SWPBS:Where Did the Triangle

Come From?

George SugaiOSEP Center on PBIS

University of ConnecticutMay 17, 2006

www.pbis.org

www.swis.org

George.sugai@uconn.edu

OBJECTIVES

• Celebrate your accomplishments & progress

• Review SWPBS features that relate to sustainability & expansion

• Look at some recent data

pbis.org

OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions &

Supports

• USF, KU, UK, MU, UNC, UF, UO & UConn

• IL EBD-PBIS Network, Shepperd-Pratt, May Institute

• www.pbis.org

Center Logic: SWPBS

Successful individual student behavior support is linked to host environments or school climates that are effective, efficient, relevant, & durable(Zins & Ponti, 1990)

Behaviorism

ABA

PBS Foundations• Behavior & physiology• Learned behavior• Behavior & environment• Behavior lawfulness

• Observable behavior• Socially important questions• Applied settings• Functional relationship

PBS

PBSFeatures

Science of Human

Behavior

Local Context& Culture

Prevention Logic

NaturalImplementers

Evidence-Based

Practices

SystemsChange&

Durability

Continuum ofBehavior Support

SYST

EMS

PRACTICES

DATASupportingStaff Behavior

SupportingStudent Behavior

OUTCOMES

Supporting Social Competence &Academic Achievement

SupportingDecisionMaking

4 PBS Elements

Primary Prevention:School-/Classroom-Wide Systems for

All Students,Staff, & Settings

Secondary Prevention:Specialized Group

Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior

Tertiary Prevention:Specialized

IndividualizedSystems for Students

with High-Risk Behavior

~80% of Students

~15%

~5%

CONTINUUM OFSCHOOL-WIDE

INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR

SUPPORT

Academic Systems Behavioral Systems

1-5% 1-5%

5-10% 5-10%

80-90% 80-90%

Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•High Intensity

Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•Intense, durable procedures

Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response

Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response

Universal Interventions•All students•Preventive, proactive

Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive

Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success

Brief Primer on “Triangle”

Why?• It’s showing up beyond Center

website

• “Basics” are being overlooked

• It’s a guide, not a standard

Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A. J., & Lynn, N. (2006). School-based mental health: An empirical guide for decision makers. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida. The Louis De la Parte Florida mental Health Institute, Department of Child and Family Studies, Research and Training Center for Children’s Mental Health.

http://rtckids.fmhi.usf.edu

“Triangle” ?’s you should ask!

• Where did it come from?

• Why not a pyramid or octagon?

• Why not 12 tiers? 2 tiers?

• What’s it got to do w/ sped?

• Where did those % come from?

Original logic: Public Health & Disease Prevention

Commission on Chronic Illness, 1957; Larson, 1994;Mrazek & Haggerty, 1994)

• Tertiary (FEW)– Reduce complications,

intensity, severity of current cases

• Secondary (SOME)– Reduce current cases of

problem behavior

• Primary (ALL)– Reduce new cases of

problem behavior

Prevention Logic for All(Walker et al., 1996)

• Decrease development of new problem behaviors

• Prevent worsening of existing problem behaviors

• Redesign learning/teaching environments to eliminate triggers & maintainers of problem behaviors

• Teach, monitor, & acknowledge prosocial behavior

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1

Mean Percentage of Students by Major ODR rate 04-05 673 schools Grades K-6 (292,021 students)

6+ ODRs

2-5 ODRs

0-1 ODR

88 (10)

9 (6)

3 (4)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1

Mean Percentage of Students by Major ODRs 04-05 255 schools, Grades 6-9 (170,700 students)

6+ ODRs

'2-5 ODRs

'0-1 ODRs

75 (13)

16 (7)

9 (7)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1

Mean Percentage of Students by Major ODRs 04-05 67 schools, Grades 9-12 (62,244 students)

6+ ODRs

'2-5 ODRs

'0-1 ODRs

20 (12)

11 (12)

69 (21)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1

Mean Percentage of Students by Major ODRs 04-05 167 schools, Grades K- (8-12) (65,862 students)

6+ ODRs

'2-5 ODRs

'0-1 ODRs

77 (16)

15 (12)

8 (8)

Bethel School District Office Discipline Referrals

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

K Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12

Grade Level

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

SWIS summary 04-05 (Majors Only)1210 schools, 595,742 students

Grade Range Number of Schools

Number of Students

Mean ODRs per 100 per school day

K-6 673 292,021

Mean = 434

.39 (sd=.43)

6-9 255 170,700

Mean = 669

.96 (sd=.72)

9-12 67 62,244

Mean = 929

1.28 (sd=1.32)

K-(8-12) 167 65,862

Mean = 394

.88 (sd=.96)

Alt/JJ 48 3,915

Mean = 82

11.89 (9.03)

SWIS summary 04-05(Out of school suspensions [OSS]…Events)

Grade Range Number of Schools

Number of Students

Mean OSS per 100 students

K-6 673 292,021

Mean = 434

11.35 (18)

6-9 255 170,700

Mean = 669

46.38 (55)

9-12 67 62,244

Mean = 929

54 (84)

K-(8-12) 167 65,862

Mean = 394

34 (48)

Alt/JJ 48 3,915

Mean = 82

241 (216)

SWIS summary 04-05(Out of school suspensions [OSS]…Days)

Grade Range Number of Schools

Number of Students

Mean Days of OSS per 100 students

K-6 673 292,021

Mean = 434

10.9 (19)

6-9 255 170,700

Mean = 669

60 (72)

9-12 67 62,244

Mean = 929

67 (67)

K-(8-12) 167 65,862

Mean = 394

n/a

Alt/JJ 48 3,915

Mean = 82

314 (374)

What’s SWPBS look like?• Team- & data-based school-wide implementation• 3-4 year commitment for systems change• Small # positively stated expectations (within 1

min.) visible, defined, taught, & encouraged• >80% of kids/adults state expectations & give

behavioral example in context• >80% of kids receive at least weekly

acknowledgement• >70% of kids received 0 or 1 major disciplinary

referral• <10% received >2 major disciplinary referrals

Agreements

Team

Data-based Action Plan

ImplementationEvaluation

GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION

PROCESS: “Getting Started”

Initiative, Project,

Committee

Purpose Outcome Target Group

Staff Involved

SIP/SID/

etc

Attendance Committee

Character Education

Safety Committee

School Spirit Committee

Discipline Committee

DARE Committee

EBS Work Group

Working Smarter Team Matrix

Initiative, Committee

Purpose Outcome Target Group

Staff Involved

SIP/SID

Attendance Committee

Increase attendance

Increase % of students attending daily

All students

Eric, Ellen, Marlee

Goal #2

Character Education

Improve character

Improve character All students

Marlee, J.S., Ellen

Goal #3

Safety Committee

Improve safety

Predictable response to threat/crisis

All students

Has not met

Goal #3

School Spirit Committee

Enhance school spirit

Improve morale All students

Has not met

Discipline Committee

Improve behavior

Decrease office referrals

All students

Ellen, Eric, Marlee, Otis

Goal #3

DARE Committee

Prevent drug use

All students

Don

EBS Work Group

Implement 3-tier model

Decrease office referrals, increase attendance, enhance academic engagement, improve grades

All students

Eric, Ellen, Marlee, Otis, Emma

Goal #2

Goal #3

Sample Team Matrix

Data: Big Ideas

• Always develop questions first

• Accuracy of data linked to quality of data systems

• Context matters…interpret available data on local context

• Link intervention decisions to local data interpretations & desired outcomes

Nonclass

room

Setting S

ystems

ClassroomSetting Systems

Individual Student

Systems

School-wideSystems

School-wide PositiveBehavior Support

Systems

SCHOOLWIDE

1 Common purpose & approach to discipline

2. Clear set of positive expectations & behaviors

3. Procedures for teaching expected behavior

4. Continuum of procedures for encouraging expected behavior

5. Continuum of procedures for discouraging inappropriate behavior

6. Procedures for on-going monitoring & evaluation

CLASSROOM-WIDE

• Classroom-wide positive expectations taught & encouraged

• Teaching classroom routines & cues taught & encouraged

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

• Active supervision

• Redirections for minor, infrequent behavior errors

• Frequent precorrections for chronic errors

• Effective academic instruction & curriculum

NONCLASSROOM SETTINGS

• Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged

• Active supervision by all staff

– Scan, move, interact

• Precorrections & reminders

• Positive reinforcement

SECONDARY/TERTIARY INDIVIDUAL

• Behavioral competence at school & district levels

• Function-based behavior support planning

• Team- & data-based decision making

• Comprehensive person-centered planning & wraparound processes

• Targeted social skills & self-management instruction

• Individualized instructional & curricular accommodations

SW PBS Practices Evidence-based Practices

                                                                  

                                                                  

“Ohio Integrated Systems Model for Academic & Behavior Supports”

• Big Ideas in Beginning Reading

• DIBELS

• Florida Center for Reading Research

• Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement

• National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems

• North Central Regional Educational Laboratory

• Oregon Reading First

• Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports

• School Wide Information Systems (SWIS)

• What Works Clearinghouse

 

                                                                   

      

Other SWPBS Outcomes

ODR Admin. BenefitSpringfield MS, MD

2001-2002 2277

2002-2003 1322

= 955 42% improvement

= 14,325 min. @15 min.

= 238.75 hrs

= 40 days Admin. time

ODR Instruc. BenefitSpringfield MS, MD

2001-2002 2277

2002-2003 1322

= 955 42% improvement

= 42,975 min. @ 45 min.

= 716.25 hrs

= 119 days Instruc. time

PBIS Messages

• Measurable & justifiable outcomes

• On-going data-based decision making

• Evidence-based practices

• Systems ensuring durable, high fidelity of implementation

Have a great school year!

George.sugai@uconn.edu

www.pbis.org www.swis.org