Achieving Academic and Behavioral Success for All Students

Report
2/2/12
WCASS
1
Wisconsin RtI Center
2
2/2/12
Response to Intervention
In Wisconsin
an organizational framework
for
achieving higher levels of
academic and behavioral success
for all students
Wisconsin RtI Center
3
2/2/12
Wisconsin RtI Center
4
2/2/12
STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT
Good Teaching
Social Behavior Support
Increasing District & State Competency and Capacity
Investing in Outcomes, Data, Practices, and Systems
Wisconsin RtI Center
5
2/2/12
Without Multi-Level System of Support
Special Education??
Amount of Resources
Needed to Solve Problem
Title I?
ELL??
Sea of Ineligibility
G/T??
Struggling learners??
General Education
Intensity of Problem
Wisconsin RtI Center
6
2/2/12
Amount of Resources
Needed to Solve Problem
Bridging the Gap
General +
Intensive
Resources
General +
Supplemental
Resources
General Resources
Wisconsin RtI Center
Intensity of Problem
7
2/2/12
Academic Systems
Tier 3/Tertiary/Intensive
•Few students
1-5%
Tier 2/Secondary/Selected
•Some students
Tier 1/Universal/Core
•All students
Behavioral Systems
5-15%
80-90%
1-5%
Tier 3/Targeted/Intensive
•Few students
5-15%
Tier 2/Secondary/Selected
•Some students
80-90%
Tier 1/Universal/Core
•All settings, all students
Wisconsin RtI Center
8
2/2/12
 You
all know this, now how do we get
schools to do this
Wisconsin RtI Center
9
2/2/12
Academics & Behavior: A Symbiotic
Relationship
 High
quality academic instruction (e.g., content
matched to student success level, frequent
opportunity to respond, frequent feedback) by itself
can reduce problem behavior (Filter & Horner, 2009;
Preciado, Horner, Scott, & Baker, 2009; Sanford, 2006)
 Implementation
of school-wide positive behavior
support leads to increased academic engaged time
and enhanced academic outcomes (Algozzine &
Algozzine, 2007; Horner et al., 2009; Lassen, Steele, &
Wisconsin RtI Center
Sailor, 2006)
10
2/2/12
Potential benefits of
combined data sets
At the school level…
 Combined data sets can reveal
system gaps
At the student level
 Combined data sets can help you
better understand locus of concern
Wisconsin RtI Center
11
2/2/12
Potential Benefits for…
…integrating data
For students flagged for BOTH
academic and behavior, could
signal more significant underlying
needs (e.g. anxiety, depression)
With very young students: Poor
academic progress is often a
predictor of later behavior issues
With older students: Poor academic
and behavioral issues combined
could signal drop-out risk
…integrating delivery
of supports
For students with needs in
both academic and
behavioral areas, can
capitalize on small group
academic setting for reteaching and reinforcing
of pro-social behaviors
Wisconsin RtI Center
12
2/2/12
Coherent Implementation
Infrastructure
“We cannot continue to see
initiatives as discrete and
insular programs. Rather, we
must see them as a system of
interconnected strategies for
improvement.”
“Rethinking the Scale-Up Challenge,” West Wind, 2009
Wisconsin RtI Center
13
2/2/12
Avoiding False Over/Under Identifying
Technically adequate assessments
Integrated initiatives
Continuum of effective practices
Fidelity of implementation
Timely team-based decision making
Efficient & accurate decision rules
Regular systems level audits
Training to Fluency
Wisconsin RtI Center
14
2/2/12
SUSTAINABLE IMPLEMENTATION & DURABLE RESULTS
THROUGH CONTINUOUS REGENERATION
Continuous
Self-Assessment
Relevance
Valued
Outcomes
Priority
Efficacy
Effective
Practices
Fidelity
Practice
Implementation
Wisconsin RtI Center
15
2/2/12
Wisconsin School-wide Implementation Review
Wisconsin RtI Center
Purpose #1
16
2/2/12
Translate the
Wisconsin RtI vision
into
actions
Wisconsin RtI Center
Purpose #2
17
2/2/12
Where are we
Baseline
now?
Where are we Action
going? Planning
How far have Progress
we come? Monitoring
Wisconsin RtI Center
18
2/2/12
+
Wisconsin RtI Center
Leadership and
Organizational
Structures
19
2/2/12
Universal
Wisconsin RtI Center
Selected &
Intensive
Support
20
2/2/12
Wisconsin RtI Center
21
Wisconsin RtI Center
2/2/12
22
Dean Fixsen
2/2/12
Doug Reeves
Wisconsin RtI Center
23
2/2/12
Levels of Implementation
Infrastructure
Initial Implementation
Full
Implementation
Sustainability
Not in Place
 3 – 5 years 
Purpose Building
Wisconsin RtI Center
24
2/2/12
www.wisconsinRtIcenter.org
Wisconsin RtI Center
25
SIRs Completed
Completed
Total
2/2/12
CESA
Total
1
58
2
36
Overall
259
Math
84
3
13
Reading
175
4
7
Both
54
5
14
6
31
7
13
8
6
9
18
10
9
11
44
12
12
School Type
Math
Readin
Total
g
Elementary
38
110
148
Middle
23
33
56
High
24
27
51
Mixed
0
4
4
Wisconsin RtI Center
26
2/2/12
SIR Results
Math-Overall
Key:
Not in place
Purpose-building
Reading-Overall
Infrastructure
Initial implementation
Full implementation
Wisconsin RtI Center
27
2/2/12
SIR Results: Essential Elements
High Quality
Instruction
Balanced
Assessment
Leadership &
Collaboration Organizational
Structure
Math
Reading
Wisconsin RtI Center
28
2/2/12
SIR Results: Further Analysis
Universal Level
Selected &
Intensive
Math
Reading
Wisconsin RtI Center
29
2/2/12
SIR Results: Further Analysis
Culturally Responsive
Family
Engagement
Math
Reading
Wisconsin RtI Center
30
2/2/12
Benchmarks of Quality
Wisconsin RtI Center
31
2/2/12
What is the BoQ?
• Reliable, valid, useful, and efficient (~10 minutes for
team members and 60-90 minutes for coaches)
• Measures degree (fidelity) of implementation of the
universal level of PBIS in a school
• Allows teams to review their progress toward
implementing the critical elements of PBIS
• Provides clear information regarding areas of
strength and weakness in implementation efforts to
be used for developing action plans
• Completed at least annually in March/April/May
Wisconsin RtI Center
32
2/2/12
Subscales on the BoQ
 PBIS
Team
 Faculty Commitment
 Effective Procedures
for Dealing with
Discipline
 Data Entry & Analysis
Plan Established
 Expectations & Rules
Developed
 Reward/Recognition
Program Established
 Lesson Plans for
Teaching
Expectations/Rules
 Implementation Plans
 Classroom Systems
 Evaluation
Wisconsin RtI Center
33
BoQs Completed
School Type
Early Education
Elementary
Total
1
221
2/2/12
CESA
Total
1
157
2
117
3
0
4
10
5
6
6
27
7
32
8
8
High
40
Middle
58
Other
14
PreK-12
1
PreK-8
59
9
2
Total
394
10
31
11
0
12
Wisconsin RtI Center
4
34
2/2/12
BoQ Results by Time Since Training
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Rewar
Discipli Data Expect d/Rec
Imple Classro
Faculty
PBIS
ne
Entry & ations ognitio Lesson menta om Evalua
Overall
Comm
Team
Proce Analysi Develo
n
Plans
tion System tion
itment
dures
s
ped Progra
Plan
s
m
0 to 1.5 years before training (n=17)
71.9
80.5
59.8
85.6
77.5
86.6
67.3
68.0
62.4
61.9
66.1
0 to .5 years after training (n=51)
38.9
82.4
33.7
55.9
37.3
44.9
33.9
29.9
28.7
34.5
29.0
.5 to 1 year after training (n=68)
69.6
86.3
62.8
81.0
69.0
81.8
64.5
60.6
59.7
64.1
66.2
1 to 1.5 years after training (n=117)
74.3
85.8
63.8
87.0
74.4
87.0
69.7
70.2
65.3
70.5
72.9
1.5 to 2 years after training (n=63)
76.2
85.8
66.7
87.2
73.0
90.2
71.0
72.5
69.0
73.7
75.7
2 to 2.5 years after training (n=29)
73.6
83.0
64.9
80.9
74.9
84.3
70.6
64.2
67.7
68.5
74.8
2.5 to 4.5 years after training (n=28)
74.0
83.9
58.9
81.6
74.7
83.8
69.3
69.5
78.4
78.1
74.5
Wisconsin RtI Center
35
2/2/12
BoQ and SIR Parallels
 Annual
 Leadership
Team
 Overall score and Subscale scores
 Action Planning
 Thorough measure fidelity of implementation of
systems
Wisconsin RtI Center
36
Math, PBIS ,
Math, PBIS,
0.62%
Reading, 0.45%
2/2/12
Math, Reading, 1.83%
PBIS, Reading, 2.59%
Math, 0.85%
PBIS, 30.91%
None, 59.81%
Reading, 2.94%
% of Schools with
State-level Implementation Data
PBIS/Reading RtI/Math RtI
Wisconsin RtI Center
37
2/2/12
Math,
Math, PBIS,
PBIS ,
Reading, 1.11%
1.55%
Reading, 7.33%
Math,
Reading,
4.55%
PBIS, Reading,
6.44%
Of the schools
taking a selfassessment, what
Math, 2.11%
PBIS, 76.91%
Wisconsin RtI Center
38
2/2/12
• Team schedule and structure
• Collaborative Team processes
and protocols
• Student Data collected
• Student Data analysis
Wisconsin RtI Center
39
2/2/12
Crandon Elementary
• Total District Enrollment- 917
• Total Elementary Enrollment- 470
Wisconsin RtI Center
40
2/2/12
Crandon Elementary
Reading SIR
PBIS TIC
PBIS SAS
10/20/2011
9/30/2011
11/4/2011
Overall
Infrastructure
Overall
77% Overall
75%
High Quality Instruction
Infrastructure
Commitment
75% Monitoring
78%
Balanced Assessment
Initial
Implementation Team
83% Management
78%
Collaboration
Infrastructure
50% District Support
80%
Leadership & Organizational
Structures
Initial
Implementation Define Expectations
Universal
Initial
Implementation Teach Expectations
100% Teach Expectations
84%
Selected & Intensive
Infrastructure
100% Reward System
88%
Culturally Responsive
Purpose Building Violations
50% Violations System
Family Engagement
Infrastructure
67%
Self Assessment
Reward
Classroom
67% Define Expectations 94%
Information System
100%
Function Based Support
Wisconsin RtI Center
100%
64%
41
2/2/12
Crandon Elementary
Team Structures
• Grade Level Common Planning Time
• Once a week
• Scheduled during a special
• One week, grade level meets with Literacy Coach
• To improve instruction in reading
• Other week, grade level meets with Interventionist
• To discuss student’s of concern
• Review behavior and academic data
• Meet in book room to review Data Wall
Wisconsin RtI Center
42
2/2/12
Crandon Elementary
Team Structures
• Leadership Team- PBIS team (trained at Universal)
• Two fourth grade teachers
• Principal
• Internal PBIS coach (school councilor)
• 5th grade teacher
• Interventionist (systems coach)
• School psychologist
• Meets every other Wednesday- After school
• Planning stage
• Discuss what is happening at Tier I
• Discuss Tier 2 options or plan
• Review intervention plans
• Review behavioral and academic data
Wisconsin RtI Center
43
2/2/12
Crandon Elementary
Team Structures
• Leadership Team- REACh Team (academics)
• Second grade teacher
• Title I teacher
• Principal
• Internal PBIS coach (school councilor)
• 5th grade teacher
• Interventionist (systems coach)
• School psychologist
• Meets every other Wednesday
• Discuss students who are not making gains
• Discuss Tier 2 options or plans
• Review intervention plans
• Review academic and behavioral data
Wisconsin RtI Center
44
2/2/12
Crandon Elementary
Team Structures
• Building Leadership Team- team of 8
• Principal
• Grade level teachers
• Title Teachers
• Special Education teachers
• School Counselor
•
•
•
•
Meets once a week
Review academic and behavioral data
Discuss how school is doing as a whole
Discuss progress on building levels goals that are tied to data
retreat
Wisconsin RtI Center
45
2/2/12
Crandon Elementary
Team schedules
• PBIS and REACh share four members
• Duty of the shared members to inform both teams
• Bring whole picture together
• Ensure whole child data review
• PBIS and REACh- Elementary teams meet with MS/HS team
• Goal is to meet quarterly
• Currently meeting weekly to help MS/HS teams set up
• All Day Common Planning time
• 5 times a year
• Half day at grade level
• Half day cross grade level
Wisconsin RtI Center
46
2/2/12
Crandon Elementary
Collaborative Processes/procedures
• Use data wall with all student data
• Update data wall once a quarter, after benchmarking is done
• Use green folder with common documentation papers
• Same documentation paper, different colors for
academic or behavioral concerns
• Currently working on same form to document each personnel
actions
• Progress monitor once a month
• Tier 3 interventions progress monitor every two weeks
• Review data at all meetings
Wisconsin RtI Center
47
2/2/12
Crandon Student Data Card
Crandon
Elementary
Data
WallQuarter
One
Crandon
Elementary
Data
WallQuarter
Two
Crandon Elementary Data Wall
Wisconsin RtI Center
48
2/2/12
Crandon Elementary
Student Data Collected and
Analyzed
DIBELS data
SWIS data
COMPASS data
Reading Levels
On the Mark data
Scholastic Reading Inventory
data
• Scholastic Math Inventory
data
• Behavior Intervention Plan
data
• Attendance data
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Set up data wall to identify
students at
• Basic
• Minimal
• Proficient
• Advanced
• All data sets are
analyzed to determine
where to place student
(i.e. if students scores
low on one measure
and higher on others.
Team discusses where
to place student)
Wisconsin RtI Center
49
2/2/12
School Handbook of Practices
RtI
• Data-based
decisionmaking
processes
• Teaming
calendar
Culturally
Responsive
Practices
PBIS
• Family
Child” Communication
• Access to data
“Whole
Response
Process
Wisconsin RtI Center
50
2/2/12
Suggestions for Explaining MultiLevel System of Support to staff
 Start
with Shared Vision and Goals
 Review shared features of PBIS and RtI with
teachers


At Universal AND
Selected and Targeted Levels
 Review

student level “look” at the triangle
Reiterate that all integrated support must be
guided by multiple data sets
 Define
Multi-Level System of Support within
your local context
Wisconsin RtI Center
51
2/2/12
How to work smarter
Create
 Common team structures
 Common protocols for data-based decisionmaking
 Shared calendars for screening and collaborating
 Data boards with combined academic, behavior,
and demographic data
 Opportunities to infuse cultural considerations
 Family communication
 Common professional development in processes,
data-based decision-making
Wisconsin RtI Center
52
2/2/12
Blending our efforts through the
use of teams:
Common Team Structures
Universal
Team
Secondary
Systems
Team
Problem
Solving Team
Tertiary
Systems
Team
Wisconsin RtI Center
53
2/2/12
Multiple Levels of Support
Necessary Conversations (Teams)
Universal
Team
• Plans school& class-wide
staff
development
and supports
• Reviews
school-wide &
Universal data
trends
Secondary
Systems Team
Problem
Solving Team
Tertiary
Systems Team
• Uses process
data
• Standing
team
• Uses process
data
• Determines
overall
intervention
effectiveness
• Creates
plans for one
youth at a
time
• Determines
overall
intervention
effectiveness
• Represents
highest level
of staff
expertise
Wisconsin RtI Center
54
2/2/12
Teams to Connect the Data
Universal Team
Plans school-wide support
Secondary Systems
Team
Uses data; determines overall
intervention effectiveness
Problem Solving Team
Standing team; uses data driven
process for one youth at a time
Tertiary Systems Team
Uses data; determines overall
intensive intervention
effectiveness
Who
Who
Who
Who
When
When
When
When
What Data
Academic Behavior
What Data
Academic Behavior
What Data
What Data
Academic Behavior
Academic Behavior
Wisconsin RtI Center
55
2/2/12
Tools
Data Audit Tool
• District And School
Multi-Level System Tool
District Data Audit Tool
Wisconsin RtI Center
56
2/2/12
Tool Links
• Data Audit Tool-District
• http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/131610
4404_Wisconsin%20PBIS%20Network%20Data%20Audit%20Tool%20%20District.pdf
• Data Audit Tool-School
• http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/131610
6031_Wisconsin%20PBIS%20Network%20Data%20Audit%20Tool%20%20School.pdf
• Multi-Level System Tool
• http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/assets/files/resources/132753
0042_MLSS%20Triangle%20Charts%20blank.xls
• School-wide Implementation Review
• http://www.wisconsinrticenter.org/educators/gettingstarted/sir.html
• Benchmarks of Quality
• http://www.wisconsinpbisnetwork.org/coaches/pbis-inaction/fidelity-tools.html
Wisconsin RtI Center
57
2/2/12
Think MARATHON, not SPRINT!
1.
2.
3.
Recognize that successful implementation
is a multiple- year commitment.
Begin implementation with components
already nearly in place, then continue with
subsequent components.
Integrate professional development and
collaboration as the primary means for
capacity building and sustainability.
Wisconsin RtI Center
Mellard & Johnson (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s
guide to implementing response to intervention.

similar documents