PBIS in Personnel Development Programs
Brandi Simonsen, Rob Horner & George Sugai
OSEP Center on PBISCenter for Behavioral Education & Research
University of ConnecticutMay 21 2010
www.pbis.org www.cber.org www.swis.org
• Education > EdPsy > SpEd• www.epsy.uconn.edu
www.education.uconn.edu
www.pbis.org
www.cber.org
Conceptual Framework or Logic Model
• Behavioral theory
• Applied behavior analysis
• Experimental/quantitative research
Audiences
• General/special educators
• Administrators• School
psychologists, counselors, social workers
Outcomes
• Certification &/or master’s
• SWPBS practices & systems
General Curriculum/Competency Areas
• Behavioral theory & behavior analysis
• Classroom & behavior management
• School-wide discipline
• SWPBS practices & systems
Structure/Courses
• Basic classroom & behavior management
• Individualized positive behavior support
• Applied behavior analysis
• Practicum in positive behavior support
SWPBS Personnel Development Features
Other• Professional Development Collaborative• CBER Research Collaborative• Integrated Bachelors Master’s Program (IBM) & Teacher Certification
Program for College Graduates (TCPCG)• UConn Administrator Preparation Program (UCAPP 6th yr)
General/special education integration
Evidence-based practices & systems
Prevention & teaching oriented
Theory grounded
RtI logic & framework
Competency based
Educationally relevant & important activities,
experiences, & products
Culturally & contextually oriented
Data-based decision making
• SWPBS• Literacy• Post-Secondary
SWPBS Conceptual Foundations
Behaviorism
ABA
PBS
SWPBS
Laws of Behavior
Applied Behavioral Technology
Social Validity
All Students
VIOLENCE PREVENTION
Positive predictable school-wide
climate High rates academic &
social success
Formal social skills instruction
Positive active supervision & reinforcement
Positive adult role models
Multi-component, multi-year school-family-community
effort PREVENTION SCIENCE
LITERATURE
• Surgeon General’s Report on Youth Violence (2001)
• Coordinated Social Emotional & Learning (Greenberg et al., 2003)
• Center for Study & Prevention of Violence (2006)
• White House Conference on School Violence (2006)
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (in press). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality.
www.pbis.org
“Is SWPBS evidence-based practice?”
SWPBS isFramework for enhancing adoption & implementation of
Continuum of evidence-based interventions to achieve
Academically & behaviorally important outcomes for
All students
SWPBS Logic!Successful individual student behavior support is linked to host environments or school climates that are effective, efficient, relevant, durable, salable, & logical for all students(Zins & Ponti, 1990)
•Achieve desired outcome?Effective
• Doable by real implementer?Efficient
•Contextual & cultural?Relevant
• Lasting?Durable
•Transportable?Scalable
•Conceptually Sound?Logical
Host Environment Features
PRACTICES
SupportingStaff Behavior
SupportingStudent Behavior
OUTCOMES
Supporting Social Competence &Academic Achievement
SupportingDecisionMaking
IntegratedElements
IMPLEMENTATION W/ FIDELITY
CONTINUUM OF EVIDENCE-BASEDINTERVENTIONS
CONTENT EXPERTISE &
FLUENCY
PREVENTION& EARLY
INTERVENTION
CONTINUOUSPROGRESS
MONITORING
UNIVERSAL SCREENING
DATA-BASEDDECISION MAKING
& PROBLEM SOLVING
RtI
Classroom
SWPBSPractices
Non-classroom Family
Student
• Smallest #• Evidence-based
• Biggest, durable effect
SCHOOL-WIDE1.Leadership team
2.Behavior purpose statement
3.Set of positive expectations & behaviors
4.Procedures for teaching SW & classroom-wide expected behavior
5.Continuum of procedures for encouraging expected behavior
6.Continuum of procedures for discouraging rule violations
7.Procedures for on-going data-based monitoring & evaluation
EVIDENCE-BASED
INTERVENTIONPRACTICES
CLASSROOM1.All school-wide
2.Maximum structure & predictability in routines & environment
3.Positively stated expectations posted, taught, reviewed, prompted, & supervised.
4.Maximum engagement through high rates of opportunities to respond, delivery of evidence-based instructional curriculum & practices
5.Continuum of strategies to acknowledge displays of appropriate behavior.
6.Continuum of strategies for responding to inappropriate behavior.
INDIVIDUAL STUDENT1.Behavioral competence at school & district levels
2.Function-based behavior support planning
3.Team- & data-based decision making
4.Comprehensive person-centered planning & wraparound processes
5.Targeted social skills & self-management instruction
6. Individualized instructional & curricular accommodations
NONCLASSROOM1.Positive expectations & routines taught & encouraged
2.Active supervision by all staff (Scan, move, interact)
3.Precorrections & reminders
4.Positive reinforcement
FAMILY ENGAGEMENT1.Continuum of positive behavior support for all families
2.Frequent, regular positive contacts, communications, & acknowledgements
3.Formal & active participation & involvement as equal partner
4.Access to system of integrated school & community resources
Teacher__________________________ Rater_______________________
Date___________
Instructional Activity Time Start_______
Time End________
Tally each Positive Student Contacts
Total # Tally each Negative Student Contacts
Total #
Ratio of Positives to Negatives: _____ to 1
Classroom Management: Self-Assessment
Classroom Management Practice Rating
1. I have arranged my classroom to minimize crowding and distraction Yes No
2. I have maximized structure and predictability in my classroom (e.g., explicit classroom routines, specific directions, etc.).
Yes No
3. I have posted, taught, reviewed, and reinforced 3-5 positively stated expectations (or rules). Yes No
4. I provided more frequent acknowledgement for appropriate behaviors than inappropriate behaviors (See top of page).
Yes No
5. I provided each student with multiple opportunities to respond and participate during instruction.
Yes No
6. My instruction actively engaged students in observable ways (e.g., writing, verbalizing) Yes No
7. I actively supervised my classroom (e.g., moving, scanning) during instruction. Yes No
8. I ignored or provided quick, direct, explicit reprimands/redirections in response to inappropriate behavior.
Yes No
9. I have multiple strategies/systems in place to acknowledge appropriate behavior (e.g., class point systems, praise, etc.).
Yes No
10. In general, I have provided specific feedback in response to social and academic behavior errors and correct responses.
Yes No
Overall classroom management score:
10-8 “yes” = “Super” 7-5 “yes” = “So-So” <5 “yes” = “Improvement Needed”# Yes___
Name______________________________ Date_____________
Setting □ Hallway □ Entrance □ Cafeteria
□ Playground □ Other_______________Time Start_________
Time End _________
Tally each Positive Student Contacts Total #
Ratio of Positives to Negatives: _____: 1Tally each Negative Student Contacts Total #
Non-Classroom Management: Self-Assessment
1. Did I have at least 4 positive for 1 negative student contacts? Yes No
2. Did I move throughout the area I was supervising? Yes No
3. Did I frequently scan the area I was supervising? Yes No
4. Did I positively interact with most of the students in the area? Yes No
5. Did I handle most minor rule violations quickly and quietly? Yes No
6. Did I follow school procedures for handling major rule violations? Yes No
7. Do I know our school-wide expectations (positively stated rules)? Yes No
8. Did I positively acknowledge at least 5 different students for displaying our school-wide expectations?
Yes No
Overall active supervision score:
7-8 “yes” = “Super Supervision”
5-6 “yes” = “So-So Supervision”
<5 “yes” = “Improvement Needed”
# Yes______
Primary Prevention:School-/Classroom-Wide Systems for
All Students,Staff, & Settings
Secondary Prevention:Specialized Group
Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior
Tertiary Prevention:Specialized
IndividualizedSystems for Students
with High-Risk Behavior
~80% of Students
~15%
~5%
CONTINUUM OFSCHOOL-WIDE
INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR
SUPPORT
ALL
SOME
FEW
1-5% 1-5%
5-10% 5-10%
80-90% 80-90%
Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based
•High Intensity
Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based
•Intense, durable proceduresTargeted Group Interventions
•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response
Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)
•High efficiency•Rapid response
Universal Interventions•All students
•Preventive, proactive
Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive
Responsiveness to Intervention
Academic Systems Behavioral Systems
Circa 1996
RTIIntegrated Continuum
Mar 10 2010
Academic Continuum
Behavior Continuum
Universal
Targeted
Intensive
All
Some
FewContinuum of Support for
ALL
Dec 7, 2007
Universal
Targeted
IntensiveContinuum of
Support for ALL
Dec 7, 2007
Science
Soc Studies
Reading
Math
Soc skills
Basketball
Spanish
Label behavior…not people
Universal
Targeted
IntensiveContinuum of
Support for ALL
Dec 7, 2007
Prob Sol.
Coop play
Adult rel.
Anger man.
Attend.
Peer interac
Ind. play
Label behavior…not people
~80% of Students
~5%
ESTABLISHING CONTINUUM of SWPBS
SECONDARY PREVENTION• Check in/out• Targeted social skills instruction• Peer-based supports• Social skills club•
TERTIARY PREVENTION• Function-based support• Wraparound• Person-centered planning••
PRIMARY PREVENTION• Teach SW expectations• Proactive SW discipline• Positive reinforcement• Effective instruction• Parent engagement•
~15%
Agreements
Team
Data-based Action Plan
ImplementationEvaluation
GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION
PROCESS: “Getting Started”
Effective Implementation
Science(SISEP)
Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycle
Funding Visibility PolicyPoliticalSupport
Training Coaching Behavioral ExpertiseEvaluation
LEADERSHIP TEAM(Coordination)
Local School/District Implementation Demonstrations
SWPBS Implementation
Blueprintwww.pbis.org
