Supporting School’s Efforts to Reduce
Violence using Positive Behavioral
Interventions & Supports Framework (PBIS)
Steve Goodman (MI), Jenee Littrell (CA),
Sidney Smith (CA), George Sugai (CT)
December 10, 2012
3 Purposes: Describe….
1.
2.
3 PBIS examples of
Features of
how PBIS
school-wide multiframework has
tiered behavior
been used to
framework (PBIS)
improve
for addressing
conditions for
school violence
learning
3.
Enhance
relationships
between juvenile
justice, education,
& community
leaders
Sidney Smith
Steve Goodman
Dep. Dir., Children’s Behavioral
Health, Monterey County
Behavioral Health, Salinas, CA
Dir. MI Integrated Behavior &
Learning Support Initiative,
Ottawa Area Intermediate S.D.,
Holland, MI
Jenee Littrell
Dir. of Guidance & Wellness
Grossmont Union High School
District, El Cajon, CA
George Sugai
Dir. Ctr. Behavioral Education &
Research, Neag School of
Education, University of CT,
Storrs, CT
Overview: School-wide Multitiered Systems Framework
George Sugai
University of Connecticut
George.sugai@uconn.edu
www.CBER.org
www.PBIS.org
High rates of reactive
management
Minor problem
behavior linked to
major consequences
Increasingly negative
school climates
Mismatch between
problem & intervention
Nov 1985 Kappan
Getting Tough
School Discipline Challenge:
Academic & behavior
success (failure) are linked!
Teaching to Corner
CONTINUUM OF
SCHOOL-WIDE
INSTRUCTIONAL &
POSITIVE BEHAVIOR
SUPPORT
FEW
~5%
~15%
SOME
Primary Prevention:
School-/ClassroomWide Systems for
All Students,
Staff, & Settings
ALL
~80% of Students
Tertiary Prevention:
Specialized
Individualized
Systems for Students
with High-Risk Behavior
Secondary Prevention:
Specialized Group
Systems for Students
with At-Risk Behavior
PBIS (aka SWPBS) is
Framework for enhancing
adoption & implementation of
Continuum of evidence-based
interventions to achieve
Academically & behaviorally
important outcomes for
All students
Prevention Logic for All
Redesign of teaching environments…not students
Prevention Objectives
Prevention Actions
Prevent
Decrease worsening &
Eliminate
reduce
developmen
triggers &
t of new
intensity of maintainers
problem
of problem
existing
problem
behaviors
behaviors
behaviors
Add triggers
Teach,
&
monitor, &
maintainers acknowledge
prosocial
of prosocial
behavior
behavior
Biglan, 1995; Mayer, 1995; Walker et al., 1996
IMPLEMENTATION
W/ FIDELITY
CONTINUUM OF
CONTINUOUS
EVIDENCE-BASED
PROGRESS
INTERVENTIONS
MONITORING
UNIVERSAL
SCREENING
MTSS
PBIS
DATA-BASED
DECISION MAKING
& PROBLEM
SOLVING
CONTENT
EXPERTISE &
FLUENCY
TEAM-BASED
IMPLEMENTATION
Multi-tiered
Systems of
Support
Whole-school
Data-driven
Prevention-based framework
For improving learning outcomes
For all students
Through layered continuum
Of evidence-based practices & systems
Math
Intensive
Science
Targeted
Tech
Continuum of
Support
“Theora”
Spanish
Reading
Writing
Soc skills
Universal
Soc Studies
Basketball
Dec 7, 2007
Label behavior…not
people
Intensive
Anger man.
Prob Sol.
Continuum of
Support:
“Molcom”
Targeted
Acc. Fdbk
Ind. play
Adult rel.
Self-assess
Attend.
Universal
Coop play
Peer interac
Align behavioral
Dec 7, 2007supports
ESTABLISHING CONTINUUM of SWPBS
TERTIARYPREVENTION
PREVENTION
TERTIARY
•• Function-based support
•• Wraparound
•• Person-centered planning
••
••
SECONDARY
SECONDARY PREVENTION
PREVENTION
•• Check in/out
•• Targeted social skills instruction
•• Peer-based supports
•• Social skills club
••
PRIMARY
PRIMARY PREVENTION
PREVENTION
•• Teach SW expectations
•• Proactive SW discipline
•• Positive reinforcement
•• Effective instruction
•• Parent engagement
••
RCT & Group Design PBIS Studies
Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C. W., Thornton, L. A., & Leaf, P. J. (2009). Altering school climate through
school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a grouprandomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10(2), 100-115
Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Bevans, K. B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of
school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational
health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462-473.
Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of School-Wide
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on student outcomes: Results from a
randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 12, 133-148.
Bradshaw, C. P., Reinke, W. M., Brown, L. D., Bevans, K. B., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). Implementation
of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in elementary schools:
Observations from a randomized trial. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 1-26.
Bradshaw, C. P., Waasdorp, T. E., & Leaf, P. J. (in press). Effects of school-wide positive
behavioral interventions and supports on child behavior problems. Pediatrics.
Horner, R., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A., & Esperanza, J., (2009). A
randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior
support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133-145.
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide
positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality, 42(8), 1-14.
Waasdorp, T. E., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (in press). The impact of school-wide positive
behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS) on bullying and peer rejection: A
randomized controlled effectiveness trial. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.
PRACTICE
“Don’t Throw
Stones!”
Effective
IMPLEMENTATION
Effective
Maximum
Student
Benefits
Not
Effective
Fixsen & Blase, 2009
Not Effective
Colorado Data
Colorado Data 2012-13
State of Colorado
TOTAL SUSPENSIONS
Classroom - ISS - OSS
115,000
110,000
105,000
100,000
95,000
90,000
85,000
All Colorado Schools
Suspensions by Incident Type (2011-2012)
DRUG VIOLATIONS
5%
DANGEROUS
WEAPONS
1%
OTHER CODE OF
CONDUCT
VIOLATIONS
23%
DETRIMENTAL
BEHAVIOR
32%
3RD DEGREE
ASSAULTS/
DISORDERLY
CONDUCT
6%
DISOBEDIENT/
DEFIANT OR
REPEATED
INTERFERENCE
30%
All Colorado Schools
TOTAL EXPULSIONS
2,500
2,400
2,300
2,200
2,100
2,000
1,900
1,800
All Suspensions by Race
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
American
Indian
Asian
2007-2008
Black
2008-2009
= % of total school enrollment
Hispanic
2009-2010
White
2010-11
Native
Two or
Hawaiian More Races
2011-12
All Expulsions by Race
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
-10.0%
American
Indian
Asian
2007-2008
Black
2008-2009
= % of total school enrollment
Hispanic
2009-2010
White
2010-11
Native
Two or
Hawaiian More Races
2011-12
Referrals to Law Enforcement
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
American
Indian
Asian
2007-2008
Black
2008-2009
= % of total school enrollment
Hispanic
2009-2010
White
2010-11
Native
Two or
Hawaiian More Races
2011-12
Cultural/Context
Considerations
Start w/
effective,
efficient, &
relevant,
doable
Basic
“Logic”
Maximum
Student
Outcomes
PRACTICES
Implementation
Fidelity
Prepare &
support
implementation
Training
+
Coaching
+
Evaluation
Improve “Fit”
Grossmont Union High School District
Positive Behavioral Supports and
Multi-tier Service Model
Working Session
National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention
December 10, 2012 3:45-5:00 pm
• Grossmont Union High School District- 20,000 students
(9th-12th)
• Nine Comprehensive Schools; One Alternative Education
Site
• 41% White; 35% Latino; 21% African American; 3% Other
• Approximately 39% Free and Reduced Lunch (Some
campuses as high as 75%)
• Eastern Portion of San Diego County
Community Partners:
• Juvenile Justice
• Child Welfare Services
• Law Enforcement
• Community Based Organizations
• Mental Health
• Public Health
• Neighborhood Groups/Religious Institutions
We organize our resources
– Multi-tier model
– Communication and Information Sharing
– Problem-solving approach
Students get help earlier
– Actions based on outcomes (data!), not procedures
We do stuff that’s likely to work
– Evidence-Based interventions
We make sure they’re successful
– Progress monitoring
– Problem-Solving process
– Increasing levels of intensity
Mt. Miguel H. S. - Discipline Data 2010-2011
1876 total discipline referrals
– 1084 Attendance
– 438 Defiance
– 319 Rule Violation
– 35 Other
3 teachers wrote over 15% of the total
25 students received 364… more than 20%
GPA and Discipline Correlation
Number of Discipline Referrals
Board of Directors includes staff, students,
parents and community representatives
Multi-tiered
2) Problem solving approach
3) Evidence-based instruction/intervention
4) Increasing levels of intensity
5) Decisions based on data
6) Progress monitoring
• School-Wide Expectations & Rules
– Must be a part of the school’s everyday language
– Must students, parents and community partners must
buy-in
– Address ALL areas of campus
• Lesson Plans to Teach Students
• Formal opportunities, as well as teachable
moments
• Plan for rewarding appropriate behavior
– If the student hasn’t collected their reward, they
haven’t contacted the Tier 1 system
Video Example
• Goal of Tier 1 is: prevention, & promotion of
positive behavior
• Actively reviewing school-wide data
– Implementation
– Outcomes
– Screening
• Planning interventions for Tier 1
• Identifying needs at Tier 2
• Detentions, suspensions and expulsions
DON’T WORK to change behavior in the long term for
MANY students
• This approach includes a set of strategies and
systems to increase
• The capacity of schools to reduce school disruption
and educate all students including those with problem
behaviors
What this system allows us to do:
Invest in prevention
Teach, monitor and reward BEFORE punishment
Implement for sustainable effects
Evaluate using information for decision-making
Partner across the community to accomplish
same goals
School and partner data to identify areas of need
– Adopt an apartment complex
– Parent nights in the community
– Support groups and community
Camp LEAD
– Experiential program
– Matador Pride ambassadors in
Mt. Miguel H. S. - Discipline Data 2011-2012
1222 total discipline referrals
– 904 Attendance
– 201 Defiance
– 104 Rule Violation
– 13 Other
1 teacher wrote 7% of the total
School-wide
Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Support
Sid Smith, Ph.D.
Monterey County Behavioral Health
44
How & Why Monterey County
Rolled-out PBIS
Monterey County Behavioral Health had funds dedicated
for innovative and preventive programming. After
eliciting stakeholders input, we chose PBIS.
o Positive engagement in education associated with
many positive outcomes (i.e. reduce youth violence).
o Impacts many youth (entire school or district) for
modest investment.
o Evidence based
o Data driven
o Can individualize
45
How We Implemented
in Monterey County
Initial plan:
 Select 1 school site
 Provide training
 Provide financial support
(pay for substitute teachers, data tracking software)
Desired outcome: Selected site becomes model
program and others will follow.
46
How Plan Evolved
o Provided overview of program to all interested
school sites (17).
o Participants did not like our plan of selecting
only one school and responded:
“Train us all and we will cover the financial costs”
(outside of training and software costs).
o We paid for data tracking as we felt it was
important for uniform reporting on results.
47
The County-wide PBIS effort started 2 years ago
(1 district, independently, started 1 year prior).
Leadership teams from 36 school sites (9 different
districts) received Tier 1 training.
20,000 students impacted.
Elementary, Middle and High Schools represented.
48
PBIS in Monterey County is a
Partnership with:
 California State University at Monterey Bay
(CSUMB)
 Monterey County Behavioral Health
 Monterey County Office of Education
 Santa Clara Office of Education
We welcome others to join our efforts
49
Next Steps
 Continue to provide training/support to Tier 1
schools to achieve fidelity (go at their pace).
 When site(s) ready, train Tier 2 skills and later
Tier 3 skills.
 Train new sites.
 Build on cross-county collaborations.
 Develop funding for dedicated staff to coordinate
efforts.
 Link to our other county-wide initiative:
All Kids…Our Kids.
50
All Kids…Our Kids
“Be there for them every day”
Based on Search Institute’s framework of 40
developmental assets.
More assets associated with:
 Decrease in high risk behaviors.
 Increased likelihood for youth to thrive.
51
Lessons Learned
 Active leadership from school principal and
superintendent is important.
 With educational staff turn over every year
there are new training needs.
 Each school site goes at their own pace.
 Dedicated staff time for coordination vs
“on top of your other tasks”.
52
Concluding Thoughts:
o How do good ideas spread across an organization?
o Presentation of scientific facts is not enough.
o Training alone is not enough.
o Line staff are more influenced by the actions of their
peers.
o Leadership needs to “identify and support” early
adopters and others will follow.
53
Michigan’s Integrated Behavior and
Learning Support Initiative (MiBLSi)
Steve Goodman, Director
miblsi.cenmi.org
What is MiBLSi?
A statewide structure to create capacity
for an integrated Behavior and Reading
Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS)
that can be implemented with fidelity, is
sustainable over time and utilizes databased decision making at all levels of
implementation support.
Why we invest in this work…
Students need to be competent with both
academic AND social behavior skills to
increase graduation rates, reduce dropout
rates, reduce youth violence and improve
post school opportunities and success.
Access to Effective Behavior and Reading Practices
• Ensuring that students (staff) have access to
effective practices in an integrated behavior and
reading Multi-Tiered System of Supports
• Practices are selected based on: Need, Fit,
Resource Availability, Evidence, Readiness for
Replication, Capacity to Implement
Support for the Practices
• Ensuring that the interventions are implemented
correctly with the “right people”, at the “right time”, in
the “right amounts” (Implementation Fidelity)
MiBLSi Statewide Structure of Support
Michigan
Provides guidance,
Department of
visibility, funding, political
Education/MiBLS
support for MiBLSi
i
Regional
Provides coaching for District
Technical
Teams and technical
assistance for Building Teams
Assistance
Who is
supported?
District/Regional
Leadership Team
Building
Leadership Team
Building Staff
Students
Provides guidance, visibility,
funding, political support
Provides guidance and
manages implementation
Provides effective practices
to support students
Improved behavior
and reading
How is
support
provided?
Inputs
Develop
Organizational
Structures
Develop Staff
Competencies
Outcomes
Schools
effectively
implement
MTSS
Practices
Feedback Loops
Outcomes
Successful
Student
Outcomes
The Multi-Tiered Logic Model:
– Increased supports, intensity of
practices, and frequent data-based
decisions based on intensity of need.
– Multi-tiered logic is applied to students,
staff and organizations.
Major Discipline Referrals/100
Students/Day
Michigan Elementary Schools: Major Discipline
Referrals/100 Students/Day by Fidelity of
Implementation (2011-2012)
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Not Met Fidelity Criteria
Met Fidelity Cirteria
Major Discipline Referrals/100
Students/Day
Michigan High Schools: Major Discipline
Referrals/100 Students/Day by Fidelity of
Implementation (2011-2012)
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Not Met Fidelity Criteria
Met Fidelity Cirteria
Median Proficiency on state reading test for schools that met and have
not met criteria on Benchmark of Quality for PBIS
Profenciency on State Reading Test
(MEAP)
100%
90%
State Average
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Met Criteria on BoQ
Not Met Criteria on BoQ
Major Discipline Referrals per
100 Students per Day
Roberto Clemente: Reduction in Major Discipline
Referrals
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
Roberto Clemente: Reduction in Physical Aggression
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Physical Aggression
2008-09
Harrassment/bullying
2009-10
20010-11
Fighting
20011-12
Roberto Clemente
4th Grade MEAP - Reading
% Met or Exceeded
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
2007
2008
2009
2010
Year
DPS
Roberto Clemente
MI ELL
Roberto Clemente
5th Grade MEAP - Reading
% Met or Exceeded
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
45%
2007
2008
2009
2010
Year
DPS
Roberto Clemente
MI ELL
Recommendations and Suggestions
1. The work is immense and complex, we need to invest in
school/community partnerships that focus on developing a
culture of competence with shared values, language and
experiences.
2. Focus on what works by utilizing research-based practices and
data-based decision making.
3. Emphasize common goals/priorities across organizations and
agencies to strengthen communication and implementation
efforts.
4. Ensure that organizations create “host” environments to make it
easy for the practitioner to implement with fidelity (e.g, provide
political support and reduction of competing initiatives).