420 likes | 542 Views
Check in, Check Out- Part 1. Leanne S. Hawken , University of Utah Danielle Starkey , Missouri, SWPBS Ericka Dixon , Winfield Primary Illinois PBIS Forum, 2012. Overview. Overview BEP/CICO Principles Where have we been and where are we going? BEP/CICO at the state/regional level .
E N D
Check in, Check Out- Part 1 Leanne S. Hawken, University of Utah Danielle Starkey, Missouri, SWPBS Ericka Dixon, Winfield Primary Illinois PBIS Forum, 2012
Overview • Overview BEP/CICO Principles • Where have we been and where are we going? • BEP/CICO at the state/regional level. • BEP/CICO at the school level.
Student Recommended for BEP/CICO BEP-CICO Implementation Process BEP/CICO Implemented BEP Coordinator Summarizes Data For Decision Making Morning Check-in/DPR Pick-up Parent Feedback Regular Teacher Feedback Bi-weekly BEP Meeting to Assess Student Progress Afternoon Check-out Revise Program Exit Program
In the Beginning……….. • Started at Fern Ridge Middle School, Elmira Oregon • Crone, Horner, & Hawken (2004). Responding to Problem Behavior in Schools: The Behavior Education Program. New York, NY: Guilford Press • 5 schools • 3 elementary • 2 middle schools • One BEP Coordinator served: • 15-20 students elementary • 20-30 students secondary • Excel Data System • No web-based system
Current BEP/CICO practice • To support more students, some schools have multiple BEP/CICO check-in, check out facilitators. • Expanded to include high school & preschool populations • New data system • SWIS CICO • Current – 1999 schools K-12 use SWIS CICO data base. • Fidelity of Implementation • Individual Systems Evaluation Tool (I-SET)
Manual on How to Implement BEP/CICO Crone, Hawken, & Horner (2010).Responding to Problem Behavior in Schools: The Behavior Education Program (2nd ed). New York, NY: Guilford Press
DVD on how to Implement BEP/CICO Hawken, Pettersson, Mootz, & Anderson (2005). The Behavior Education Program: A Check-in, Check-out Intervention for Students at Risk. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Leanne S. Hawken, PhD - 2011
Research on BEP/CICO • Effective in reducing problem behavior for: • Elementary school students (Cheney et al., 2009; Fairbanks, Sugai, Guardino, & Lathrop, 2007; Filter et al., 2007; Hawken, MacLeod, & Rawlings, 2007; McCurdy, 2007; Stage, Cheney, Flower, Templeton, & Waugh, 2010; Todd, Kaufman, Meyer, & Horner, 2007). • Middle School Students (Hawken, 2006; Hawken & Horner, 2003; March & Horner, 2002) • Students in Urban School Settings (McCurdy, 2007) • Students with disabilities (Hawken, et al., 2007, MacLeod, Hawken, & O’Neill, 2010) ***Problem behaviors measured via direct observation, rating scales, changes in percentage of points earned on DPRs, & reductions in ODRs
Research on CICO • Effective in increasing academic engagement, including for students in high school settings (Hawken & Horner, 2003, Swain-Bradway, 2009) • Reduced need for Tier 3 and special education supports following CICO implementation (Hawken, et al., 2007) • Overall range of effectiveness of CICO ranges from 40% to 70% (Fairbanks, et al., 2007) (Hawken, et al., 2007)
Research on CICO • More effective with students with attention-maintained problem behavior (March & Horner, 2002; McIntosh, et., al., 2009, Campbell & Anderson, 2008) • Effective across behavioral functions (Hawken, O’Neill, & MacLeod, 2011) • Students who do not respond to CICO benefit from function-based, individualized interventions (Fairbanks, et., al., 2007, March & Horner, 2002; Macleod, Hawken, & O’Neill, 2010)
Supporting Check-In, Check-Out Implementation Danielle Starkey, Regional SW-PBS Consultant Heart of Missouri Regional Professional Development Center
Missouri SW-PBS Training Structure MO SW-PBS
Missouri SW-PBS Personnel • State Coordinator (1) • State Data/Web Consultant (1) • Tier 2/3 Consultants (6) • Regional Consultants (24) MO SW-PBS
Missouri SW-PBSTier 2 Readiness Indicators and Guidelines Building the Foundation for Effective Implementation of Check-In, Check-Out
Readiness for Tier 2 • SW-PBS universal systems are consistently implemented with fidelity • Schoolwide • Non-Classroom • Classroom MO SW-PBS
Readiness for Tier 2 • SW-PBS Universal System Outcomes • Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET) • Score (80/80) within past 12 months • Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ) • Score of 80% or higher • Self-Assessment Survey (SAS) • 80% of staff report that Schoolwide, Non-Classroom & Classroom Systems are in place OR WITH MO SW-PBS
Readiness for Tier 2 • Office referral data indicates 80 percent of students in the 0-1 referral range • System in place to document classroom minors • Consistent use of school-wide data for making decisions as evidenced by monthly Big 5 Data Reports MO SW-PBS
Systems Training • Foundational Knowledge • The Tier 2 Team • Student Identification Process • Nominations • Existing school data • Screening instrument scores • Monitoring Progress & Evaluating Outcomes using the Benchmarks for Advanced Tiers MO SW-PBS
Intervention Training • Check-in/Check-out (BEP-CICO) • Check & Connect • Social Skill Instructional Groups • Targeted Environmental Interventions MO SW-PBS
Lessons Learned – CICO/BEP • Higher level of success with implementation when solid Tier 1 is in place. • Staff training on intervention components is essential, with a review each school year. • Tier 2 Systems in place are critical • Team • Student Identification Process • Monitoring Progress & Evaluating Outcomes MO SW-PBS
Winfield Primary School’s Check-In / Check-Out(CICO) Program Winfield Primary Ericka Dixon erickadixon@winfield.k12.mo.us
Winfield Primary at a Glance • Total Enrollment: 386-404 • Grade Levels Served: Pre-School-2nd Grade • Free and Reduced Lunch Rates:
2010-2011 First Year of Implementation • Big Five Data Showing Increases in Problem Behavior • Intervention to Build Relationship • 65% of the day spent on discipline • Received Verbal Permission from Parents for Students to enter CICO Intervention
Big Five Data Report 2010-2011 Referrals: 133 2011-2012 Referrals: 204
2010-2011 CICO Year One Facts • 22 Students Utilized the CICO Intervention • 17 Staff Members were Utilized as Coordinators • 7 Students were dismissed • 9 Students Continued • 3 Students Moved • 3 Students Moved to Tier III Intervention
2010-2011 Staff Survey Results • Intervention Built Relationships • Saw Some Improvements in Behaviors • One More Thing to Do • Time Consuming for Both the Classroom Teacher and Staff Coordinator • Minimal Successes • No Set Criteria to Exit the Program • No End Result Known • No Real Training in the Intervention-felt thrown in • Coordinators felt like counselors Positives Negatives
2011-2012- Second Year of Implementation • Received Professional Development from our PBIS RPDC Representatives • Designed Entrance and Exit Criteria • Created a Teacher Recommendation Form • Created a Daily Points Sheet • Created a Flow Chart and Celebrations for Fading CICO Students • Created a Letter to Inform Parents of the CICO Program • Made Personal Phone Calls to CICO Student Parents • Received Written Permission from Parents to Start and Exit CICO • Offered On-Going Professional Development to Staff
2011-2012 Staff Survey Results • Major Behavior Referrals Decreased • Staff Members felt Supported • Professional Development Improved Implementation Process • Students began to Self-Monitor Behavior • Parents began to get involved • Coordinators felt like support teams instead of counselors • Classroom Teachers continued to struggle with effective feedback after each classroom activity. • This intervention was not working for Tier III Students Positives Negatives
Future Plans for Winfield Primary School • Implement CICO in Pre-School • Implement Self-Monitoring Intervention • Implement Check-N-Connect Intervention • Implement Social Skills Intervention • Implement a Universal Behavior Screener • Continued Professional Development on CICO Intervention • Continued Revising, Refining, and Monitor of CICO Intervention • Continued Staff Development for all Tier I and Tier II Interventions
Daily Progress Report (DPR) Ratio of at minimum 4:1 for Pre-corrects/Positives to Negative
EntranceCriteria Student Data Inventory Teacher Nomination Universal Screening
Questions If you need materials, advice, etc., please email Ericka Dixon. erickadixon@winfield.k12.mo.us