Cultural Relevance and SWPBIS

1. Cultural Relevance and SWPBIS Rob Horner, Bob Algozzine, Scott Ross, and Cayce McCamish 2012 National PBIS Leadership Forum October 18, 2012

2. Welcome

3. Maximizing Your Session Participation • Work with your team • Consider 4 questions: • Where are we in our implementation? • What do I hope to learn? • What did I learn? • What will I do with what I learned?

4. Where are you in implementation process?Adapted from Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M. & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).

5. Session Overview

6. What is cultural relevance and disproportionality?

7. Culture/ Cultural Relevance/ Disproportionality • Culture: • Ways of behaving that a group of individuals agree is “acceptable.” • Cultural Relevance • Appreciation for the social learning history that a person brings to any specific situation • Disproportionality • Differences in how one society/culture responds to a designated group

8. “…the extent to which a group of individuals engage in overt and verbal behavior reflecting shared behavioral learning histories, serving to differentiate the group from other groups, and predicting how individuals within the group act in specific setting conditions. That is, ‘culture’ reflects the collection of common verbal and overt behaviors that are learned and maintained by a set of similar social and environmental contingencies (i.e. learning history), and are occasioned (or not) by actions and objects (i.e. stimuli) that define a given setting or context.” • Sugai, O’Keeffe, & Fallon, 2012

9. Importance for SWPBIS • A primary goal of SWPBIS is to create a whole-school culture that is predictable, consistent, positive and safe. • Students should not only feel welcome and supported, they should feel “part of the school” • Failure to appreciate the culture each child brings to school, and failure to respond to patterns of disproportionality undermine SWPBIS.

10. What do we know about disproportionality and cultural relevance?

11. Disclaimer • Information provided is generalization and application to individual case requires verification. • Every school, district, and state has different needs, none of which was the basis for this presentation. • Implementation of any intervention must be tailored to school, district, and state needs and its impact verified with data.

12. Team-Initiated Problem Solving What do we know about disproportionality and cultural relevance? • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved?

13. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? Measuring Disproportionality Composition tells us the percent of children in a group who are from a specific group (e.g., In the United States, less than 20% of children enrolled in public elementary and secondary schools areAfrican American). Figure 1. Percentage distribution of enrollment in public elementary and secondary schools by race/ethnicity Source. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/tables/dt11_044.asp \1\Includes data for states reporting students of two or more races.

14. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? In my best judgment, about 60 to 80 percent of the pupils taught [in special education classes] are children from low status backgrounds—including Afro-Americans, American Indians, Mexicans, and Puerto Rican Americans; those from nonstandard English speaking, broken, disorganized, and inadequate homes; and children from other non-middle-class environments. (Dunn, 1968, p. 6) Put Another Way Composition of children enrolled in public elementary and secondary schools is predominantly White but composition of many special education classes is predominantly “children from low status backgrounds….”

15. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? A Blueprint for Change Two major suggestions which constitute my attempt at a blueprint for change are developed below. First, a fairly radical departure from conventional methods will be proposed in procedures for diagnosing, placing, and teaching children with mild learning difficulties. Second, a proposal for curriculum revision will be sketched out. These are intended as proposals which should be examined, studied, and tested. What is needed are programs based on scientific evidence of worth and not more of those founded on philosophy, tradition, and expediency. (Dunn, 1968, p. 11)

16. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? • A Blueprint for Change [Largely Unrealized] • Legal challenges and professional “concerns about bias in testing led to a profusion of research in the 1970s and early 1980s…” (Skiba et al., 2008, p. 266, emphasis added). • Task forces, commissions, and blue-ribbon panels documented problem and proposed solutions with little indication of how to follow them or how to decide if they were evaluated with fidelity, or whether desired goals were achieved. • We did not treat disproportionality as a problem we wanted to solve. • We did treat it as a problem we wanted to admire (i.e., observe, panel, and report). • Focus on documenting causes without solutions. • Focus on documenting barriers to change without addressing them.

17. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? • A Blueprint for Change [Largely Unrealized] • Disproportionality “Must” List • Policy pressure to address the problem increased with the inclusion of provisions concerning disproportionality in the original (1997) and reauthorized (2004) IDEAs. • Guidance uninhibited by reason. • Directives unburdened by accountability. • IDEAs direct that states must • have policies and procedures in place to prevent inappropriate identificationor representation by race; • monitor local education agencies using quantifiable indicators; • collect and examine data to determine if significant disproportionality is occurring ; • disaggregate data on suspension and expulsion rates by race and ethnicity; and, • provide for a review and, if appropriate, revision of policies, practices, and procedures (cf. Dunn’s blueprint /curriculum revision dream).

18. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? A Blueprint for Change [Largely Unrealized] “The disproportionate representation of minority children is among the most critical and enduring problems in the field of special education” (Skiba et al., 2008, p. 264). Striking Chicago teachers say accountability unfair because poor kids can't learn 'There are too many factors beyond our control…'(Velderman, 2012)

19. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? Source. Snyder, T.D., and Hoffman, C.M. (2002). Digest of Education Statistics 2001 (NCES 2002-130). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Table 112, p. 133 http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/2002130.pdf; Snyder, T.D., Dillow, S.A., and Hoffman, C.M. (2007). Digest of Education Statistics 2006 (NCES 2007-017). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Table 114, pp. 180-181 http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007017.pdf

20. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? Note. Average reading scale scores include public and private school students; the 12th-grade NAEP reading assessment was not administered in 2003, 2007, or 2011; value in figure is previous year performance. Accommodations during testing (e.g., extended time, small group testing) for children with disabilities and English language learners were not permitted during 1992 and 1994 assessments; students were tested with and without accommodations in 1998. Source. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/tables/table-rd2-1.asp

21. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? Average Reading Scale Scores of 12th-Grade Students by Race/Ethnicity NOTE: The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Testing accommodations (e.g., extended time, small group testing) for children with disabilities and English language learners were not permitted in 1992 and 1994; students were tested with and without accommodations in 1998. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), selected years, 1992–2009 Reading Assessments, NAEP Data Explorer. Source. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/figures/figure-rgp-1.asp

22. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? In 2009, White students at grade 12 scored 27 points higher in reading than Black students and 22 points higher than Hispanic students. Neither score gap was significantly different from the respective score gaps in previous assessment years. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_rgp.asp http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_rgp.asp#info http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/figures/figure-rgp-1.asp

23. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? Average Reading Scale Scores of 4th-Grade Students by Race/Ethnicity NOTE: The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Testing accommodations (e.g., extended time, small group testing) for children with disabilities and English language learners were not permitted in 1992 and 1994; students were tested with and without accommodations in 1998. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), selected years, 1992–2009 Reading Assessments, NAEP Data Explorer. Source. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/figures/figure-rgp-1.asp

24. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? Parsing the Achievement Gap (I) Does research reveal relationships between life experiences and life conditions and cognitive development and achievement? (Barton, 2003) Yes Are there differences in life experiences and life conditions among subgroups that mirror differences in cognitive development and achievement observed in schools? (Barton, 2003)Yes

25. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? Parsing the Achievement Gap (I) Correlates of Achievement among Different Groups that Mirror Gaps in Achievement Barton, P. E., (2003). Parsing the achievement gap: Baselines for tracking progress. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Barton, P. E., & Coley, R. J. (2009). Parsing the achievement gap II. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

26. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? Parsing the Achievement Gap (II) Are there still gaps in life experiences and life conditions that mirror gaps in achievement? (Barton & Coley, 2009) Yes Another problem identified, parsed, and admired but not solved.

27. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? What about Behavior? • African-American students received more suspensions in middle school than all other students except Native Americans (Skiba, Peterson, & Williams, 1997). • African-American students are referred to the office for infractions that are more subjective (e.g., excessive noise, loitering, threat) in interpretation (Skiba, Michael, Nardo, & Peterson, 2002). • …even after controlling for the student’s level of teacher-rated behavior problems, teacher ethnicity, and other classroom factors, Black students were significantly more likely than White students to receive ODRs (Bradshaw, Mitchell, O’Brennan, & Leaf, 2010, p. 508).

28. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? • A discipline gap with African American students over-represented among students with office discipline referrals was present in schools engaged in school-wide positive behavior support implementation as well as schools not engaged in implementation; however, the gap was smaller in schools engaged in school-wide positive behavior support. (Vincent, Swain-Bradway, Tobin, & May, 2011) • The statistics on the use of suspension for African American and special education students are cause for great concern. We already know that African American males are disproportionately placed into categories of special education that are associated with extremely poor outcomes. We now see that these same students face incredibly high rates of suspension. (Orfield, 2012, p. 4) What about Behavior?

29. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? • It has become a well-known fact that students from non-White backgrounds…experience poorer discipline and academic outcomes…than their White peers (Vincent, Tobin, Hawken, & Frank, 2012, p. 431-432). What about Behavior?

30. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? • National suspension rates show that 17%, or 1 out of every 6 Black schoolchildren enrolled in K-12, were suspended at least once; and, this is much higher than the risk for Native Americans (1 in 13 or 8%), Latinos (1 in 14 or 7%), Whites (1 in 20 or 5%), or Asian Americans (1 in 50 or 2%). (Losen & Gillespie, 2012) What about Behavior?

31. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? If we use the 10% mark as a basis of state comparison, the risk for Blacks exceeded this rate in 39 out of 47 states, for Native Americans in 9 states, for Latinos in 6 states, for Whites in 1 state, and not in any state for Asian Americans. (Losen & Gillespie, 2012, p. 22) What about Behavior? Another problem identified, parsed, and admired but not solved.

32. Team-Initiated Problem Solving • Do we have a problem? • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • Was solution implemented with fidelity? • Was desired goal achieved? • Has the problem been solved? • A Blueprint for Change [Largely Unrealized] • Culturally-Responsive Education Practices • Enhance Staff Members’ Cultural Knowledge • Enhance Staff Members’ Cultural Self-Awareness • Validate Others’ Culture • Increase Cultural Relevance • Establish Cultural Validity • Emphasize Cultural Equity • To strengthen commitment to culturally equitable … outcomes, acknowledgement of differences, • and clear strategies for accommodating those differences within a common school culture might be necessary. (Vincent, Randall et al., 2011, p. 222).

33. Do we have a problem? • A Blueprint for Change [Largely Unrealized] • Action Plan • Do we have a problem? • Document disproportionality and outcome gaps at state, district, and school levels • What is our goal for improvement? • How are we going to address the problem? • What are promising practices for decreasing disproportionality? [Call Cayce] • What are promising practices for increasing cultural relevance? [Call Scott] • How will we know solution was implemented with fidelity? • Is desired goal being achieved? • Has the problem been solved?

34. What are promising practices for decreasing disproportionality?

35. Discipline Disproportionality and Promising Practices for Increasing Cultural Relevance Cayce McCamish, M.S., Ed. S.

36. Overview • Disciplinary disproportionality and the Organization of Power • Grounding this presentation • Color-blind Racism • Framework for investigating and problem-solving disciplinary disproportionality

37. Disciplinary Disproportionality and the Organization of Power • One school • Methods: • Comprehensive disciplinary data analysis • Disciplinary policy crosswalk • Whole-school staff survey* • 7 staff member interviews *staff members were asked to offer responses about the whole school

38. Grounding this Presentation • Social Construction- • “patterns of mutual expectations” • “The social world is constructed- meanings are made, definitions produced and interpretations propounded” (Clarke & Saraga, 2001) • Racism- • “signifies and symbolizes social conflicts and interests by referring to different types of human bodies” (Omi and Winant, 1994) • The way power is organized on the basis of skin color. • Power- • “action on the action of others” (Foucault as cited in Flynn, 2005)

39. What are we really talking about? • -Behavior • -Policies & Procedures • -Rules & Expectations Can we discuss disciplinary disproportionality without discussing race? • -Inequitable outcomes • -Race

40. The Challenge: Color-blind Racism Racism Without Racists • “racial norms disallow the open expression of racial views, [and as a result] whites have developed a concealed way of voicing them” • While avoiding overt verbal expressions of racism, white participants none-the-less conveyed racialized ideology in a “very careful, indirect, hesitant” and “coded language” • Central frames: Abstract liberalism, naturalization, cultural racism, and minimization (Bonilla-Silva, 2006, p. 3, 57, 55)

41. For instance, I don’t see that the man next to me is Black. I don’t see skin color. I am completely color blind. No, sir. I don’t see it.

42. Color-blind Racism and Power • Patricia Hill-Collins asserts “racism is a system of power with four domains” which are: structural, disciplinary, cultural, and interpersonal (Hill-Collins, 2009, p. 53). • Racism is “produced and resisted within each domain of power as well as across all four domains” (Hill-Collins, 2009, p. 55).

43. 4 Domains of Power (Hill-Collins, 2009) “use the rules and regulations of everyday life to uphold the racial hierarchy or to challenge it” and is organized through “bureaucracies” and rely on “surveillance” “how racism as a system of power is set up,” and “organized” through “social institutions” “manufactures the ideas that justify racial hierarchy” by “constructing representations, ideas, and stories about race and racism” “shapes race relations among individuals in everyday life” whereby during “ordinary social interactions”

44. Proposed Model for Examining Disciplinary Disproportionality Disciplinary policies and procedures Disciplinary practices, expectations, behaviors, and events/outcomes Cultural beliefs and perceptions Perceptions of the relationships between staff members and students

45. Sources of Data Examining Disciplinary Disproportionality -Discipline Handbook -Code of Conduct -School-wide discipline data (ODR, ISS, OSS, Expulsion) -Staff survey -Staff Interviews -Staff survey -Staff interviews

46. Findings from the Four Domains of Power Analysis -1 of most frequent behaviors is not in policy at all; others are unclear -inconsistency -continuum -Quality of data -Definition of DD -4 most common behavioral offenses -Staff perceptions about behavioral differences -Staff believe families are the biggest factor -Cultural subscale -Disruptive is cultural not racial -Cultural beliefs appear to have replaced racial beliefs -Staff is unsure if relationships are formed -Many do not see the need -The administrator

47. Implications • Findings are contextually relevant • Offers a framework for expanding efforts beyond disciplinary data analysis • Creates opportunity for dialogue about race-related issues within a color-blind context • Provides a basis for strategically responding or implementing interventions to address disproportionalty

48. Responding to Disciplinary Disproportionality

49. Phase II Problem Solving • Working with PBIS problem-solving team(s) • Utilizing the TIPs Problem-solving process • Support teams with engaging in the problem-solving process with a focus on the data related to each domain • Indentify and implement strategies that respond to needs revealed within each domain

50. Structural Domain Data: Are our disciplinary policies consistent and include clear definitions? Do we have a problem? Structural Domain Data: Did we achieve our goal? If not, why not? Continue the process for this or other Domains. Structural Domain Data: “Disruptive” and “Other” behavioral offenses are not clearly defined or even listed in the policies. Structural Domain Structural Domain Data: Clearly define “disruptive” behavior and train staff, avoid “other,” and propose policy revisions to include “disruptive.” Structural Domain Data: Who is doing what by when? What is the goal? How will we measure fidelity? Newton, J.S., Todd, A.W., Algozzine, K, Horner, R.H. & Algozzine, B. (2009).