How Did They
Do That?
Improving Student Achievement Outcomes
with Participatory Leadership, Shared
Decision Making, and PBIS
Bonnie Brown, Dustin Dykes, Sean Cooper
Houston County Schools
Welcome to Thomson Middle School
Student Enrollment Demographics
Indicator
Student Population Percentage
Students with Disabilities
13%
Asian
3%
Black
44%
Hispanic
6%
White
44%
Multiracial
2%
Eligible for Free / Reduced Lunch
66%
Celebrate Good Times (Come On)
In 2013:
 100% of Thomson’s Special Education 6th Grade students passed the CRCT in
reading.
 100% Thomson’s Special Education 7th Grade students passed CRCT in reading
and language arts.
 92% passed 6th grade ELA (28% increase)
 94% passed 7th grade math (42% increase)
 Also our GAA students passed 99.99999% of all tested areas.
6th Grade
7th Grade
8th Grade
Discipline Referrals down to 817!
Number of Infinite Campus entries
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
2008-2009-1169
2009-2010-1611
2008-2009-1169
2009-2010-1611
2010-2011-1866
2010-2011-1866
2011-2012-1398
2011-2012-1398
2012-2013
2012-2013
Halloween Check Point
 2012- Year 1 Implementation 226 Referrals
 2013- Year 2 Implementation 163 Referrals
63 less…Yay TMS…whoop whoop
Mental Models and Mindsets
 Mental Models are “deeply ingrained assumptions,
generalizations, or even pictures or images that influence how
we understand the world and how we take action” (Senge,
1990, p. 24)
 Mental models can assist educational organizations in
producing positive, effective, sustainable change outcomes
 A dysfunctional organizational mental model produces negative
outcomes (Duffy, 2008, p.7)
Meeting Student Needs
 Educational leaders are responsible for fostering a school
culture that “embraces high academic standards and
expectations for all students” (Boyer & Lee as cited in DiPaola,
Tschannen-Moran, & Walther-Thomas, 2004, p. 3)
 When educational organizations fail to meet achievement
outcomes for students with disabilities they often blame
setting events that include lack of student motivation and poor
parenting (Leech & Fulton, 2008, p. 631)
 “Defeatist attitude carries the seeds of its own fulfillment”
(Bossidy as cited in Tichy & Cohen, 1998, p. 28) which enables
educators and strongly impacts individual teacher ownership
of student achievement.
Meeting Student Needs (Cont.)
 Positive achievement outcomes for students with disabilities
strongly correlate with educational leaders who support special
education teacher partnerships, provide appropriate support
tools and provide ongoing professional development (Benz,
Lindstrom, & Yovanoff; Brownell, Ross, Colon, & McCallum;
Kearns, Kleinert, Clayton, Burge, & Williams; Klinger, Arguelles,
Hughes, & Vaughn as cited in DiPaola et al., 2004, p. 3).
Kanter - The Change Wheel
 “A culture for change needs to be programmed into an
organization’s (or a wider system’s) method of operating.
Without fundamental systematic change, organizations will
always revert to their basic pattern, like the default position on
a computer program” (p. 1)
 A single intervention interjected into a dysfunctional
organization will not produce positive change outcomes,
however combined interventions contribute to systematic
change (p. 1)
Kanter - The Change Wheel (Cont.)
Target Areas:
 Interrelated Special Education Teachers
 New Leadership
 Attitude
 Initiative
 Accountability
Current Mental Model Compared to “The Change Wheel”
Element
Current Mental Model
Common Theme, Shared Vision
•
No clear leadership vision for the future
•
Limited mutual trust
•
No collaboration between teachers
•
No accountability and ownership of student achievement
Symbols and Signals
•
Limited leadership modeling of desired behaviors
Governance and Accountability Structure
•
Management mentality of following procedures versus initiative
and interventions for change
Education, Training, Action Tools
•
No intervention team or shared decision making practices
•
Limited professional development linked to identified growth
needs
Champions and Sponsors
•
No veteran teacher support of change
Current Mental Model Compared to “The Change Wheel”
Element
Current Mental Model
Quick Wins and Local Innovations
•
None
Communications, Best Practice Exchange
•
Special Education Department meetings communicate system
level expectations, processes, and procedures only
•
School Improvement Plan growth areas for students with
disabilities are not shared or discussed with teachers
Policy, Procedures, System Alignment
•
Practices do not address school change needs
•
No use of research based interventions to meet individual
student learning needs
Measures, Milestones, and Feedback
•
Inconsistent data collection and analysis produced poor
achievement outcomes for students with disabilities
Rewards and Recognition
•
No feedback or accountability
•
None
Change Strategies
 Tier 3 / 4 Reading and Math Intervention Team
 Program Specialist / API / Interrelated Teachers
 CRCT and GRASP Data
 Shared Decision Making (Departmental)
 Effective Meeting Module
 Consensus
 Research Based Interventions
 Corrective Reading and PLATO Learning
 PBIS
 Professional Development
 Follow-Up
Mental Model Movement
Element
Mental Model Movement
Common Theme, Shared Vision
•
Leader and team defined vision for the future
•
Establishment of trust
•
Teacher instructional collaboration
•
Teacher accountability and ownership of student achievement
has increased
Symbols and Signals
•
Leaders consistently model desired behaviors
Governance and Accountability Structure
•
Participatory leadership
•
Shared decision making practices made using consensus
•
Professional development linked to identified student,
Education, Training, Action Tools
teacher, and program growth needs
Champions and Sponsors
•
Veteran teacher “buy-in” and support of change
Mental Model Movement
Element
Mental Model Movement
Quick Wins and Local Innovations
•
GRASP data show increases in individualized student
achievement
Communications, Best Practice Exchange
•
Effective meeting practices implemented
•
Special Education Department meetings communicate system
level expectations, processes, and procedures
•
School Improvement Plan growth areas communicated with
teachers
Policy, Procedures, System Alignment
•
Practices address school change needs
•
Research based interventions are used to meet individual
student learning needs
Mental Model Movement
Element
Mental Model Movement
Measures, Milestones, and Feedback
•
Consistent and meaningful data collection and analysis for
students with disabilities
•
Team determined to use GRASP assessments to drive IEP goals
and objectives at all grade levels
•
Performance outcome feedback and accountability at team
and individual teacher levels
Rewards and Recognition
•
Consistent recognition of positive outcomes and individual
efforts and innovations toward change
Source: www.pbis.orgr
Don’t let the sweet face fool you!
I did it! Yay me!
What is PBIS and where did it come from?
 PBIS gained significant attention when amendments to the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) became law on June 4, 1997 (Sugai,
Sprague, Horner, & Walker, 2000).
 The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act mandate to use PBIS
strategies led to the evolution of PBIS into a school-wide approach
(SWPBIS), used extensively across the country (Sugai et al., 2000). Over the
past decade, school districts have begun to use this school-wide approach to
address common challenging behaviors of students in their schools.
(Landers, Courtade, & Ryndak , 2012
Why am I so interested in SWPBIS?
I’ve got to fix this!
 Discipline Committee
 Clear expectations for all (Discipline Chart, Power point for students, Locker
Test)
 Create a System for teachers (New form, team leaders)
 Professional Learning (Building relationships, facing the brutal facts, handle
your own business)
What happened?
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
2008-2009-1169
2009-2010-1611
2010-2011-1866
2011-2012-1398
Number of AS400 entries
The New Solution-SWPBIS
The Pyramid
5%
5%
10%
80%
The Pyramid at TMS
13.3% (108)
3.9% (32)
9.7% (79)
73% (593)
I know you’ve seen it before but…
 “If a child doesn’t know how to read, we teach.

“If a child doesn’t know how to swim, we teach.”

“If a child doesn’t know how to multiply, we teach.”

“If a child doesn’t know how to drive, we teach.”

“If a child doesn’t know how to behave, we…………teach? ………..punish?”
 “Why can’t we finish the last sentence as automatically as we do the
others?”
Tom Herner (2002) National Association of State Directors of Special Education
Methods of Intervention
 Universal-all students in the building are taught expectations for common
areas (lunchroom, restroom, hallways, etc.). When expectations are met,
students are rewarded with “blue cards.” When expectations are not met,
the expectations are re-taught and an “orange card” may be issued.
 Tier 2, Tier 3, and SWD with behavior goals use a check in check out sheet.
 Token Economy- not only rewards positive behavior but provides real world
money management
Your Turn!
 Take two minutes and discuss with someone close to you who is not at your
school one way that you or a co-worker effectively teaches, recognizes, or
reinforces positive behavior.
 Now take one more minute to share with someone else that is close to you
how your school recognizes your staff to reinforce positive behavior.
You are the experts!
 If your school has not bought in to the SWPBIS system yet, you can be the
trailblazers!
 Approach your administrators from this angle
 It takes 20 minutes to deal with the average office referral
 We had a reduction of 581 referrals
 That saves your administrators 193.6 hours or 24 school days!
References

Bennis, W. (1989). On Becoming a Leader. [iBooks version] Retrieved from http://store.apple.com/us

DiPaola, M., Tschannen-Moran, M., & Walther-Thomas, C. (2004). School Principals and Special
Education: Creating the Context for Academic Success. Focus on Exceptional Children, 37(1), 1-10.

Duffy, F. M. (2009). Paradigms, Mental Models, and Mindsets: Triple Barriers to Transformational
Change in School Systems: Part 1. Retrieved from the Connexions Web site:
http://cnx.org/content/m26229/1.1/

Good, J. W., & Reynolds, C. (2012). Effective Meetings Module. (p. pp. 1-14).

Duffy, F. M. (2009). Paradigms, Mental Models, and Mindsets: Triple Barriers to Transformational
Change in School Systems: Part 1. Retrieved from the Connexions Web site:
http://cnx.org/content/m26229/1.1/

Good, J. W., & Reynolds, C. (2012). Effective Meetings Module. (p. pp. 1-14).

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The Leadership Challenge (4th ed.). [iBooks version] Retrieved
from http://store.apple.com/us

Leech, D., & Fulton, C. R. (2008). Faculty Perceptions of Shared Decision Making and the Principal’s
Leadership Behaviors in Secondary Schools in a Large Urban District. Education, 28, 630-644.

Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. [iBooks
version]. Retrieved from http://store.apple.com/us

Tichy, N. M., & Cohen, E. (1998, July). The Learning (Teaching) Organization. Training & Development,
52(7), 26-33.