Schoolwide Positive Behaviour SupportLeadership Team Training

Day 1

Louise O’KellyPositive Behaviour Support Consultant

WMR 2012 schoolsFebruary 2012

Today...

Consider:

•The rationale for implementing SWPBS

•The logic, systems and practices of the process

•What building a continuum of support entails.

•The role of data in our work.

Tomorrow…

• Develop an action plan for our school

• Establish meeting processes and timetable.

Getting there…..

•Implementation practices, structures, & processes

•Outcomes & examples

•Brief activities

“Map”

• 2+ years of team training• Annual “refresher” events• Coaching support @ school & regional levels• Regular self-assessment & evaluation data• State/regional coordination

Tasmanian Context“Reactive models around explicit deficit centred behaviour management programs are the most common approaches to handling behaviour issues. Such deficit models of behaviour management do not appear to be working.”

(Atelier Learning Solutions, 2004)

Traditional discipline approaches tend to produce outcomes for students which are opposite to those articulated in the our curriculum.

Australia

Behaviour problems in schools are;

‘ongoing, growing and of national concern’ (p.3)

MCEETYA Student Behaviour Management Project (2002)

Queensland

Behaviour and behaviour management issues in schools and the development, approval, application and review of school-based policies on behaviour management, including school disciplinary absences, remain contentious and the subject of ongoing public and political debate. The historical connotation of ‘behaviour management’ is that of negative behaviour and its amelioration” (p.2).

Queensland Government MACER Report (2005)

TraditionalTraditional

• Traditional, and more reactionary, school discipline procedures (e.g., those that rely on punishment and exclusion) are generally ineffective in either reducing challenging behaviours or increasing desired behaviour

(e.g., Mogan-D’Atrio, Northrup, LaFleur and Spera, 1996).

9

School-related Factors Affecting Violence

Probability increased if a student: felt he/she spent a lot of time

in class copying out of textbooks or off the blackboard.

felt his/her teacher spent more time controlling the class than teaching.

felt that his/her fellow students were racist.

more than 25% of the student’s school teachers had less than five years experience.

Probability decreased if a student:felt that students making racist comments were reprimanded by teachers for doing so.

felt that teachers at the student’s school stop bullying if they are aware of it.

had found out the school rules formally (through classroom instruction, or in an assembly).

10

Features of schools with reduced levels of Features of schools with reduced levels of violence in schools:violence in schools:

• explicit school rules that are taught.• an equitable school discipline policy.• highly structured teaching programs• with positive rewards, and• ability appropriate curriculum.• staff who actively intervene to prevent or stop bullying.• high proportion of experienced teaching staff.• staff who respond rapidly and effectively to student complaints of

provocation• or harassment, and• working peer-mediation programs.

(NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2005)11

12

Teacher Well-BeingTeacher Well-Being

• The use of ineffective and inappropriate interventions has a detrimental effect on the well-being of teachers.

• Finding workable solutions is of benefit to all – students, teachers and parents.

(Murik, Shaddock and Spinks, 2005)

13

Issues for TeachersIssues for Teachers

• Some of the recommended strategies for responding to difficult behaviour were considered too–Individualised–Time consuming–Resource intensive

(Maag, 2001)

Pre service issuesPre service issues

• 65% beginning teachers DON’T feel that their pre-service education prepared them for dealing with the needs of:–Students with disabilities–Students with low socio-economic status–Students from non English speaking backgrounds

14

In service issues

• Supporting students with additional needs• IT• Behaviour and discipline

OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey; 2009‘Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments’

Community perceptions, media reporting & government responses

‘A battle is brewing to contain a 26 per cent spike in students being suspended from Queensland schools over the past three years. The alarming wave of aggressive and disrespectful behaviour from southeast and north Queensland students comes as the Government pours another $28.6 million into “positive behaviour strategies” this financial year.’ (p.1)

Brisbane Courier Mail 2008

Australian Policy Context“implement policies, programmes and processes to nurture a

safe and supportive school”

“proactive and oriented towards prevention and intervention”

“regularly monitor and evaluate their policies and programmes so that evidence based practice supports decisions and improvement”

“recognise the critical importance of pre service and ongoing professional development in creating a safe and supportive school environment” (p.8-9)

National Safe Schools Framework (2003)

Initiatives and Reviews:Where we were...

•A consistency of response in relation to the ineffectiveness of current practicein improving student outcomes

•A lack of confidence or ‘efficacy’ on the part of principals and teachers to effectivelyteach students with difficult behaviour, manifested in repeated requests forprofessional learning and support

•An overuse of sanctions and consequence based approaches reflecting a tendencyto attribute cause for misbehaviour primarily to student factors

•A concern about the lack of any systematic and systemic approach to studentbehaviour that aligned with Departmental values and with teaching and learningpractices.

Common assumptions about academic errors

Common assumptions about behaviour mistakes

Students are trying to make the correct response.

Students are trying to be disruptive, that is to make an incorrect response.

Errors are accidental. Errors are deliberate.

Errors are inevitable. Students are refusing to cooperate.

Learning requires exploration. Students should not explore limits; they should obey them.

Students who are having difficulties need additional or modified teaching.

Students who are having difficulties should be punished.

Students who achieve good work deserve some recognition

Students should behave appropriately without needing recognition.

Behavioural HabitsBehavioural Habits

21

2 Worries & Ineffective Responses to Problem Behaviour

• Get Tough (practices)

• Train-&-Hope (systems)

Get Tough• Clamp down

• Review rules (again and again)

• Increase continuum and consistency of consequences

Sugai, 2002

Get Tougher

• Zero tolerance policies

• Increased suspension & exclusion

• Off site educational placements

Sugai, 2002

“Get Tough” Problems• Foster environments of control

• Triggers & reinforces non-acceptable behaviour

• Compromises the student-teacher relationship

• Weakens relationship between academic & social behaviour learning

Sugai, 2002

Focus on Behaviour Errors• Challenging behaviour gets worse

• Classes get disrupted

• Children who challenge start hanging out together

• Adults feel powerless

Science of behaviour has taught us that students….

• Are NOT born with “bad behaviors”• Do NOT learn when presented contingent aversive

consequences

……..Do learn better ways of behaving by being taught directly & receiving positive feedback….consider function

Getting Tough Is EnoughBelief that disruptive behaviour should not be tolerated because it inhibits the education of other students and that raising the intensity of punishment is the most effective way to curtail behaviour.

Reprimands, detention, suspension, expulsion and loss of privileges are most common responses to disruptive behaviour.

These are among the least effective strategies for reducing unwanted behaviour.

A strong, consistent policy of punishment and exclusion for problem behaviours – without a balanced system of teaching and rewarding expected behaviours is associated with increases in– aggression, – vandalism, – truancy and,– dropouts

Focusing On The Difficult FewAssuming that if the behaviour of the ‘difficult few’ could be contained (or relocated!) the school climate would be acceptable.

One of the three levels of effective disciplinary structure is a system for addressing a small number of students with chronic and intense disruptive behaviour.

It is not an error to focus on these students, but it is a mistake to focus on these students without first implementing preventions and at risk practices.

Schoolwide discipline is not achieved one student at a time.

Procedures must be in place to build schoolwide social competence.

Too often efforts to remove or contain the small number of the most disruptive students simply results in identification of an ever-increasing number of these students.

Looking For The Quick FixBuilding effective schoolwide discipline takes time.

A reasonable period to design and establish the three major disciplinary systems is 3 to 5 years.

A dangerous trap is to embark on a schoolwide disciplinary effort with the assumption that a program can be identified, adopted and implemented within a few months.

Schools with effective disciplinary systems typically build them over time.

Finding One Powerful TrickSchoolwide discipline is not achieved through a single strategy.

Deceptive to think that a single strategy or procedure exists to meet all the needs of a school.

Effective schoolwide discipline involves the development of at least three distinct systems.

Effective responses to schoolwide discipline problems will involve the design of an action plan that builds and integrates multiple components of a schoolwide disciplinary structure.

Believing Someone Else Has The SolutionSchool teams will need to develop and adapt disciplinary systems that meet the unique features of each school.

There is no one unified system of discipline that has or is likely to emerge as the miracle solution for schools.

School principals committed to building effective disciplinary systems need to lead the integration and ownership of those elements that establish the social culture of a school.

Believing That More Is BetterA common trap is to add more and more reform initiatives to an already overburdened staff.

It is less difficult to identify a new idea that needs implementation than to identify the existing activities that will be terminated to recover resources needed for the new initiative.

As the intensity and diversity of disciplinary problems in schools increase, educators become vulnerable to the lure of the newest fad.

Innovation is added with no consideration beyond surface level appeal (packaging, ease of use, cost).

Activity• Consider your school community and

discuss to what extent do all or any of these beliefs have some influence.

• Report one question or concern from your team.

10 mins.

Worry #2:“Train & Hope”

REACT toProblemBehavior

REACT toProblemBehavior

Select &ADD

Practice

Select &ADD

Practice

Hire EXPERTto TrainPractice

Hire EXPERTto TrainPractice

WAIT forNew

Problem

WAIT forNew

Problem

Expect, But HOPE for

Implementation

Expect, But HOPE for

Implementation

Problem Statement

“We give schools strategies & systems for developing positive, effective, achieving, & caring school & classroom environments, but implementation is not accurate, consistent, or durable. Schools need more than training.”

Schoolwide Approach

“ ...although long proposed, until recent years schools have struggled to agree on a common and shared approach to problem behaviour, and even more difficult has been to integrate strategies to improve behaviour with teaching and learning in the context of a schoolwide, positive plan”

Cook & Radler (2006)

...a typical school can use up to fourteen different responses to problem behaviour at any one time, and that strategies and responses are most often implemented inconsistently or imprecisely.

Gottfredson (2000)

Model of teacher change. Guskey

Implications for Professional Development

• Recognise that change is a gradual and difficult process for teachers.

• Ensure that teachers receive regular feedback on student learning progress.

• Provide continued follow up support.

Why SWPBS?Why SWPBS?• School friendly

• Practical

• Systematic

• Research informed

• Ongoing development

• Values alignment

• Incorporated community

• Inclusive

43

School Leadership Teams

SWPBS District Coaches

Central/regional coordination and training

Schools Are Important And Good

• Schools can provide:– Regular, predictable, positive learning and

teaching environments– Positive adult and peer models– Regular positive reinforcement– Academic and social behaviour development

and success

Positive Behaviour Support is

“a broad range of systemic & individualised strategies for achieving important social & learning outcomes while preventing problem behaviour with all students.”

(Sugai & Horner, 2001;2002)

Positive Behaviour Support

• Apply three tiered prevention logic– Primary for all– Secondary for some– Tertiary for a few

Primary Prevention:School-/Classroom-Wide Systems for

All Students,Staff, & Settings

Secondary Prevention:Specialised Group

Systems for Students Whose Behaviour Places

Them At-Risk of Disconnecting From School

Tertiary Prevention:Specialised

IndividualisedSystems for Students at Whose Behaviour Places

Them at High-Risk of Disconnecting From School

~80% of Students

~15%

~5%

CONTINUUM OFSCHOOLWIDE

INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOUR

SUPPORT

SWPBS Logic!

Successful individual student behaviour support is linked to host

environments or school climates that are effective, efficient, relevant, &

durable(Zins & Ponti, 1990)

SYST

EMS

PRACTICES

DATASupportingStaff Behaviour

SupportingDecisionMaking

Supporting Student Behaviour

PositiveBehaviour

Support OUTCOMES

Social Competence &Academic Achievement

•Supports that are needed to enable the accurate and durable implementation of the practices of

SWPBS

•Interventions and strategies that are research validated

•Information that is used to identify status, need for change, and effects of interventions

Academic and behaviour outcomes that are endorsed and emphasised by students, families and educators

Nonclass

room

Setting S

ystems

ClassroomSetting Systems

Individual Student

Systems

School-wideSystems

Schoolwide PositiveBehaviour Support

Systems

1. Common purpose & approach to discipline

2. Clear set of positive expectations & behaviours

3. Procedures for teaching expected behaviour

4. Continuum of procedures for encouraging expected behaviour

5. Continuum of procedures for discouraging inappropriate behaviour

6. Procedures for on-going monitoring & evaluation

Schoolwide Systems

What does SW-PBS look like?• At School-wide Level:

– You can identify the behavioural expectations within 5 min of entering the school.

– Students state the behavioural expectations• Ask 10 randomly selected students

– Students are recognized for appropriate behaviour• Ask 10 randomly selected students if they have been

acknowledge for appropriate behaviour in past week.– All staff know the expectations– Data are collected and used for decision-making– Team-based process– Families actively included

Nemarluk

WanguriAs we build our identity we will incorporate the

social story of: 

1. Be safe

2. Be kind

3. Be your best

ShepherdsonSWPBS Team = 6 (was 4) + whole school

• Keep your child safe = Dharray \amatha\ nhokala\aw yothuw

•  • SAFE     =  Marrpara\

• SMART   =  Gadama\

• STRONG =  {^\

Activity

• Do you have a set of school wide rules/expectations?

• Are they fewer than 5?

• Are they positively stated?

• 10 mins

Acknowledging SW Expectations: Rationale

• To learn, humans require regular & frequent feedback on their actions

• Humans experience frequent feedback from others, self, & environment– Planned/unplanned– Desirable/undesirable

• W/o formal feedback to encourage desired behaviour, other forms of feedback shape undesired behaviors

Are “Rewards” Dangerous?

“…our research team has conducted a series of reviews and analysis of (the reward) literature; our conclusion is that there is no inherent negative property of reward. Our analyses indicate that the argument against the use of rewards is an overgeneralization based on a narrow set of circumstances.”

– Cameron, 2002• Cameron & Pierce, 1994, 2002• Cameron, Banko & Pierce, 2001

1. Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged

2. Active supervision by all staff– Scan, move, interact

3. Precorrections & reminders4. Positive reinforcement

Nonclassroom Setting Systems

School Rules/Expectations Orientation Friday 15/2

•Block 1-Prep-Grade 2 - 9.15-10.50•Block 2 – Grade 3/4 – 11.20-12.40•Block 3 – Grade 5/6 – 1.35 – 3.00

Toilets Play Equip

Assembly

Office &

Mr T

Buses P.E. Music

Prep C 9.15 9.25 9.40 9.50 10.00 10.10 10.20

Prep 1 T 9.25 9.35 9.50 10.00 10.10 10.20 10.30

1/2 BP 9.35 9.45 10.00 10.10 10.20 10.30 10.40

1/2 BY 9.45 9.55 10.10 10.20 10.30 10.40 10.50

3/4 LM 11.20 11.30 11.40 11.50 12.00 12.10 12.20

3/4 D 11.30 11.40 11.50 12.00 12.10 12.20 12.30

3/4 B 11.40 11.50 12.00 12.10 12.20 12.30 12.40

5/6 F 1.35 1.45 1.55 2.05 2.15 2.25 2.35

5/6 H 1.45 1.55 2.05 2.15 2.25 2.35 2.45

5/6 SB 1.55 2.05 2.15 2.25 2.35 2.45 2.55

64

65

Canteen queues

Outdoor Gym

1. Classroom-wide positive expectations taught & encouraged

2. Teaching classroom routines & cues are taught & encouraged

3. Ratio of 6-8 positive to 1 negative adult-student interaction

4. Active supervision5. Redirections for minor, infrequent behaviour errors6. Frequent precorrections for chronic errors7. Effective academic instruction & curriculum

Classroom Setting Systems

We now have a clear set of schoolwide expectations (or rules)

What does SW-PBS look like?

• At the Classroom Level:– Classroom expectations defined and taught– Maximum time allocated for instruction– Maximum opportunities to respond correctly– High rates of positive reinforcement & supervision– Individualized support– Positive adult-to-student interactions exceed negative.

1. Behavioural competence at school & district levels2. Function-based behaviour support planning 3. Team- & data-based decision making4. Comprehensive person-centred planning & wraparound

processes5. Targeted social skills & self-management instruction6. Individualised instructional & curricular accommodations

Individual Student Systems

What does SW-PBS look like?• At the Individual Student Level:• Function based behaviour support is foundation

for addressing problem behavior– Emphasis on directly teaching effective, efficient, &

relevant social skills– Person-centered, strength-based approach taken– Team- & data-based behavior support– Linked to school-wide support

What does PBS look like: STATE Level?

• Local & durable training, coaching, & evaluation capacity are established.

• Data- & team-based action planning & implementation are operating.

• Full continuum of behaviour support is available to all students.

Action Planning

• Tools available:– SET

– EBS

– TIC

– Current school discipline data

• What’s missing?

• What’s the data not telling us?

• Is it reliable?

Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET)

Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET)

Data Collection Protocol Conducted annually.

Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET)

Using SET ResultsThe results of the SET will provide schools with a measure of the proportion of features that are:

1. not targeted or started,

2. in the planning phase, and

3. in the implementation/ maintenance phases of development toward a systems approach to schoolwide effective behaviour support.

The SET is designed to provide trend lines of improvement and sustainability over time.

BHS 2006

2520

0

50

75

40

100

44

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perc

enta

ge in

Pla

ce

ExpectationsDefined

ExpectationsTaught

Reward System ViolationsSystem

Decision Making Management Local Support ImplementationAverage

BHS 2007

100

80

50

62

87

60

100

77

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

in P

lac

e

ExpectationsDefined

ExpectationsTaught

Reward System ViolationsSystem

Decision Making Management Local Support ImplementationAverage

BHS 2008

100 100 100

50

100

87

75

87

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perc

enta

ge in

Pla

ce

ExpectationsDefined

ExpectationsTaught

Reward System ViolationsSystem

Decision Making Management Local Support ImplementationAverage

BHS2009

75

40

83

50

75

94100

73.9

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perc

enta

ge in

Pla

ce

ExpectationsDefined

ExpectationsTaught

Reward System ViolationsSystem

Decision Making Management Local Support ImplementationAverage

Regional DataSchoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET Data)

At Risk Children – December 2008

• 57% Primary Prevention

• 29% Secondary Prevention

• 14% Tertiary Prevention

Data collected from Red Cards, Bum bags, Withdrawal Room Book, Teacher data (RAMP)

 

 

At Risk Children – June 2011

• 91% Primary Prevention

• 6% Secondary Prevention

• 3% Tertiary Prevention

Data collected from Red Cards, Bum bags, Withdrawal Room Book, SWIS data

Activity

• Read the SET scoring guide and discuss.

• If you have your school’s graph discuss priority areas.

• One question or concern from each team.

• 10 mins

Effective Behaviour Support (EBS)

Effective Behaviour Support (EBS)

Data Collection ProtocolConducted annually, preferably in February

and November.Completed by all staff.Use results to design annual action plan.

Effective Behaviour Survey (EBS)

Looking at various contexts• School-wide • Non-Classroom• Classroom• Individual students

AsksWhat practices are in place? What areas are most important

for action planning? What are our priorities for

improvement?

Non Classroom Settings

Non Classroom Settings: Current Status

0

10

20

30

40

50

In Place Partial in Place Not in Place

Perc

enta

ge

Non Classroom Settings: Priority for Improvement

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

High Medium Low

Perc

enta

ge

………therefore a focus on safety in out of class time

Activity

Complete the school wide and non classroom section of the EBS. Compare your results with your team mates.

20 mins

Using Results from the EBS Self-Assessment Survey

• Is a system in place? (In Place > 50%)

• Is there a need to focus on a system?(Current status of In Place is < 40% and Priority for Improvement is High for > 50%)

• Which system should receive focus first?(Smallest change that will make biggest durable difference)

• Which features of the system need attention?

Working Smarter

Is doing some ‘bits’ of SWPBS enough?

• Many schools provide a rich and supportive range of programs aimed at supporting student success:

– Program Achieve, Mind Matters, Tribes– Mentoring– Peer support, buddy programs– Anti-bullying initiatives– Others

“SWPBS does not replace good programs already in schools. Instead, SWPBS incorporates and builds on current practices to create a systemic approach…”(Iowa Behavioural Alliance, 2004)

Agreements

Team

Data-based Action Plan

ImplementationEvaluation

GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION

PROCESS: “Getting Started”

3-4 YearCommitment

Top 3 School-Wide

Initiatives

Coaching &Facilitation

DedicatedResources

& Time

PrincipalParticipation

3-Tiered Prevention

LogicAgreements &

Supports

• the fundamental difference SWPBS offers in comparison to other behaviour programs/approaches....it is a PROCESS, that is DATA BASED, is supported by SYSTEMS, that seek to improve PRACTICE.

• It is not a quick fix, it does take time and there are NO short cuts