one or more areas

• Verify with other data

• Select program base on need

• Set up PM and goals

• implement and evaluate

10/1/2018

84

Progress Monitoring: Assessing meaningful change

• Percentage of Non-overlapping data (PND)

• Reliable change Index (RCI)

• Effect Size

Data Based Decision

Making: BIMAS 2Joelle Traub & Chris Baber

85

In November...

Screened the entire school using the BIMAS-2

● Conduct

● Negative Affect

● Cognitive/ Attention

● Social

● Academic Functioning

Results showed…

Kindergarten

86

Results showed...

1st Grade

Results showed...

5th Grade

87

Social Emotional Learning Stations (K & 1)

Two students from each classroom

● 8 kindergarten

● 6 first grade students

Focus on an area of concern:

● Working out problems with others

● Being friendly

● Sharing his/her thoughts

● Feeling comfortable talking with others

Met once a week for 30 minutes

You Make the Call

• Was the intervention effective ?

If so in what areas

• Working out problems with others

• Being friendly

• Sharing his/her thoughts

• Feeling comfortable talking with others

10/1/2018

88

Results (SSLS)

1. Worked out problems with others 2. Appeared comfortable when relating to others

Hedges g= .5

PND: 78%

Hedges g= .43

PND: 100%

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Ave

rage

Item

Sco

re

Question 1

Question 1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11A

ver

ag

e It

em S

core

Question2

Question2

Bas

elin

e Intervention

Results (SSLS)

3. Was generally friendly with others 4. Shared what he/she was thinking about

Hedges g= .22

PND: 22%

Hedges g= .37

PND: 78%

89

Recommendations

• Adopt a more formal approach

• Measure and improve fidelity

• Grade level groups

• Consult with educators

• Use of evidence-based interventions

• Increase the frequency of the groups

• Classroom observations

Tiers 3Evaluate treatment programs for students with known difficulties

• Select program based on need

• Set up PM and goals

• implement and evaluate

10/1/2018

90

Anger Management Treatment Study

Students referred for difficulties with

behavioral control

N = 46 (ages 12 to 18 years)

Gender: 32 males and 14 females.

Race/Ethnicity:

30 African American,

2 Hispanic &

14 Caucasian students

Mean 20 weeks of treatment

Pre-Post Intervention Performance of an Anger Management Treatment Group: BIMAS–Teacher T-scores

Statistically significant change in theoretically expected direction

BIMAS-T Scale Pre-Test Post-Test t Cohen’s d

ConductM 65.9 59.3

9.2 1.5SD 4.8 3.7

Negative AffectM 63.0 53.9

6.6 1.0SD 10.7 7.7

Cognitive/ AttentionM 63.3 55.3

7.3 1.2SD 6.6 6.9

SocialM 30.0 34.4

−3.4 −0.7SD 5.5 7.2

Academic FunctioningM 41.9 45.7

−5.2 −0.8SD 4.9 4.1

Note. N = 46. All ts significant at p < .01.

Cohen’s d values of |0.2| = small effect, |0.5| = medium effect, and |0.8| = large effect.

91

Pre-Post Intervention Performance of an Anger Management Treatment Group: BIMAS–Parent T-scores

Statistically significant change in theoretically expected direction

BIMAS-P Scale Pre-Test Post-Test t Cohen’s d

ConductM 66.6 53.5

12.7* 2.6SD 5.8 4.3

Negative AffectM 60.8 47.1

10.4* 1.7SD 9.5 6.9

Cognitive/ AttentionM 59.4 49.5

10.3* 2.0SD 5.4 4.6

SocialM 31.7 37.5

−4.7* −1.0SD 4.9 6.9

Academic FunctioningM 40.0 45.7

−7.3* −1.3SD 4.4 4.1

Note. N = 46. All ts significant at p < .01.

Cohen’s d values of |0.2| = small effect, |0.5| = medium effect, and |0.8| = large effect.

Pre-Post Intervention Performance of an Anger Management Treatment Group: BIMAS–Self-Report T-scores

Statistically significant change in theoretically expected direction

BIMAS-SR Scale Pre-Test Post-Test t Cohen’s d

ConductM 65.5 52.2

13.8* 2.8SD 5.4 3.8

Negative AffectM 59.2 44.6

11.5* 1.8SD 9.8 6.5

Cognitive/ AttentionM 62.7 49.6

12.9* 2.4SD 6.6 4.2

SocialM 35.1 39.5

−4.5* −0.8SD 6.2 4.8

Academic FunctioningM 38.9 46.2

−10.1* −1.8SD 5.0 3.0

Note. N = 46. All ts significant at p < .01.

Cohen’s d values of |0.2| = small effect, |0.5| = medium effect, and |0.8| = large effect.

92

Multi-Tiered Systems of Support On-line Resources

Attendance, Academics, Behavior, Social Emotional, Suicide Prevention

93

Tier One Interventions

PBIS• Administrative Support

• Staff buy in

• Identify expectations

• Teach expectations

• Monitor expected behavior

• Acknowledge/Encourage expected behavior

• Correct behavioral errors (continuum of consequences)

• Use data for decision-making

Others

• Connect with Kids

• Second step

• Positive Action

• Full listing WWCH

• https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/FWW/Results?filters=,Behavior

10/1/2018

Tier 2 Interventions

• Second Stephttp://www.cfchildren.org/second-step

• Stop and Thinkhttp://www.projectachieve.info/stop-think/stop-and-think.html

• Behavior Education Program/ Check In Check Outhttp://www.pbisworld.com/tier-2/check-in-check-out-cico/

• Ripple Effectshttp://rippleeffects.com/

• WhyTryhttp://www.whytry.org/

• More at:

• https://www.misd.net/mtss/behavior_tier2.html

10/1/2018

94

Tier 3 interventions

• FBA/BIP

• CBT/DBT

• Incredible Years

• Full Listing What Works Clearing House

• https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/FWW/Results?filters=,Behavior

10/1/2018

Boston Public Schools Comprehensive Behavioral Health Model

• Boston Public Schools CBHM http://cbhmboston.com/

• Large and well developed MTSS model

• Many resources for school based folks

95

The RTI Action Network

• The RTI Action Network http://www.rtinetwork.org/

• Essential Elements, Checklists, SLD Toolkit

Michigan’s Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative (MIBLSI)

• Michigan’s Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative (MIBLSI) https://miblsi.org/

• Lots of resources in Evaluation, Training Materials, and Presentations sections

96

Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, State of Washington

• Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, State of Washington http://www.k12.wa.us/MTSS/Resources.aspx#health

• Numerous resources for MTSS

Attendance

• Screening

• Communicate attendance policies and expectations with caregivers and staff

• Materials-

• http://www.attendanceworks.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/AWTeacherToolkit-August-2014-new2.pdf

97

Attendance • Progress Monitoring

• Attendance Works:

• http://www.attendanceworks.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/AWParentEngagementToolkitfinal6.11.pdf

• Attendance Counts:

• https://getschooled.com/dashboard/tool/343-attendance-counts?type=tool

Intervention Resources

• Student Attendance Success Plan-http://www.attendanceworks.org/tools/for-parents/student-success-plan-facilitator-handout/

• Toolkit- http://awareness.attendanceworks.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/AAM-toolkit-2.0-040814.pdf

98

Intervention Resources

• Self-Assessment- http://www.attendanceworks.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/District-and-Community-Self-Assessment-Tool-3-27-14.pdf

• Report on Absenteeism http://new.every1graduates.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/FINALChronicAbsenteeismReport_May16.pdf

Academics

• Screening

• http://www.p12.nysed.gov/biling/docs/RTIGuidance-Final11-10.pdf

99

Academics

• Progress Monitoring

• http://www.fcrr.org/FAIR_Search_Tool/FAIR_Search_Tool.aspx

• Curriculum based measurement-

• http://www.interventioncentral.org/curriculum-based-measurement-reading-math-assesment-tests

Academics

• Intervention Resources

• Curriculum-Based Measurement Warehouse-

• http://www.interventioncentral.org/response-to-intervention

• wright_NECSD_Acad_Beh_Intvs_26_28_Jan_2011_Handout.pdf

100

Academics

• Intervention Resources

• http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R00547943CE5AC66.pdf

• http://www.rti4success.org/

• http://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-309458376/comparing-computer-adaptive-and-curriculum-based-measurement

Academics

• Intervention Resources

• http://www.nasponline.org/publications/booksproducts/bp5samples/141_bpv122_8.pdf

• http://ad.vwcs.net/dlt/JenRTI/Resources/CBM%20PM%20research/Evaluation%20of%20PM%20Outcomes%20Christ.pdf

• http://www.jimwrightonline.com/pdfdocs/cbaManual.pdf

101

Behavioral • Screening

• http://www.wrightofer.com/uploads/2/0/5/6/20561318/examining_the_effects_of_school-wide_positive_behavioral_interventions.pdf

• http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/behavior-supports/schoolwidebehavior

• http://www.nasponline.org/resources/factsheets/pbs_fs.aspx

Behavioral

• Progress Monitoring

• ChartDog- http://www.interventioncentral.org/teacher-resources/graph-maker-free-online

• Class Dojo- https://www.classdojo.com/

• PBISWorldhttp://www.pbisworld.com/data-tracking/

• SUNY Oswego-http://www.oswego.edu/~mcdougal/web_site_4_11_2005/

• http://miblsi.cenmi.org/MiBLSiModel/Evaluation/Measures/StudentRiskScreeningScale.aspx

102

Behavioral

http://www.bimas2.com

mcdougal.bimas2@gmail.com

Behavioral

• Intervention Resources

• http://www.pbisworld.com/

• http://challengingbehavior.fmhi.usf.edu/do/resources/teaching_tools/ttyc.htm

• http://miblsi.cenmi.org/MiBLSiModel/Evaluation/Measures/StudentRiskScreeningScale.aspx

• http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/131/3/e1000.full.pdf+html

103

Intervention Resources

• http://www.escambia.k12.fl.us/pbis/rtib/Tier%202%20Intervention%20Toolbox.pdf

• http://www.icareby.org/sites/default/files/spr352sugai.pdf

• School-Wide PBShttps://www.osepideasthatwork.org/toolkit/pdf/SchoolwideBehaviorSupport.pdf

Contact Information

James McDougal, Psy.D

Director, School Psych Program

SUNY Oswego

BIMAS-2 Senior Author

mcdougal@oswego.edu

mcdougal.bimas2@gmail.com

315-480-5816

Jillian Archer, NCSP

jarcher@bostonpublicschools.org