PBIS in Urban Alternative School Settings: Program Design and Planning

1. Adam Feinberg Ph.D., BCBA-D Deb Smyth, Ph.D., BCBA-D The May Institute, Inc. OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports Annual Convention of the National Association of School Psychologists February 23, 2011 San Francisco, CA PBIS in Urban Alternative School Settings: Program Design and Planning www.mayinstitute.org www.pbis.org

2. What we’ll be covering… • What’s different about alternative settings? • Typical features • Implementation of PBIS • Is SWPBIS effective in Alternative settings? • Emerging Evidence Base • Case studies • Discussion

3. SW-PBIS & Alternative Settings What is different about Alternative settings? What are critical features of SW-PBIS in these settings? Typical features of alternative settings?

4. Tertiary Prevention: Specialized Individualized Systems for Students with High-Risk Behavior Most interventions are individualized and intensive. Small and variable population with intensive behavioral, mental health, and educational needs 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 May also employ system-wide features (i.e., point or level system) ALL ~80% of Students

5. Approach 4 Integrated Elements Supporting Social Competence & Academic Achievement OUTCOMES Supporting Decision Making DATA SYSTEMS Supporting Staff Behavior PRACTICES Supporting Student Behavior

6. Sample Outcomes • Increases in prosocial & appropriate behavior • Decreases in disruptive and aggressive behavior • Increases in percentage of children responding to behavioral support • Increases in student specific progress toward IEP goals • Increases in number of students returning to less restrictive environment

7. Data • Incident Reports • Direct Behavior Ratings • Earned Points • Direct Observation • Individual Student Progress • Program-wide Data • ______________ Adopt or develop a data management system • Review existing data and collect additional data if needed Use data to make decisions

8. Systems • Team & Coaches • (system-wide) • (Team or classwide) • Continuous PD • Data-based decision making • Monitoring and evaluation fidelity • Program evaluation and continuous improvement

9. SWPBS Practices School-wide Classroom Family Non-classroom Student

10. School-wide Systems 1. Common purpose & approach to discipline 2. Clear set of positive expectations 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

11. Classroom Setting Systems • Maximize structure and predictability • Establish, post, teach, monitor and reinforce a small number (3-5) of positively stated expectations • Establish a continuum of strategies to acknowledge students for following expectations • Active engagement • Redirections for minor, infrequent behavior errors • Frequent precorrections for chronic errors

12. Nonclassroom Setting Systems • Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged • Active supervision by all staff • Scan, move, interact • Precorrections & reminders • Positive reinforcement

13. Individual Student Systems • Develop data decision rules to identify those students who do not respond to Tier I. • Organize other supports along a continuum. • Develop an assessment process to determine which additional intervention(s) may be appropriate • Collect progress monitoring data

14. General Implementation Process Identify Team Conduct Self-Assessment Develop / Adjust Action Plan Implement Action Plan Monitor & Evaluate Action Plan

15. Is School-wide PBIS effective in alternative school placements? Emerging Evidence Case Studies Discussion

16. Emerging Evidence Base(Miller, George, Fogt, 2005; Farkas et al., in press; Miller, Hunt, Georges, 2006; Simenson, Britton, & Young, 2010) • Descriptive case studies have documented that implementing SW-PBIS, or similar proactive system-wide interventions, in alternative school settings results in positive outcomes. • Decreases in crisis interventions (i.e., restraints) and aggressive student behavior • Increases in percentage of students achieving highest levels • In addition, faculty and staff are able to implement strategies with fidelity and staff and students generally like SWPBIS

17. Case Studies Two Alternative School Settings

18. School 1 Alternative Elementary Grades 3 – 6

19. School 1: Demographics

20. School 1: Initial Systems Integrity Self-Assessment

21. School 1: Systems Integrity DataSchool-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)Spring 2009

22. School 1: Training and Support • “Buy in” for PBIS was a concern and was perceived to not be possible by administration or staff. • Perception was PBIS features were in place • Review of EBS Survey and current behavioral data • Team agreed to review PBIS features relative to current system over a series of team meetings • School staff had a long learning history of attributing behavioral challenges as influenced by factors outside the immediate school environment.

23. School 1: SW-BSP DevelopmentReview, Discuss, Agreements… • Clear Expectations: Already in place but modified to increase clarity for students by linking to reinforcement • Teaching Expectations: Created formal lesson plans to teach the school wide expectations • Reinforcement Procedures: Individualized by classroom. Modified to a formal school-wide process but added weekly school-wide activities. • Consequences: Informal process. Staff was resistant to modify these procedures. • Data: Instituted SWIS and bi-monthly meetings regarding Data review with district BCBA staff.

24. School 1: Systems Integrity DataSchool-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)

25. School 1: Systems Integrity DataTeam Implementation Checklist (TIC)

26. School 1: Outcome DataFrequency of behavioral incidents requiring out of classroom intervention.

27. School 1: Outcome Data Restraints

28. School 2 Alternative Early Childhood Grades K – 2

29. School 2: Demographics

30. School 2: Initial Systems Integrity Self-Assessment

31. School 2: Systems Integrity DataSchool-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)

32. School 2: Training & SupportBuilding upon strengths! • “Buy-in” was gained by reviewing EBS Data and Behavior data • Discussed areas in need for development and agreed to focus on those. • Once the “areas of need” were built team reviewed and wanted to develop rest of PBIS School-wide components. • Team decided to use a Professional Development day to build most of their plan

33. School 2: Training and SupportBuilding upon strengths! • Clear Expectations: Already in place • Teaching Expectations: Modified from informal teacher based to school-wide formal instruction at the beginning of the year at the start of EVERY new activity • Reinforcement Procedures: Individualized by classroom. Formalized it to a consistent school-wide process but continued classroom based trade ins at the end of day • Consequences: Informal process. Changed to formal procedures of classroom managed and office managed • Data: Instituted SWIS and bi-monthly meetings regarding Data review with district BCBA staff.

34. School 2: Systems Integrity DataSchool-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)

35. School 2: Systems Integrity DataTeam Implementation Checklist (TIC)

36. School 2: Outcome DataFrequency of behavioral incidents requiring out of classroom intervention.

37. School 2: Outcome DataReduction of restraints

38. PBIS in Alternative SchoolsLessons Learned • Alternative schools with a large number of behavioral challenges can greatly benefit from strong effective universal practices • Take the time to build each component with consideration • Use data at every step • Make sure data guides each decision!

39. Contact Information Adam Feinberg afeinberg@mayinstitute.org Deb Smyth dsmyth@mayinstitute.org www.pbis.org www.mayinstitute.org