SWPBS Implementation Blueprint - revised

1. SWPBS Implementation Blueprint - revised George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut Mar 25 2010 www.pbis.orgwww.cber.orgwww.swis.org

2. PURPOSE To describe how district & school leadership teams can use updated SWPBS Implementation Blueprint to develop & guide their implementation efforts. • SWPBS Foundations • SWPBS Implementation Guidelines • SWPBS Implementation Blueprint • Discussion

3. SWPBS Foundations

4. “Abbreviated” SWPBS History

5. SWPBS Foundations

6. Colvin, G., & Sugai, G. (1992). School-wide discipline: A behavior instruction model. 1992 Oregon conference monograph. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.

7. Colvin, G., Kame’enui, E. J., & Sugai, G. (1993). School-wide & classroom management: Reconceptualizingthe integration & management of students with behavior problems in general education. Education & Treatment of Children, 16, 361-381.

8. Project PREPARE~1992

9. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (1994). Including students with severe behavior problems in general education settings: Assumptions, challenges, and solutions. In J. Marr, G. Sugai, & G. Tindal (Eds.). The OR conference monograph (Vol. 6) (pp. 102-120). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.

10. Walker, H. M., Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Bullis, M., Sprague, J. R., Bricker, D., & Kaufman, M. J. (1996). Integrated approaches to preventing antisocial behavior patterns among school-age children and youth. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 193-256.

11. “Early Triangle”(p. 201)Walker, Knitzer, Reid, et al., CDC

12. SWPBS is

13. Tertiary Prevention: Specialized Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SUPPORT FEW ~5% Secondary Prevention: Specialized Group Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior ~15% SOME Primary Prevention: School-/Classroom- Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings 23 ALL ~80% of Students

14. 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 Responsiveness to Intervention Academic Systems Behavioral Systems 1-5% 1-5% 5-10% 5-10% 80-90% 80-90% Circa 1996

15. 23 RTI Continuum of Support for ALL Few Some All Dec 7, 2007

16. 23 Behavior Continuum Academic Continuum RTI Integrated Continuum Mar 10 2010

17. Continuum of Support for ALL Math Science Spanish Reading Soc skills Soc Studies Basketball Label behavior…not people Dec 7, 2007

18. Continuum of Support for ALL Anger man. Prob Sol. Ind. play Adult rel. Attend. Coop play Peer interac Label behavior…not people Dec 7, 2007

19. ESTABLISHING CONTINUUM of SWPBS • TERTIARY PREVENTION • Function-based support • Wraparound • Person-centered planning • TERTIARY PREVENTION ~5% ~15% • SECONDARY PREVENTION • Check in/out • Targeted social skills instruction • Peer-based supports • Social skills club • SECONDARY PREVENTION • PRIMARY PREVENTION • Teach SW expectations • Proactive SW discipline • Positive reinforcement • Effective instruction • Parent engagement • PRIMARY PREVENTION ~80% of Students

20. SWPBS Implementation Guidelines

21. Implementation Challenge

22. Supporting Social Competence & Academic Achievement OUTCOMES 15 Supporting Decision Making Supporting Staff Behavior DATA SYSTEMS PRACTICES 1. Implementation is Interactive & Informing Supporting Student Behavior

23. 2. Implementation involves stakeholders at multiple levels State District School Classroom Student

24. 3. Implementation progresses through phases

25. 4. Sustainable Implementation requires continuous regeneration Continuous Self-Assessment Relevance Priority Efficacy Fidelity Valued Outcomes Effective Practices Practice Implementation Local Implementation Capacity

26. 5. Implementation success based on multiple criteria

27. 4 Main Data Concerns

28. 6. Implementation based on scalable evidence-based practices Horner, 2010

29. “Is SWPBS evidence-based practice?” Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (in press). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality. www.pbis.org

30. 17 SWPBS Practices School-wide Classroom • Smallest # • Evidence-based • Biggest, durable effect Family Non-classroom Student

32. 7. Practices must be implemented with integrity Sanetti & Kratochwill, 2009

33. 8. Policy & practice inform each other Fixsen & Blase, 2007

34. 9. Implementation is systemic

35. 10. Implementation decisions based on student responsiveness to intervention RtI

36. 11. Implementation is team-based, strategic action planning process Team Agreements Data-based Action Plan Evaluation Implementation

37. SWPBS Implementation Blueprint - rev

38. SWPBS Implementation Blueprint www.pbis.org

39. User’s Quick Access Guide

40. www.scalingup.org Dean Fixsen Karen Blase UNC

41. Blueprint Self-Assessment

42. Blueprint Blueprint Planning Tool

43. Leadership Team

44. Training Coaching Evaluation Expertise

45. CT Training Capacity Feb 2010 See PBIS Training Blueprint

46. Funding Visibility Political Support Policy

47. Local School/District Implementation Demonstration

48. George.sugai@uconn.edu Robh@uoregon.edu pbis.orgswis.orgcber.org