SCALING UP, ACROSS AND BEYOND

1. SCALING UP, ACROSS AND BEYOND 2012 OSEP Project Directors Conference Washington, DC July 23-25, 2012

2. Session Description We’ve all heard the term “scaling up”, and perhaps also heard the term “scaling across”, and have been encouraged to utilize these strategies. But, what do they mean in practice? And exactly how does one decide to scale up...and where do you start?

3. Learner Outcomes • Articulate “scaling up, across, and beyond”. • Understand the importance of having criteria for going to scale. • Understand first steps to consider in a scaling up/across effort. • Understand effective strategies that are common to each level of scale up. • Understand similarities and differences for scaling up initiatives at the national, state, and project level. • Identify incentives and barriers for scaling up initiatives.

4. Going to scale: Panel organization Moderator: Donna Sobel, University of Colorado Denver Presenters: • Susan Bailey Anderson • Kathy McNulty • George Sugai • Donna Sobel OSEP Planning Committee: • Jennifer Coffey • Linda Krantz • Veronica McDonald • Bill Sharpton

5. Scaling-up at project, SEA/State, multiple states & national levels

6. Scaling up, across and beyond is the capacity to planfully endure

8. Our journey of “going to scale” This work is messy, tension-filled, complex, and emotional as it calls into question long-held beliefs about what we’ve “always done” and realization of our own limitations as we travel our personal paths while trying to support others (educators, policy makers, families, communities) in their work. This work is NOT linear and it is never finished– it requires ongoing systems and structures for dialogue, collaboration, and fine-grained alignment. Engaging in this work calls for a commitment to the “science of implementation”.

9. University of Colorado Denver Urban community teacher education Conceptual framework • Research Intensive Urban University • Graduate (85%) & Undergraduate (15%) • Elementary (K-6) • Secondary (7-12) • SPED (K-12) • 350-400 teacher candidates • Integrated/Merged approach to preparing general & special educators • Professional Development School clinical model with co-teaching as a foundational approach

10. 325-T Grant: Achieving Special Education Equity through Diversity: ASEED Maximizing a social justice framework focusing on the unique knowledge, skills and dispositions of highly effective urban teachers.

11. Initial steps for consideration: Ensuring this work lives far beyond any one person Everything we know about collaborative relationships holds true and impacts sustainability. ASEED Leadership Team • Associate Dean for Teacher & Learning • Associate Dean for Research • Director of Urban Community Teacher Education • Executive Director of the Center for Advancing Practice Collaborative Council • Site Professors and Site Coordinators from 25 PDSs

12. Scaling-up strategies at the project level Planning for generalization Inclusive Education Content: Learning Progression Drawing upon a literature review, recommendations from local experts, and a review of pre-existing syllabi, a detailed matrix was developed to guide faculty in understanding essential skills needed by all teachers to work with students with disabilities and to identify how these content would be explicitly and strategically embedded in the program. Categories were used to cluster skills: Special education in context--perspectives, concepts and people; A study of individuals with special needs--learning characteristics and issues of diversity; Promising practices that foster inclusive education; Innovations mandated by legislation

13. Scaling up the ASEED project: Incentives and barriers Building capacity [genuine expertise] across an entire preparation program around social justice, equity and inclusive practices. Vision and leadership at high levels to stay committed to this work (resources, time, infrastructure). Developmental shift of inclusive, culturally responsive pedagogy from a surface level to a developed and deepened understanding. Authentic roles for the community to be meaningfully engaged as a true partner with IHEs and schools in this work. Translating and drawing the connections of this work to the currency of today’s accountability and teacher effectiveness contexts.

14. Scaling Up, Across and Beyond Belonging for ALL A State Story Montana’s Scaling Up Process • Interest Based Learning • Multiple Abilities Tasks • Activity-Based • Instruction • Learner – Center Practices • DI • Flexible Grouping • Peer Tutoring • Family and Community

15. Establish a Framework Systems PracticesData Montana’s Tri-lateral Framework Partnership Policy Research

16. First Steps to Consider Installation Stage Action Planning Guide SISEP Center • Identify practice, program, or initiative • Identify level of change (statewide, regional, local) • Identify Primary Focus. • Identify Secondary Focus Montana SPDG Practice- Implement MTSS Level of Change- Building, District, State Primary Focus- Building level Principals, Teachers, Para’s, and Parents Secondary Focus- State level innovators

17. Use of SISEP Drivers • Participation, Recruitment and Selection Recruiting the right people (7 teams with strong leadership and expertise in either MBI or RtI) • Preparation and Training Application, needs assessment, on-going training support • Coaching, Consultation or Mentoring Providing quality and adequate Consultation, Coaching and Mentoring (REAL, on-site meetings, trainings and on-line workgroups.) • Participant and Program Evaluation Product and Process Evaluation (multiple data sources from RtI, MBI, PBIS) • Internal Supports Strong leadership (OPI Leadership from multiple departments and support expertise from national resources) (RtICoP) • External Supports School Administrators of MT, CoP’s, MT Association of School Psychologists Common Core

18. In Summary Leadership and process that supports • Knowledge of Evidence Based Practices • Understand and apply the science of best practices • Utilization of an improvement cycle • Understand organizational change • Build on-going relationships with innovators • Provide purposeful multi-level communication to promote problem solving • Develop capacity to create, regenerate and renew.

19. National Consortium on Deaf-Blindness (NCDB) Kathy McNulty Scaling-up Efforts to Identify Infants and Toddlers who are Deaf-Blind

20. Scaling Up Across the DB Network A Work in Progress First Considerations: Why Early Identification? • Significant under-identification • Lack of a cohesive systemic approach across the DB Network • Availability of research (TRACE Project )

21. What is the Innovation? • A framework to increase early identification & referrals that includes: • data-based decision making • analysis of possible causes • implementation of evidence-based strategies

22. What strategies were used at each level of scale up? • Exploration • Analysis of the NCDB Child Count data • EI Workgroup • Focus Groups, Surveys , Review of Literature & Research • Installation • TA Tool Box of resources • Review by state projects • TA Support Team • Initial Implementation • Pilot with 8 states • Feedback, analysis & action planning

23. What were the incentives for scaling up? • Shared understanding of the importance to find the children early • High interest to receive TA on how to effectively collaborate with EI systems • Positive state examples • No reinventing the wheel

24. What were the challenges to scaling up? 52 projects that navigate different EI systems Feasibility of all 52 projects having a staff person with expertise in EI Part C’s non-categorical child count Inconsistent exchange of information Reluctance of families to hear the term deaf-blindness

25. George Sugai University of Connecticut Center on Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports www.pbis.orgwww.scalingup.org Scaling-up Evidence-based Practices & Systems OSEP Project Directors’ ConferenceJuly 23 2012Washington DC

26. # Schools Implementing SWPBS since 2000 16,232

27. # of School Implementing SWPBIS by State 12 states >500 schools 4 states >1000 schools OSEP PBIS Center Aug 2011

28. Proportion of Schools Implementing SWPBIS by State 3 states > 60% schools 9 states > 40% schools 16 states >30% schools OSEP PBIS Center Aug 2011

29. Academic-Behavior Connection 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.

30. RCT & Group Design PBIS Studies • Reduced major disciplinary infractions • Improvements in academic achievement • Enhanced perception of organizational health & safety • Improved school climate • Reductions in teacher reported bullying behavior & peer rejection Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C. W., Thornton, L. A., & Leaf, P. J. (2009). Altering school climate through school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10(2), 100-115 Bradshaw,C. P., Koth, C. W., Bevans, K. B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462-473. Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133-148. Bradshaw, C. P., Reinke, W. M., Brown, L. D., Bevans, K. B., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). Implementation of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in elementary schools: Observations from a randomized trial. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 1-26. Horner, R., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A., & Esperanza, J., (2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133-145. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality, 42(8), 1-14. Waasdorp, T. E., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (in press). The impact of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS) on bullying and peer rejection: A randomized controlled effectiveness trial. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.

31. Fixsen & Blase, 2009 Maximum Student Benefits

32. RULE: Start w/ socially important questions.

33. SWPBS Implementation Blueprint www.pbis.org

34. Where are you in implementation process?Adapted from Fixsen & Blase, 2005

35. “Multi-Tiered Systems of Support”…. Whole-school, data-driven, prevention-based framework for improving learning outcomes for all students through layered continuum of evidence-based practices & systems

37. Cultural/Context Considerations Basic “Logic” Maximum Student Outcomes DATA SYSTEMS Start w/ effective, efficient, relevant, & doable PRACTICES Implementation Fidelity Training + Coaching + Evaluation Improve “Fit” Prepare & support implementation

38. Common Language & Behaviors Effective Organizations Common Vision/Values Common Experience Quality Leadership

39. SCALING UP, ACROSS AND BEYOND