targeted /small group interventions: a proposed model for tier 2 systems implementation

Targeted /Small Group Interventions: A Proposed Model for Tier 2 Systems Implementation

Tim Lewis, Ph.D. , Barbara Mitchell, Terry Bigby, Ph.D. and Linda Bradley

University of Missouri

Missouri Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support <pbismissouri.org>

OSEP Center for Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports

<pbis.org>

Session Overview

• Part One– Overview/ Basics– “Model” process and essential features

• Part Two– School examples highlighting systems for adults,

practices for students, and data used to guide the process

School-wide PBS Process

See Small Group Catalog and Planning Forms

Practices (what we do for students)

• Clear Outcomes/Objectives• Research supported• Technical assistance input• Stake holder input

Matched to needs of student but not highly individualized

Systems (how we support adults)

• Evaluate Current systems • Allocate/reallocate resources• Develop process/model and forms (adult & student)• Training / information dissemination• On-going support (adult & students)• Develop formative evaluation process (student outcomes, adult use,

success and barriers)

• Provide frequent positive & instructional feedback to staff

All staff aware of entrance/exit and purpose plus follow-along activities

Data (how we make decisions)

• How to identify students / Data Decision rules• Progress along the way– Student outcomes– Adult perceptions

• System analyses / Cost benefit

Staff aware of DDR and process to place students in tier II supports

Policy (how to maintain change)

• Create standard processes• Codify within existing policy• Dissemination to multiple audiences

Create Tier II handbook and review annually

Small Group Starting PointsPre-requisites• Universals firmly in place including classrooms• Data used consistently in team meetingsRequisites• Data decision rules to identify students who need additional

supports supports– Environment– Student

• Progress monitoring plan developed• Equal attention to practices (student support) and systems

(adult support)

Student Support Model Phases of Implementation

Phase 1: Provide Adequate Instruction

Phase 2:Identification Process

Phase 3:Function-based Intervention

Phase 4:Evaluate Outcomes & Make Decisions

Academic Support(s)

Check In/ Check Out

Mentoring Social Skill Club

Targeted Environmental Interventions

Avoid Tasks?

Obtain Attention?

Skill Deficit?

Step 2: Teacher & Team synthesize data to 1) Define Problem 2) Develop Hypothesis 3) Identify Replacement 4) Select Intervention

Step 1: Teacher and Team Partner collect data.

Teacher/Parent Nomination

Data Decision Rules

Universal Screening Instrument

Nonresponder as compared to typical peer? Full access to Tier 1 supports? Is

Identification process accurate and durable?

– Classroom System – Nonclassroom System– Schoolwide System

Tier 1 implemented with fidelity?

If Yes, then

Analysis and/or Full Assessment

Obtain Attention?

Student Support Model

• Phase 1 = Provide Adequate Instruction • Phase 2 = Identification Process • Phase 3 = Function-based Intervention

• Collect Student Information • Select Intervention• Implement Intervention

• Phase 4 = Evaluate Outcomes & Make Decisions

*Team based support throughout each phase

Phase 1 = Provide Adequate Instruction

• Teach, Practice, Acknowledge, Respond Consistently– School-wide, Non-classroom, Classroom– Initial & Data-based, On-going

• Goal = Students have time to respond Teachers have time to know students

• Caveat = Students who can’t wait• Establish Criteria…• Serious/Chronic; Dangerous or violent


Effective Classroom Practice: 1. Expectations & Rules 2. Procedures & Routines 3. Continuum of Strategies to Acknowledge Appropriate4. Continuum of Strategies to Respond to Inappropriate5. Active Supervision6. High Rates of Engagement: OTR7. Activity Sequence & Offering Choice8. Academic Success & Task Difficulty


Was Tier 1 Implemented with Fidelity?Did all students receive adequate instruction?

–SET = score (80/80) within past 18 months –SAS = 80% report systems are in place–Data indicating 80% or more of students

have 0-1 ODR–Classroom Walkthrough Observation Data

Phase 2 = Identification Process

Externalizing Behavior Examples…• Aggression to others or things• Hyperactivity• Non-compliance• Disruptive• Arguing• Defiance• Stealing • Not following directions• Calling out


Internalizing Behavior Examples…• Exhibits sadness or depression• Sleeps a lot• Is teased or bullied by peers• Does not participate in games• Very shy or timid• Acts fearful• Does not stand up for self• Self-injury (cutting, head banging)• Withdrawn


• Teacher Nomination for Assistance–Short/simple–Designed for quick response

Identifies internalizing & externalizing ?Allows for early identification?


• Data Decision Rules–ODR/Classroom Minors–Attendance–Academic Indicators/Grades

Identifies internalizing & externalizing ?Allows for early identification


• Universal Screening Instruments– Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (K-6)

• Walker & Severson, 1990– Strengths & Difficulties Questionnaire (K-12)

• Goodman, 2001 – Behavioral & Emotional Screening System (PreK-12)

• Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2008

Identifies internalizing & externalizing ?Allows for early identification

Phase 3 = Function Based Intervention

• Collect Student Information– Simple FBA

• Standard Protocol = (FACTS)• Team Developed

• Select Intervention– Targeted Environment; Social Skill Group; CICO; Mentoring

(adult or peer); Academic Support• Implement Intervention

– Minimum 4 data points collected over 4 weeks (Sprague et al, 2008, p.79)

Phase 4 = Evaluate Outcomes & Make Decisions

Was the IV implemented with integrity? Does the IV match function of student behavior?

• Use data to determine response to the intervention …– Fade or Continue

• If student has 3-4 consecutive data points below the goal line… (Sadler & Sugai, 2009)

– Modify or Intensify

Phase 1: Provide Adequate Instruction

Phase 2:Identification Process

Phase 3:Function-based Intervention

Phase 4:Evaluate Outcomes & Make Decisions

Academic Support(s)

Check In/ Check Out

Mentoring Social Skill Club

Targeted Environmental Interventions

Avoid Tasks ?

Obtain Attention?

Skill Deficit?

Step 2: Teacher & Team synthesize data to 1) Define Problem 2) Develop Hypothesis 3) Identify Replacement 4) Select Intervention

Step 1: Teacher and Team Partner collect data.

Teacher/Parent Nomination

Data Decision Rules

Universal Screening Instrument

Nonresponder as compared to typical peer? Full access to Tier 1 supports? Is

Identification process accurate and durable?

– Classroom System – Nonclassroom System– Schoolwide System

Tier 1 implemented with fidelity?

If Yes, then

Analysis and/or Full Assessment

Obtain Attention?

Tier 2 Action Plan Checklist

1. Tier 2 Team2. Student Identification Process3. Function-based Matching Process4. Intervention Implementation5. Monitoring Progress, Evaluating Outcomes &

Making Decisions6. Strategies for Communication

System Level Evaluation

Checklist for Individual Student Systems (CISS)• Part I. Foundations– Establish & Maintain a Behavior Support Team– Strategies for Meeting the Needs of Students–Monitoring & Evaluation

• Part II: Targeted Interventions• Part III: Intensive Individual Interventions

System Level Evaluation

Benchmarks of Advanced Tiers (BAT)• Implementation of SW PBS• Foundations for Tiers II & III– Commitment– Student Identification–Monitoring & Evaluation

• Tier 2 Support Systems• Tier 2 Strategy Implementation

Essential Features

Emphasis is on continuum and interrelated components of data,

practices, systems

Targeted/Small Group Interventions: Building Blocks

• Teach/build pro-social replacement behaviors• Attend to possible function of the problem

behavior• Build maintenance and generalization

strategies to promote use– Connect points to universals

Targeted/Small Group Interventions

Consider• Not fixed group of students• Student’s needs vary across continuum over

time and within academic/social area• Least intrusive but matched to student need• Response may be environmental changes

without direct student intervention

Structural Analysis Setting Factors Assessment Tool

• Level 1: Classroom Set-up and Structure

• Level 2: Context Specific Activities

• Level 3: Instructional Delivery and Tasks

• Level 4: Student Behavior

Stichter, J. P., Lewis, T. J., Johnson, N., & Trussell, R. (2004). Toward a structural assessment: Analyzing the merits of an assessment tool for a student with E/BD. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 30, 25-40.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Baseline Level 1 Level 1 & 2 Level 1, 2 & 3 Follow-Up

Mean Percent of Teacher Behavior

High Structure Materials Accessiblity Rules Visible Assistance Consistent Answering Consistent

Important ThemesCommon misperception is that these strategies

will “fix” the student and the classroom teacher does not need to be an active participant since “specialists” or outside staff are often involved in the intervention – Important to stress that these interventions will require high level of involvement among ALL staff within the school building

Data: Assessment• Focus is on sorting student for service, not “diagnosis and

placement.”

• Social-Behavioral Concerns– Social skills– Self-management

• Academic Concerns– Peer Tutors– Check in– Homework club

• Emotional Concerns– Adult mentors

Practices: Building Blocks

• Teach/build pro-social replacement behaviors• Build maintenance and generalization

strategies to promote use• Attend to possible function of the problem

behavior

Small Group / Targeted Practices

Social Skill Training Self-Management Mentors Check-in Peer tutoring / Peer Network Academic support

Social Skills• Identify critical skills (deficit or performance problem)

• Develop social skill lessons– “Tell, show, practice”

– Match language to school-wide expectations• Generalization strategies

Must provide clear & specific activities all staff follow to promote generalization & make sure staff using strategies

STUDENTS RECEIVING A "BEHAVIOR PLAN"EIGHT OR MORE REFERRALS

1999/2000 vs. 2000/2001

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

A* B C D E F* G H I J* K L M N O P

STUDENT NAME

NUMBER OF REFERRALS

REFERRALS 99-00 REFERRALS 00-01

AVERAGE PERCENT DECLINE IN REFERRALS

50%%

*STUDENT LEFT SCHOOL DISTRICT BEFORE THE END OF THE ACADEMIC YEAR

Self-Management• Teach self-monitoring & targeted social skills simultaneously• Practice self-monitoring until students accurately self-monitor

at 80% or better• Periodic checks on accuracy

It is not simply giving students a self-evaluation check-list, must teach and practice to fluency and reinforce both accurate self-evaluation and appropriate behavior

Daily Sessions

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

g e o

f Int

erva

ls On

- Task

Functional Analysis Self-Management Baseline Self -Management

LPLT

HPLT

HPHT 1

HPHT 3

HPHT 2

HPLT + SM

HPLT

HPLT + SM

LPLT = Low peer & teacher attention HPLT = High peer & low teacher attention HPHT 1 = High peer & high teacher attention (VI 1minute) HPHT 2 = High peer & high teacher attention (VI 2 minute) HPHT 3 = High peer & high teacher attention (VI 3 minute) HPHT + SM = High peer attention & self management

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Figure 4. Eddy's percentage of intervals on-task across functional analysis and functionalreplacement intervention

Mentoring• Focus on “connections” at school

– Not monitoring work– Not to “nag” regarding behavior

• Staff volunteer– Not in classroom– No administrators

• Match student to volunteer– 10 minutes min per week

Emphasize the importance of being ready to meet with student on a regular, predictable, and consistent basis. Goal is not to become a “friend,” but a positive adult role model who expresses sincere and genuine care for the student

43

23

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Number of Behavior Referrals

YR2 YR3

Pals - Combined Discipline ReferralsSept-J an

YR2 vs. YR3

46%

Average5.38

Average2.88

AMOUNT OF TIME PER WEEKSPENT WORKING DIRECTLY WITH STUDENT

9

6

3

0

0

0

10 minutes or less

10 to 20 minutes

20 to 30 minutes

30 to 40 minutes

40 to 60 minutes

More than 60 minutes

NUMBER OF TEACHERS

Check-in• Focus is on academic & social compliance

– AM / PM• Teach strategies to enter work /objectives to accomplish

– Agendas• All staff must prompt/reinforce student use

Emphasize the goal is to fade out the check-in so the focus should be on reinforcing students for accurately self-monitoring and work completion across the school day

Time Out of Class

00.51

1.52

2.53

3.54

4.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Student

Min per day attended

Pre Post

Office Discipline Referrals

0.000.020.040.060.080.100.120.140.160.18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Student

Ave. ODR per day

attended

Pre post

Schools ImplementingTier 2 Support

MO SW-PBS

Center for PBSCollege of EducationUniversity of Missouri

Feature 1: Tier 2 TeamFeature Evaluation Yes No

A tier 2 team is identified to develop T2 process, interventions, & make decisions about students

List of Team Members

Team roles & responsibilities are designated

Team members with assigned roles

Tier 2 team meets at least every 2 weeks Team Meeting Schedule

Meetings are organized and employ a standard format

Copies of agenda

Tier 2 team is provided info about systems, data, practices required for implementation of T2 supports

PD Calendar; Attendance at MO SWPBS coach mtgs

Team conducts an audit to determine existing interventions available

Copy of audit

Team provides support for staff who implement T2 interventions

PD Schedule; faculty meeting agenda

Tier 2 Team Membership

• Principal or Asst. Principal• Universal SW-PBS team member• Faculty with expertise in behavior assessment

and interventions• General Educator with expertise in academic

assessment and intervention

Team Roles & Responsibilities

1) Chairperson/Facilitator

2) Recorder/Secretary

3) Data-base Manager

4) Communication Coordinator

Team Meetings

• The Tier 2 Team meets once every two weeks.• The team utilizes an agenda and follows a

standard format:– Data check for students with multiple minors or majors– Assign additional data collection for students who

meet data decision rule– Update on student progress

• Fidelity of Implementation– Faculty support

2. Student Identification ProcessFeature Evaluation Yes No

School uses data-based process for identifying students

Check each process used: Screening

All school staff are trained in and know process for initiating additional support

Written procedures and PD Schedule

Tier 2 Team systematically schedules time for review of data decision rules and/or screening results to identify

Team meeting minutes

Students identified for additional support have full access to Tier 2 supports

Written procedures

Process for access to intervention is designed for students to get assistance within 3-10 school days of identification

Advanced Tier Data Collection Spreadsheet

Identify/Screen Non-Responders

• Data Decision Rules– ODR/Classroom Minors– Attendance– Grades

• Teacher Nomination/Request for Assistance– Short/simple– Designed for quick response

3. Matching Process

Feature Evaluation Yes No

System for collecting, reviewing, and documenting student data is established.

Written procedures.

A brief process to identify function of behavior is established.

Written procedures or flow chart of process.

A set of research-based interventions, which can be matched to function of concern, is readily available.

Description of each intervention available.

Review of Student Data

• Each school utilizes a data collection spreadsheet.

• A member of the Tier 2 team is selected to work with the grade level team to complete the data collection spreadsheet.

• How to run Tier 2 Interventions/Tier II Data Collection Spreadsheet.xls

Identify Function & Match to Research-Based Intervention

• The schools utilize the Competing Pathway Model to identify the function of each student’s behavior.

• The schools have developed 2 interventions at this time– Academic Assistance Groups

– Check-In/Check-Out

4. Intervention ImplementationFeature Evaluation Yes No

Interventions are consistent with schoolwide expectations

Description of interventions and/or copy of DPR

Each intervention has written materials to describe the core features/purpose

Description of Interventions

Coordinator is designated for each intervention

Description of Interventions

Intervention includes formal process for teaching appropriate behaviors

Teacher Interview

Intervention includes regular opportunities for students to perform appropriate behaviors

Teacher Interview

Implementation requires no more than 10 minutes per day from staff

Teacher Interview

Process for teaching staff to implement P D Schedule

Monitoring Progress, Evaluating Progress and Making Decisions

Feature Evaluation Yes No

An information system is used to monitor the impact of interventions and the system allows for daily collection of behavior ratings.

Individual student behavior rating graphs

Each intervention uses accurate and objective data for monitoring student progress and making decisions

Individual student behavior rating graphs and/or written materials

5. Monitoring Progress, Evaluating Progress and Making Decisions

• Tier 2 team identifies goal(s) and timeline for implementation for each student.

• Record daily on Daily Progress Record (DPR)• Progress Monitor weekly using criteria for

placement in Tier 2 (monitor ODR, classroom minor, or behavior cited on nomination form)

• Team makes determination from progress review: maintain, fade, change intervention

Strategies for Communication Feature Evaluation Yes No

Teachers of students participating in an intervention receive progress updates at least monthly

Format for progress updates is identified.Teacher Interview

Faculty/staff is informed at least quarterly about the number of students receiving interventions and the progress of all.

Format for progress updates is identified.Faculty/Staff Interview

There is a documented process for notifying and routinely updating family/guardian when a student is identified for and receives additional support.

Format for progress updates is identified.Family Interview

6. Strategies for Communication

• Tier 2 team works with each student to develop graph of progress. The student shares the graph each week with teacher/MS team.

• Tier 2 reports numbers of students involved in interventions and response to intervention at each faculty meeting.

• Tier 2 team schedules professional development activities each month.

Derby Ridge Elementary

Derby Ridge Elementary• 700 Students• 80 Teachers and Certified Staff• 62% Free & Reduced• 10% Special Education• Implementation of Universal, Tier 1

Interventions for 6 Years. • 90/90 on SET

Tier 2 System

• Teacher Expectations• Grade Level Teams • Tier 2 Team Representatives• Tier 2 Team • Capacity Building

• All Staff• Grade Level Expertise• Tier 2 Team Expertise

Teacher Expectations• Implement Tier 1 with Fidelity– PBS Checklist– Classroom Universal Checklist

• Review Student Data Regularly to Identify Students Who Need Tier 2 Support

• Communicate With Family and Staff• Implement Interventions with Fidelity

Grade Level Teams• Meet Weekly to Discuss Students Who Meet Data

Decision Criteria• Use Function Based Decision Making– Review Data (Minors, ODRs, Attendance, Academics)– Define Problem Behavior– Match Classroom / Environmental Interventions to

What the Student is Trying to “Get” or “Avoid” through Misbehavior.

• Collaborate and Generalize for Similar Students’ Behavior and Function

Tier 2 Grade Level Representatives

• Guides Grade Level Teams through Function Based Decision Making Process.

• Serves as a Resource to Assist Teachers with Students’ Concerns.

SchoolwideTier 2 Team

1. Developed Tier 2 System2. Develop Small Group Interventions and

Connect with Schoolwide Expectations3. Support Grade Level Team Process4. Communicate with Faculty and Staff About

Tier 2 Process and Interventions5. Provide Professional Development


• Review Tier 1 Implementation with PBS Checklist:– DRE Expectations Matrix is our Social Curriculum – All Staff Teach All Students Weekly “Super Skills” – All Staff Give All Students Specific Performance

Feedback Using “Braggin’ Dragon” Cards – All Staff Give Effective Responses and Follow Continuum

of Responses to Behavior Errors• Review Using PBS Checklist, Classroom Universal

Inventory and Administrative Walk-Through

Phase 2 = Screen for Risk

• Data Decision Rules:– 2 major ODRs from Beginning of Year– Minor Incidents Persist---5 after Sept 30– Attendance / Tardies a Concern—8 per trimester– Academic Concerns – Concern for Students with Internalizing Behavior

• Teacher Nomination• Universal Screening

Phase 3 = Function Based Intervention• Teacher Collects Student Information– Majors (Office) & Minor (Classroom)– Academics & Attendance– Function– Strengths

• Grade Level Team Determines:– Summary of Problem – Replacement Behavior– Student Goal

• Grade Level Team Select Classroom Intervention– Antecedent, Behavior OutComes format– Progress Monitoring Method– Action Plan– Follow Up Date

Small Group Interventions

• In Process of Developing:– Social Skills Club (Redefining Counselor Groups)– Check In/Check Out– Academic Support

Phase 4 = Evaluate Outcomes

• Progress Monitoring for Individual Students in Tier 2:– Determine Student Goal and Progress Monitor – Review Data in Two Weeks and Share with Grade Level

Team

Lessons Learned at Derby Ridge

• Grade level teams need instruction about how to collect, analyze and make data decisions

• It is hard to stick to Tier 2 data rules and not “jump” to Tier 3

• Teachers see “Support” as Outside Classroom• Communication, communication,

communication!

targeted /small group interventions: a proposed model for tier 2 systems implementation

Documents

practices student support

complicated process

individualized supports

bank of existing supports

proposed model

small group catalog

place students

adult use