of 16
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
1/16
A Review of the Tier Two
Behavior Support Program at
Highland Springs Elementary
Check-in / Check-out
Executive Summary by Joe Koont
Virginia Commonwealth Universit
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
2/16
Table of Contents
1. Background and Context.....p. 3
2. Evaluation Design.....p. 5
3. Findings.....p. 8
4. Implications and Recommendations.....p. 11
5. Conclusion and References.....p.16
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
3/16
! From 2008 - 2010, Highland SpringsElementary failed to earn Virginia Department
of Education (VDOE) academic accreditation.
Schools that failed to earn state accreditation
were required to implement a specific school
improvement plan model. There were many
academic improvement plans, as well as plans
to reduce discipline. Disruptive behaviors
lower overall student achievement because
they impede the learning of all students and
monopolize a significant portion of teachers
and administrators time. (Anderson, 2009)
! In 2009, Highland Springs Elementaryimplemented a school-wide discipline
program. This program is based on a system
developed by VDOEs Training and Technical
Assistance Center (TTAC). This school-wide
program is designed to create a universal set
of expectations and consequences for
students behavior. In September 2010,
Highland Springs Elementary implemented
phase II of TTACs program. This second
phase consisted of a positive behavior support
system for students who needed individualized
help beyond the school-wide discipline plan.
! Positive behavior support is a proactiveway of dealing with student behavior.
Traditional methods of discipline, such as
suspension, time outs, and loss of privileges
are reactive. Positive behavior support is
intended to reduce the exclusionary practices
of traditional discipline in favor of proactive
behavior management. (Luiselli, Putnam,
Handler, & Feinberg, 2005)
! Highland Springs Elementary realizedthat student behavior was taking up a large
portion of teachers and administrators time.
By reducing discipline, Highland Springs
Elementary hopes to increase the time
students are on task and learning. Their
school-wide discipline program and the CICO
portion of that program are part of the larger
school improvement plan aimed at raising
overall student achievement. Highland
Springs Elementary is starting the third year of
the CICO program and is ready to evaluate the
program to determine if the time and
resources invested are helping toward their
goal of increased student achievement.
Background and Context
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
4/16
!! The ultimate goal of CICO is to prevent disruptive behavior in students who need supportbeyond the effective school-wide discipline program. The program is designed for students to
check-in with an adult in the morning, carry an individualized behavior plan throughout the day, and
check-out with the same adult at the end of the day. The check-in is intended to be a positive start
to the day. The adult conferences with the student and together they talk about the expectations for
the day and set behavior goals. The student then takes a behavior chart with him or her that
teachers use to record
their behavior at
different intervals
throughout the day. The
intervals are designed to
be short time periods
with specific behavior
expectations. These
behavior expectations
are written in simple
terms with a rating scale
that has only three
indicators for the
teacher to circle or
mark. The individualized behavior charts are designed to be easy for the student to understand
and the teacher to document. At the end of the day, the students again conference with the same
adult and they chart their individual progress toward goals they set with their adult mentor. The
effective school-wide discipline program is beneficial for the majority of students who attend
Highland Springs Elementary. For those students who need more personalized attention, the CICO
system helps minimize their negative behavior.
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
5/16
Evaluation Design
! When this study was first conceptualized,it was originally a quantitative study looking at
the effectiveness of the CICO program in terms
of the discipline data such as office referrals and
suspensions. After an initial conversation with
the client, it was clear that this evaluation would
be much more qualitative in nature. The client
has a clear understanding of the quantitativedata. She knows that this program is effective
in reducing the number of office referrals and
suspensions. She was more interested in the
perceptions of the program and the efficiency of
the daily process. For this reason, the
evaluation became a responsive evaluation
using a mixed method approach. The
evaluation used a mix of interviews, focus
groups, and surveys to gather information from
various focus groups. In between each data
collection cycle, the client was consulted for
understanding and clarification. The flow chart
on the following page shows the order in which
the evaluation occurred. A linear data collection
model was used to allow the evaluator to gainnew understanding before the next data
collection cycle.
Interviews...
allow for the evaluator to get an in-depth
personal perspective from a key stakeholder.
Focus Groups...are important tool for evaluators because
they get multiple perspectives in a single
meeting. They also allow the evaluator to
gather non-verbal observations from cross-
talk and body language.
Surveys...
can reach a wide audience quickly and they
allow the evaluator to quantify the opinions
of stakeholders. The anonymous nature of
surveys also lets stakeholder be honest
without the fear of repercussions.
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
6/16
Program Evaluation Implementation
!The initial interviews were extremely
helpful in shaping the focus group and survey
process. One of the first discussions centered on
how to survey the students. The principal did not
want to have to get permission from parents for
the evaluator to conduct a focus group. The
evaluator and the client decided that someone
from within the school would administer a brief
survey to the students. This would be someone
the students were comfortable with. A simple,
three-question survey was developed and
administered to the students in the program.
While this was not ideal, it was a compromise ththe client was comfortable with.
! The teacher survey was sent out usingGoogle Docs. The survey provided data that
helped shape the focus group questions. After
discussing the results with the client, it was
decided to add additional questions about the Ti
One, school-wide behavior support program. Th
research indicated that having a strong Tier One
program was important for the success of a Tier
Two program. The evaluator wanted to make
sure there was some data collected about the Ti
One program.
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
7/16
! There was also a compromise made onthe teacher focus groups. Initially, the plan
called for separate focus groups for teachers
who had students in the CICO program and
teachers who did not have students in the
program. This was initially set up, but weather
cancelations forced the groups to be
rescheduled. With the short notice, the focus
groups had to be a mix of teachers. While this
was not the original plan, it ended up enriching
the discussion. The evaluator relied on the
client to set up the focus groups. If these were
conducted again, it would have been helpful
for the evaluator to have a list of the
participants and to be able to touch base with
them ahead of time. It should also be noted
that during one of the focus groups, the power
went out. There was a window in the room, so
the blinds were opened and the focus group
continued. The participants indicated that they
did not mind and this event did not seem to
interfere with the data collection.
! Given more time, a follow up surveyand focus group would have been helpful.
Time and logistics did not allow for this, but
further questions about the students/teacher
interaction during the day would have been
helpful.
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
8/16
Findings - Teacher Survey
! 29 teachers responded to the survey. The survey identified the teachers in one of threegroups. The first group is teachers who currently have students in the CICO program. The next
group is teachers who do not currently have students in the CICO program, but have in the past. The
final group of teachers have never had a student in the CICO program. The teachers were asked to
rate the following ten statements on a scale from 1 to 5, where a score of 1 means they Strongly
Disagreeagree and a 5 means they Strongly Agreewith the statement.
1.I have a thorough understanding of the Check-in/Check-out program at my school.
2.The students in this program show improvement in their behavior.
3.The students behavior chart is easy for the
classroom teacher to complete.
4.The students behavior chart is easy for the
teacher to understand.
5.The students behavior chart is easy for the
student to understand.
6.I feel the level of parent communication in the
Check-in/Check-out program is sufficient.
7.I understand the selection criteria for students in
the Check-in/Check-out program.
8.The Check-in/Check-out program is a worthwhile time investment by the school administration.
9.The level of communication between the Check-in/Check-out program administrator and the
classroom teacher is sufficient.
10.The Check-in/Check-out program does not significantly take away from my instructional time.
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
9/16
2.00$
2.50$
3.00$
3.50$
4.00$
4.50$
5.00$
Q1$
Q2$
Q3$
Q4$
Q5$
Q6$
Q&$
Q8$
Q9$
Q10$
Teachers$With$Current/$
Former$Students$in$
CICO$
Teachers$Without$
Students$in$CICO$
There was a clear difference between the teachers who have or had a students in the CICO program
and those who do not.
Average Rating by Teacher Group
Average Respo se by eacher Groups from C CO Su vey
Teacher
Group Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10
Currently
Using CICO 4.00 3.43 4.07 4.29 4.14 2.93 3.43 4.07 3.36 3.93
Used CICO in
the Past 4.25 3.38 3.63 3.75 3.75 3.13 3.38 3.50 3.25 3.50
No CICO
Experience 3.57 3.71 3.14 3.57 3.43 3.14 3.14 3.86 3.14 3.29
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
10/16
Findings - Student Survey
! The student survey only had threequestions. The first question asked, What do
you like about the Check-in/Check-out
program? Six of the 13 students indicated they
like the candy or prizes. Three students
indicated they like that the program helped them
control their behavior and the final four students
responded with various other answers. 12 of the
13 students were able to articulate that they
behaved better because they were in the CICO
program.
I"behave"be(er"because"I"am"in"the""
Check3in/Check3out"Program."
Yes$
No$
I'm$not$sure?$
What%do%you%like%about%the%%
CICO%Program?%
Candy/Prizes-
Behavior-Related-
Other-
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
11/16
! Time and communication wereoverarching themes that surfaced among all
stakeholders in this evaluation. The CICO
program at Highland Springs Elementary is
constrained by the hours in the school day and
the available resources. The program is also
influenced by external factors such as home
environment and parental involvement that are
beyond the control of the school. There are
areas where time and resources could be used
more efficiently and there are channels of
communication that could be more productive.
Implications and Recommendations
Improving Perception
! Highland Springs elementary may wantto consider additional training and information
sessions about the CICO program. As new
teachers come on, they will need to be trained,
even if they do not have students in the
program. You may also want to consider
having teachers sit in on the Effective School-
wide Discipline (ESD) meetings on a rotating
basis. Through the interviews and focus
groups, there seems to be a perception that the
ESD group had substantial input regarding the
CICO program. Having teachers participate in
those meetings would let them feel like they are
a part of the process and it may also help them
understand the limited resources the school
administration is dealing with.
! Parent involvement and communicationwas also a recurring theme. Having the
parents more involved in the CICO program
may also increase the positive perception by
the teachers. The teachers understand that the
students have difficult home lives and they
want the parents to be aware of their
challenging behavior and be part of the
solution, if possible.
! Overall communication transparencymay also help with the perception of the
program. Letting teachers know more about
the selection process and why certain students
get in the program and why certain students
leave the program are important. The teachers
had varied understandings of the program and
misinformation can lead to misunderstanding.
That was clear from the survey results and the
discrepancy between the teachers who had
students in the program and those that did not.
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
12/16
!The teachers and CICO administrators
all indicated that there was not enough time to
counsel the students as much as they would
like. While it is not realistic to have the
students leave class earlier than they already
do, perhaps there could be an extended check-
out period once per week. The additional time
could be for the whole group or on a rotating
basis with individual students. That extended
block does not necessarily have to be at the
end of the day. It could be during lunch or
some other consistent time. The purpose of
this extended block would not be to go over
that days behavior chart, but instead go over a
weeks worth of data or spend extra time
talking about the students behavior goals for
the future. It will take some planning and
organization by the school administration, but
an extended time period would be a helpful
modification to the CICO program.
The school administration will want to look
closely at the time this program takes for
teachers who have more that one student inthe program. In both focus groups, the
teachers who had more than one student in
CICO indicated that keeping up with multiple
student charts was difficult. One student and
one chart seemed to be manageable. Theschool administration will want to further
investigate alternative reporting methods for
teachers with multiple students in the program.
During the check-out process, there is a limited
amount of time. The students have to catch
the bus or day care van and the CICO
administrator may have an afternoon duty. The
more students
the CICO
administrator
has, the less
individual
attention the
administrator can
provide. The
school administration may want to consider
identifying more staff to serve as CICO
administrators. This could be any staff
member that is not a classroom teacher. By
reducing the number of students in each group,
it creates more time to work with each student
at the end of the day. This would take morecoordination and oversight, but it could have a
positive effect and help alleviate some of the
time constraints at the end of the day.
Time Considerations
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
13/16
! There are several areas wherecommunication methods and processes can be
improved throughout the CICO program. The
two major areas for potential improvement are
parent communication and staff communication.
There seems to be a misunderstanding and
some inconsistencies regarding parent
communication. The CICO behavior sheet has a
place for a parent signature. One CICO
administrator does not send home the behavior
sheets and the other CICO administrator send
them home once per week. The teachers in the
focus group definitely had a misunderstanding
about how to communicate with parents through
this program. One teacher stated in a focus
group, see Ive been writing notes all yearthinking parents were seeing the notes at least
on Fridays but I guess theyre not. The other
participants also seemed unsure about wheathe
or not their parents saw the CICO behavior
sheets. This could be easily fixed with a clear
policy about the level of parent communication.
The teachers also indicated a desire for the
parents to more involved in the process. There
were several suggestions such as having the
parents come in for an orientation to the
program. When a child enters this program,
they have been a consistent behavior problem
and most likely have been suspended. The
parents should be motivated to come in and
learn about the program if it will keep their child
from being suspended. This could also build
some good will between the school and the
parent because they will see the time and
personal attention that the school is committing
to their son or daughter.
!
Communication
Ive been writing notes
all year thinking
parents were seeing
the notes at least on
Fridays but I guesstheyre not.
-Focus Group Participant
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
14/16
! There also could be more consistentcommunication between the teacher and the
CICO administrator. The CICO administrator
plays a significant role in the students
education. The teachers indicated a desire for
more consistent communication to provide
some connection to the behavior sheets. The
numbers on the behavior sheets often do not
tell the whole story about the students
behavior. Also, the teacher or the CICO
administrator may find things out about the
students personal life that they would not put
on the chart, but would want the other person
to know. Along those same lines, there needs
to be consistency in the teachers reporting on
the sheet. The numbers on the sheet are the
main way the teacher communicates the
behavior. Having the teachers using the CICO
program participate in a norming exercise may
be helpful. The teachers could be presented
with a scenario and they could discuss how
they would score that on the behavior sheets.
This would help them be more consistent. It
may also be helpful to create a forum for the
teachers in the CICO program. These
teachers all have students who have been
identified as needing Tier Two behavior
intervention. Creating a forum for these
teachers to share ideas and have a support
network may also be helpful. This could be in
the form of a quarterly meeting or some other
digital communication forum.
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
15/16
! The school administration may want toconsider several modifications to the CICO
program. One of the ideas that surfaced
through the focus groups was having a different
model for the younger students and the older
students. The teachers seemed to think that the
program and the behavior chart was better
suited for the older students. Further studies
will need to be conducted to
see if there is an alternative
behavior sheet or check-out
model for the students in
the younger grades.
! The behavior chartitself can be a trigger for
students. The whole point
of the CICO program is to
reduce negative behavior,
but the chart can be a
trigger at the end of the day
for students who did not get
the score they wanted. For
certain students, the CICO administrators may
want to consider an alternative communication
method to prevent the chart from becoming a
trigger for negative behavior.
! An area where the teachers had a greatdeal of cognitive dissonance revolved around
focusing so much energy on the most disruptive
students and rewarding them for normal
behavior. The teachers also wanted to
recognize the students who consistently exhibit
positive behavior. The teachers stated a desire
to recognize these students more than every
nine weeks. The school administration may
want to involve the teachers in coming up with
ways to recognize the
most well behaved
students as well.
! A finalrecommendation that
bridges the gap
between Tier One and
Tier Two behavior
support is the need for
more classroom
guidance. One
teacher stated, We
need more [guidance
lessons]. With as
many issues and when I look at my class, I have
twenty-six students, more than half of my
students have anger management issues. The
teachers agreed that some type of weekly
guidance lesson that was consistent would be
helpful.
Potential Program Modifications
I think were setting some of
them up for a really harsh
reality check for when they get
out to real world kind of things
and theres not a cop with a
fanny pack full of lollipops,
because theyre expecting toget some type of reward for
doing every little thing.
- Teacher
7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary
16/16
References
!The findings from this study will be helpful to the school administrators at Highland
Springs Elementary or to a school administration looking to implement a Tier Two behavior
support program such as Check-in Check-out. This type of program relies on relationships
that are formed between adults and students. Relationships take time and are difficult, if not
impossible to quantify. The current research and the findings from this study both confirm the
need for teachers and staff that are dedicated to students and willing to follow a program.
Even if the program is not implemented with complete consistency and fidelity, the relationship
are what make the difference in childrens lives.
Conclusion
Report Prepared by Joe Koontz Virginia Commonwealth University koontzjd@vcu edu
Anderson, E. (2009). The effectiveness of a proactive school-wide discipline plan on office
! discipline referrals at the elementary school level. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).! Liberty University, Virginia.
Luiselli, J., Putnam, R., Handler, M., & Feinberg, A. (2005). Whole-school positive behavior
! supports: Effects on student discipline problems and academic performance. Educational! Psychology, 25(April-June), 183-198.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]