TIPS: Team Initiated Problem Solving Part 1

1. TIPS: Team Initiated Problem SolvingPart 1 NW PBIS Conference March 2010 presented by: Rob Horner & Anne Todd, UO Developed by Steve Newton, Anne Todd, Rob Horner, UO Bob Algozzine, & Kate Algozzine, University of NC at Charlotte

2. Objectives • Build awareness of the TIPS system • Preview effective meeting practices through use of the TIPS Meeting Foundations • Preview Foundations Checklist • Roles & Responsibilities • Preview Meeting Minute Form • Be able to identify a problem that includes (not include) precision elements critical for problem solving

3. Context • Every school has teams • Teams are being expected to do problem solving • Select curricula • Get training and implement new ideas/programs • Provide efficient leadership • “Communities of Practice” • Teams need to report data to administration, district, state • Teams NEED data to do good problem solving. • Most teams are not skilled at running problem solving meetings and using data for decision-making.

4. A Model:Team-Initiated Problem Solving (TIPS) • Define the steps of effective problem solving • Define the materials, roles, and process • Define a strategy for assessing if you are being successful, and ensuring continuous improvement.

5. TIPS Model • TIPS Training • One full day team training • Two coached meetings • Team Meeting • Use of electronic meeting minute system • Formal roles (facilitator, recorder, data analyst) • Specific expectations (before meeting, during meeting, after meeting) • Access and use of data • Projected meeting minutes • Research tool to measure effectiveness of TIPS Training • DORA (decision, observation, recording and analysis) • Measures “Meeting Foundations” & “Thoroughness of Problem Solving”

6. Tertiary Prevention: Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior CONTINUUM OF SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR & INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT ~5% Secondary Prevention: Targeted Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior ~15% We use data for problem solving & decision making for a continuum of practices Primary Prevention/ Tier I: School-wide/Classroom/ Non-classroom Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings ~80% of Students

7. Building Capacity and Sustainability For Social Competence, Academic Achievement, and Safety OUTCOMES SYSTEMS INFORMATION PRACTICES Supporting Staff & Student Behavior and Decision Making

8. Themes & Assumptions • Decision making is aided by access to data • (“data-based decision making”- DBDM) • PBIS Team meetings are a major context for DBDM • Providing instruction on how to embed DBDM in a problem-solving model (TIPS) will result in problem solving that is • Thorough • Logical • Efficient • Effective • Structure of meetings lays foundation for efficiency and effectiveness

9. Problem-Solving Meeting Foundations Structure of meetings lays foundation for efficiency & effectiveness

10. Meeting Foundations Elements • Define purpose of the team • Decisions to be made, cycle of decision making, and data source(s) to use • Define roles & responsibilities • Define team agreements about meeting processes • Inform facilitator of absence/tardy before meeting • Be prepared for meeting by completing previously assigned tasks • Avoid side talk: Remind each other to stay focused • Start and end on time • Be an active participant • Use electronic meeting minutes

11. Define roles for effective meetings • Core roles • Facilitator • Minute taker • Data analyst • Active team member • Administrator • Backup for each role Typically NOT the administrator Can one person serve multiple roles? Are there other roles needed?

14. Using Meeting Minutes • Documentation of • Logistics of meeting (date, time, location, roles) • Agenda items for today’s meeting ( and next meeting) • Discussion items, decisions made, tasks and timelines assigned • Problem statements, solutions/decisions/tasks, people assigned to implement with timelines assigned, and an evaluation plan to determine the effect on student behavior • Reviewing Meeting minutes • An effective strategy for getting a snapshot of what happened at the previous meeting and what needs to be reviewed during the upcoming meeting • What was the issue/problem?, What were we going to do?, Who was going to do it and by When?, and How are we measuring progress toward the goal? • Visual tracking of focus topics during and after meetings • Prevents side conversations • Prevents repetition • Encourages completion of tasks

15. Organizing for an effective problem solving conversation A key to collective problem solving is to provide a visual context that allows everyone to follow and contribute Problem Use Data Out of Time Solution

16. Langley Elementary PBIS Team Meeting Minutes and Problem-Solving Action Plan Form Today’s Meeting: Date, time, location: Facilitator: Minute Taker: Data Analyst: • Where in the Form would you place: • Planning for next PTA meeting? • Too many students in the “intensive support” for literacy • Schedule for hallway monitoring for next month • There have been five fights on playground in last month. • Next meeting report on lunch-room status. Next Meeting: Date, time, location: Facilitator: Minute Taker: Data Analyst: Team Members (bold are present today) Administrative/General Information and Issues Problem-Solving Action Plan Evaluation of Team Meeting (Mark your ratings with an “X”)

17. Any tasks assigned get copied to the meeting minutes of the next meeting as a follow up item Meeting Agenda Item: Meeting Foundations Tasks: What, by whom, by when

18. Meeting Foundations

19. Identify Problems Team Initiated Problem Solving (TIPS) Model Develop Hypothesis Evaluate and Revise Action Plan Collect and Use Data Discuss and Select Solutions Develop and Implement Action Plan Problem SolvingMeeting Foundations

20. SWISTM(School-Wide Information System) • Defined • SWISTM is a web-based information system for gathering, entering, summarizing, reporting and using office discipline referral information • Purpose • A progress monitoring tool for improving the ability of school personnel to develop safe and effective learning environments

21. How SWISTM works

22. Organizing SWIS Data for Decision-making • Universal Screening Tool • Proportion of students with • 0-1 Office Discipline Referrals (ODRs) • 2-5 ODRs • 6+ ODRs • Progress Monitoring Tool • Compare data across time • Prevent previous problem patterns • Define Problems with precision that lead to solvable problems

23. Using the Referrals by Student report as a Universal Screening Tool

24. Using office discipline referrals as a metric for universal screening of student social behavior 6+ office discipline referrals 2-5 office discipline referrals ~5% ~15% 0-1 office discipline referral ~80% of Students

25. Using ODRs to Identify Problems • Build a picture for the pattern of office referrals in your school. • Compare the picture with a national average • Compare the picture with previous years • Compare the picture with social standards of faculty, families, students. • Goal • Identify problems empirically • Identify problems early • Identify problems in a manner that leads to problem solving not just whining

26. Using ODRs to Identify Problems • Build a picture for the pattern of office referrals in your school. • Compare the picture with a national average • Compare the picture with previous years • Compare the picture with social standards of faculty, families, students.

27. Total Office Discipline Referrals as of January 10 Total Office Discipline Referrals

29. SWIS summary 2008-2009 (Majors Only)3,410 schools; 1,737,432 students; 1,500,770 ODRs • How to use these numbers: • Your enrollment (e.g. 400 students or 225 students) • Divide by 100 (e.g. 400/100 = 4; 225/100 = 2.25 • Multiply by the National Average to get ODR per day • (4 X .34 = 1.36 2.25 X .34 = .76)

30. Compare with National Average 150 / 100 = 1.50 1.50 X .34 = .51 Elementary School with 150 Students

31. Compare with National Average 450 / 100 = 4.50 4.50 X .34 = 1.53 Elementary School with 450 Students

32. Application Activity: Absolute Value Is there a Problem? Middle School of 625 students? Compare with national average: 625/100 = 6.25 6.25 X .85 = 5.31 Office Discipline Referrals per School Day

33. High School: Compare with National Average 1800 / 100 = 18 18 X 1.27= 22.86 High School of 1800 students

34. High School: Compare with National Average 450 / 100 = 4.5 4.5 X 1.27= 5.17 High School of 450 students

35. Middle School of 700 students

38. Primary Problem Statements examples • Our average Major ODRs per school day per month are higher than national average for a school of our enrollment size • Our average ODRs per school day per month are higher this year than for corresponding months of previous year • Our average ODRs per school day per month are showing an increasing trend • Faculty, parents, and students say our ODR levels are too high

39. More Precision Is Required to Solve the Identified Problem • Define problem by identifying What problem behaviors are involved in ODRs • Clarify problem by identifying • When ODRs are occurring (time of day) • Where ODRs are occurring (location) • Who is engaging in problem behaviors that result in ODRs • Why are problem behaviors continuing to occur

40. Problem Statements • Ultimately, you want to write a “problem statement” that precisely specifies the problem you identified • The more Ws (what, when, where, who… why) you incorporate into the problem statement, the more precise the problem statement will be • The more precise the problem statement, the easier it will be to generate a solution that “fits” the problem

41. Which Statement Is More Precise?

42. Examples Primary to Precise • Carly is having reading difficulties • 50% of 2nd graders are not meeting math benchmarks • Carly is reading 20 cwpm (goal is 60), skips or guesses at words she doesn’t know, mostly during language arts • 2nd graders, who entered school after Oct 31, do not know whole numbers 75-100 and are not accurately adding two digit numbers because of lack of skills

43. ExamplePrimary to Precise Our school did not meet AYP last year The past two years this cohort of students (3rd to 5th grade) has gradually decreased in overall proficiency, their comprehension strand scores are low, we shifted to blended grade classes during their 4th grade year The 5th graders are below the state proficiency score as compared to 5th graders in Oregon

44. Achieving a Precise Problem Statementfor Fictional Trevor Test School • Middle School – Grades 6, 7, & 8 • 565 students

45. Trevor Test Middle Schooln= 565 grades 6-8Is there a problem? Compare to national average, compare to last year, examine trend, examine peaks? 565/100 = 5.65; 6.65 X .85 = 4.8

46. Trevor Test Middle SchoolIdentified Problem • Identified problem • for last 4 mos., Major ODRs per day higher than national avg. • increasing trend across all 5 mos.

47. Trevor Test Middle School 11/01/2007 through 01/31/2008 (last 3 mos.)

49. What information do we need? • Who is involved in problem behavior in the cafeteria? ODRs in the Cafeteria

50. Main problem • The sixth graders are disruptive & use inappropriate language in the cafeteria between 11:30 AM and 12:00 PM to get peer attention.