This is a presentation of the IL PBIS Network. All rights reserved.
Session #A4Universal Screening for
Behavior
Jennifer Rose, Illinois PBIS NetworkLynn Owens, Schaumburg CCSD 54
Session Objectives
This session will provide the tools to help prepare for screening:
1. Provide the rationale and benefits of Universal screening for behavior
2. Identify characteristics of evidence-based screeners for behavior
3. Illustrate how to organize Tier 2 teams and systems for implementing screening and interventions
Rationale: Prevalence Rates• How prevalent are emotional disorders among
school-age children and youth?Study Citation % of sample
with any impairment
% of sample with serious impairment
Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental
Disorders (MECA)
Shaffer et al., 1996 21% 5%
Great Smoky Mountains Study of
Youth
Burns et al., 1995 20% 11%
National Health & Nutrition Examination
Survey (NHANES)
Merikangas et al., 2010 13% 11%
Rationale: Early intervention is vital
• Research suggests that there’s a ‘window of opportunity’ ranging between 2-4 years when prevention is critical
Great Smoky Mountains Study: Age Between First Symptom and Initial Diagnosis
Source: O’Connell, Boat, & Warner, 2009
Rationale: Student Benefits Associated with Universal Screening
“The Commission found compelling research sponsored by OSEP on emotional and behavioral difficulties indicating that children at risk for these difficulties could also be identified through universal screening and more significant disabilities prevented through classroom-based approaches involving positive discipline and classroom management.”
Source: U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. (2002). A New Era:Revitalizing Special Education for Children and Their Families
“Untreated emotional problems have the potential to create barriers to learning that interfere with the mission of schools to educate all children.” (Adelman & Taylor, 2002)• “Without early intervention, children who routinely engage in aggressive,
coercive actions, are likely to develop more serious anti-social patterns of behaviors that are resistant to intervention.” (Walker, Ramsey, & Gresham, 2004)
Youth who are the victims of bullying and who lack adequate peer supports are vulnerable to mood and anxiety disorders (Deater-Deckard, 2001; Hawker & Boulton, 2000)
“Depressive disorders are consistently the most prevalent disorders among adolescent suicide victims (Gould, Greenberg, Velting, & Shaffer, 2003)
.
Rationale: Poor outcomes associated with delaying intervention
Universal Screening: Instrument Selection Criteria
Glover & Albers (2007) co-authored an article regarding application of the The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing in selecting a universal screening instrument for use in schools Key criteria:
Appropriateness for intended use Technical validity Usability/practicality
Universal Screening: Instrument Selection Criteria
Appropriateness: Matches developmental and contextual elements/needs of the
population and school Compatible with delivery model
• Frequency of screening• Outcomes are consistent with goals
Research validates instrument for intended screening purpose
Universal Screening: Selection Criteria• It is technically-valid:
• Adequate norms– Recent– Comparable to target population
demographically/geographically– Satisfactory size
» For example, the sample should contain at least 100 persons in the norm group for each age group measured
Universal Screening: Selection Criteria Validity continued
• Social validity (e.g., instrument/screening process is seen as both acceptable and important)
– For example, if an instrument is perceived as time-consuming, or the process of universal screening is not deemed as relevant to stakeholders, then results may not be valid and there will be a lack of staff buy-in
Universal Screening: Selection Criteria
Usability/practicality:• Cost-effective– Does not require specialized training to administer or
evaluate results– Does not interfere with instructional time or other required
tasks• Efficient– For example, identifies students who are withdrawn
(internalizers) as well as those who act out (externalizers)– Can be completed quickly
• Informs interventions– Results can be used to identify appropriate interventions– Aids in improving student outcomes
Summary of Featured Instruments
The following universal screening instruments are discussed to provide examples of various research-validated screeners: Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD) Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BASC-2/BESS) Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS)
PLEASE NOTE: THIS LIST DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AS AN ENDORSEMENT OF ANY OF THE FEATURED SCREENERS BY THE ILLINOIS PBIS NETWORK
Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders
SSBD: Walker & Severson, 1992
Overview
• Systematic Screener for Behavior Disorders (Walker & Severson, 1992) for grades 1-6– Validated by the Program Effectiveness Panel of the U.S. Department of
Education– Six research studies confirm the SSBD’s ability to systematically screen
and identify students at-risk of developing behavior problems– Universal screening with the SSBD is less costly and time-consuming than
traditional referral system (Walker & Severson, 1994)– Inexpensive
• Manual= $ 131.49 (includes reproducible screening forms) – Quick
• Entire screening process can be completed within 45 minutes to 1 hour per classroom
Multiple Gating Procedure (Adapted from Severson et al. 2007)
Teachers Rank Order then Select Top 3 Students
on Each Dimension (Externalizing &
Internalizing)
Teachers Rate Top 3 Students in Each Dimension (Externalizing &
Internalizing) on Critical Events, Adaptive and/or
Maladaptive Scales
Gate 1
Gate 2
Pass Gate 1
Pass Gate 2Tier 2
Intervention
Rank Ordering
Scoring
Teachers complete Critical Events Index checklist for top three internalizers and externalizers Internalizers with four or more and
externalizers with five or more critical events immediately pass gate two and are eligible for simple a secondary intervention (i.e., CICO)
Sample of SSBD Critical Events Form
Sample of SSBD CFI Form
BASC-2/Behavioral and Emotional Screening System
BASC-2/BESS: Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007
Overview• Behavioral and Emotional Screening System
(BESS) (Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007) Developed as a school-wide (Universal) screening tool
for children in grades Pre-K to 12• Similar to annual vision/hearing screenings
Identifies behavioral and emotional strengths and weaknesses
• Externalizing behaviors (e.g., acting out)• Internalizing behaviors (e.g., withdrawn)• Adaptive skills (e.g., social and self-care skills)
Sample of BASC-2/BESS Form
Administration & Scoring Criteria
The BASC-2/BESS uses T-scores to communicate results relative to the average (mean=50)
Identifiers and percentile ranks are provided for ease of interpretation
Normal risk level: T-score range 10-60Elevated risk level: T-score range 61-70Extremely Elevated risk level: T-score range
≥ 71
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire
SDQ: Goodman, 2001
Overview
The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 2001) is a free psychological measure available at www.sdqinfo.org Assesses emotional functioning of children
aged 3-17 based on parent, or teacher reports Various uses: Screening, clinical assessment,
progress monitoring, research tool
Administration & Scoring Criteria
The SDQ is comprised of five scales with five corresponding items
Each item is scored on a three-point Likert type scale Not true=0; Somewhat true=1; Certainly true=2
Factor analytically derived tool based on standard classification of psychological disorders
Overview
Emotional Symptoms Scale
Conduct Problems Scale
Hyperactivity Scale
Peer Problems Scale
Prosocial Scale
Often complains of headaches, stomach-aches…
Often has temper tantrums or hot tempers
Restless, overactive, cannot stay still for long
Rather solitary, tends to play alone
Considerate of other people’s feelings
Many worries, often seems worried
Generally obedient, usually does what…
Constantly fidgeting or squirming
Has at least one good friend
Shares readily with other children
Often unhappy, downhearted or tearful
Often fights with other children or bullies them
Easily distracted, concentration wanders
Generally liked by other children
Helpful if someone is hurt, upset or feeling ill
Nervous or clingy in new situations
Often lies or cheats
Thinks things out before acting
Picked on or bullied by other children
Kind to younger children
Many fears, easily scared
Steals from home, school or elsewhere
Sees tasks through to the end, good attention span
Gets on better with adults than with other children
Often volunteers to help others
SDQ scales and corresponding items
Sample SDQ Form
Student Risk Screening Scale
SRSS: Drummond, 1993
Overview
The Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS; Drummond, 1993) is a free screening instrument Initially developed for elementary school students
• Preliminary research indicates that the SRSS is also acceptable for use in middle and high schools
Extensive research supports validity/reliability of the SRSS
• Lane, Parks, Kalberg, & Carter, 2007; Lane, Kalberg, Parks, & Carter, 2008; Lane et al., 2010; Severson, Walker, Hope-Doolittle, Kratochwill, & Gresham, 2007; Walker, Ramsey, & Gresham, 2003
Administration
Names Steal Lie, Cheat, Sneak
Behavior Problem
Peer Rejection
Low Academic Achievement
Negative Attitude
Aggressive Behavior
Totals
Marcos 2 3 3 1 3 2 2 16
Tercel 0 0 0 3 3 1 0 7
Jonathan 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2
Sample Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS) Results
Administration & Scoring Criteria
Behaviors are rated from 0-3 0= never; 1= occasionally; 2=sometimes; and
3=frequently Risk status is based upon the following ranges:
• High=9-21; moderate=4-8; and low=0-3Schools can create their own screening
forms using excel, or other computer software
Social Skills Improvement System: Performance Screening Guide
SSIS: Gresham & Elliott, 2008Originally the SRSS
Overview
The Social Skills Improvement System, Performance Screening Guide (SSIS, 2008; Gresham & Elliott) developed as a classwide screener
Normed for students ages 3-18The SSIS consists of 83 items categorized as ‘Social
Skills,’ ‘Problem Behaviors,’ and ‘Academic Competence’
Overview
Social Skills=46 items measured using four-point Likert scale combined with rating of significance of behavior
• Subscales:» Communication» Cooperation» Assertion» Responsibility» Engagement» Self-control
Sample SSIS Social Skills form
Administration
• Problem Behaviors=30 items, four-point Likert scale• Subscales:
– Externalizing– Bullying– Hyperactivity/inattention– Internalizing– Autism Spectrum
Sample SSIS Problem Behaviors form
Administration
• Academic Competence= 7 items, class ranking plus five-point Likert scale to assess academic skill areas
Motivation to learn Reading skills Math skills
Sample SSIS Academic Competence form
Universal Screening: Sample of Evidence-Based Screening Instruments
Screener Pros ConsSystematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD; Walker & Severson, 1990)http://store.cambiumlearning.com
• Well-validated (Endorsed in 1990 by the Program Effectiveness Panel of the U.S. Department of Education)
• Efficient (Screening process can be completed within 45 minutes to 1 hour)
• Most effective instrument for identifying internalizers (Lane et al., 2009)
• Meets AERA/APA instrument selection criteria
• Inexpensive (Manual= $ 134.49; includes reproducible screening forms)
• Normed for grades 1-6 • Dated norms (normed in 1990)• Normative sample skewed to
western U.S. region
BASC-2/BESS (Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007)http://www.pearsonassessments.com
• Measures behaviors associated with internalizing and externalizing problem behaviors and academic competence
• Meets AERA/APA instrument selection criteria
• Incorporates three validity measures to rule out response bias
• Utilizes large (N= 12,350 children & youth), nationally-representative sample
• Web-based screening capacity available via AIMSewb
• Can be expensive for districts/schools that don’t have access to a scantron machine
• $26.25 for 25 hand-scored protocols• Online access via AIMSweb:
Additional $1.00 per student for subscribers and $4.00 per student for non-subscribers)
• Hand-scoring is time-consuming and reduces access to validity measures
• Computer software is expensive ($620)
Universal Screening: Sample ofEvidence-Based Screening Instruments
Screener Pros Cons
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 2001)http://www.sdqinfo.org
• Measures internalizing/externalizing behaviors
• Free• Option of completing pencil and paper, or
online version• Can be scored online• Technically sound: Large, representative
normative group
• Perceived length of administration time• Items skewed toward externalizing
behaviors
Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS; Drummond, 1993)
• Measures internalizing/externalizing behaviors
• Free• Quick to administer (less than 5 minutes
per student; 15 minutes for entire class, depending upon number of students)
• Easy to understand and interpret score results
• Technically-adequate
• Not as accurate as the SSBD regarding identification of internalizers
Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS; Gresham & Elliott, 2008)http://psychcorp.pearsonassessments.com/pai/ca/cahome.htm
• Measures problem behaviors, social and academic competence
• Computer and web-based (AIMSweb) administration and scoring available
• Expensive: Technical manual=$105.60; Rating forms= $43.75 for package of 25 hand-scored forms; scoring software= $270.00; Scanning software= $640
• Can be time-consuming. It takes 10-25 minutes per student to complete the screening instrument
Universal screening readiness checklist
Build a foundation Secure district and building-level administrative support for
universal screening Establish universal screening committee consisting of district and
building-level administrators, student support personnel, teachers, family and community representatives and assign roles
Clarify goals Identify purpose of universal screening (e.g., mental health, social
skills assessment) Determine desired outcomes
Universal screening readiness checklist
Identify resources and logistics Identify resources for supporting students identified via screening
(in-school and community-based) Create a timeline for executing screening process including
frequency of screening (e.g., once, or multiple times per year?) Develop budget for materials, staff, etc. Create administration materials (e.g., power point to share process
with staff, parents and community members, consent forms, teacher checklists)
Schedule dates for screening(s) and meetings to share school-wide results
Universal screening readiness checklist
Select an evidence-based screening instrumentUse The Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing, or resources from other professional organization resources (e.g., National Association for School Psychologists; NASP), as guidelines for selecting an appropriate screener
Universal screening readiness checklist
Data Develop data collection and progress
monitoring systemDetermine systematic process for using results
to inform interventionsPlan for sharing screening and progress
monitoring results with staff and families
Contact Information
Jennifer Rose, Ph.D.,NCSP, Tertiary Research and Evaluation Coordinator, Illinois PBIS Network, [email protected]
Universal ScreeningElementary and Jr. High
Lynn Owens, MSW, MEdSchaumburg CCSD 54
District External Coach
District 54 Demographics 21 Elementary Buildings (K-6) 5 Jr. High Buildings (7-8) 1 Elementary & Jr. High Building (K-8) District Enrollment: 14, 318
Low Income: 18% IEP: 11.3% Bi-Lingual: 17.5% Ethnicity:
• White: 46.3%• African American: 6.5%• Hispanic: 22.5%• Asian: 20.0%• American Indian: 0.3%• Multi-Racial: 3.3%
District 54 PBIS Implementation & Universal Screening 2010-2012
26 Elementary and Jr. High Buildings Implementing at all 3 Tiers of PBIS
Tier 2 Demo Site August 2009-June 20124 Cohorts 2011-12SY
8 buildings implementing Tiers 1, 2, & 3 17 buildings implementing Tiers 1 &2
Universal Screening 2010-2012 SY
2010-11SY 4 Buildings from Cohort 1 participated in
screening• 2 Elementary (Kindergarten-Sixth Grade)• 2 Jr. High (Seventh-Eighth Grade)
2011-12 SY 8 Buildings from Cohorts 1 and 2 participated in
screening• 4 Elementary (Kindergarten-Sixth Grade)• 4 Jr. High (Seventh-Eighth Grade)
PBIS Implementation & Universal Screening for 2012-13SY
6 Cohorts implementing PBIS Tiers 1-3 for 2012-13SY 17/26 buildings will be implementing up to Tier 3 during 2012-13SY 7 additional buildings will begin implementing Tier2 during 2012-13SY
2012-13SY Universal Screening 16 Buildings from Cohorts 1-4 planning to participate
• 11 Elementary• 5 Jr. High Buildings
Transitioning from 2 screening tools (SSBD & BASC II) to 1 tool (SDQ) district wide
• Cost efficient (BASC= $1.25 per student; SDQ=FREE)• Use of same tool district wide will improve flow of communication• Students will enter Tier 2 interventions sooner as all screening and scoring
done in building
Preparing for ScreeningYear 1-Pilot
Screening Window: October – November 2010 District Admin and External Coach Responsibilities (Sept-Oct)
External Coaches attended Universal Screening Facilitator training with PBIS TAC led by Jen Rose, Tertiary Research and Evaluation Coordinator
Tier 2 Coaches identified as Screening Facilitators Presented Universal Screening to Superintendent, Board Cabinet, District Leadership
Team, and Building Administrators Developed Parent Information/Consent Letter Prepared protocols for Facilitators
Identify and Train Screening Facilitators (Oct) Cohort 1 buildings for Pilot
• Implementing PBIS at least 2 years• CICO implemented with fidelity for 1 full year
Elementary Facilitator Training: • Time Lines• SSBD Facilitator Training
Jr. High Facilitator Training:• Time Lines • BASC-2/BESS Facilitator Training
Preparing for ScreeningYear 1-Pilot (con’t)
Facilitator Responsibilities (Oct-December) Review and follow timeline
• Facilitator timeline• Teacher timeline
CICO up and running since mid-September• Increase in students participating as result of screener• Changes to support internalizing students identified via screener
– CICO Parent letter Schedule screening dates with administrator
• 20-30 min. overview • 1.5 hr. administration • Wednesday Staff Development (Elementary & Jr. High)• Grade Level Meeting (Jr. High)
Present screening overview and administration with External Coach• 1 building presented without External Coach
Prepare screening protocols for scoring• SSBD: Facilitators scored using excel spread sheet• BASC-2: PBIS scored
Review results with administrator and staff
Preparing for ScreeningYear 2
Screening Window: October – November 2011 District Admin and External Coach Responsibilities (Aug-Sept)
Notified Tier 2 Coaches about Screening Facilitator training Provided Facilitator training with PBIS Tier 2 TAC Building Administrators informed of screening window Modified Parent Information/Consent Letter
• Informed consent• Screener part of support students receive at Tier 2
Identify and Train Screening Facilitators (Sept) Cohort 1 and 2 buildings conduct screening
• Implementing PBIS at least 2 years• CICO implemented with fidelity for 1 full year
Elementary Facilitator Training: • Time Lines• SSBD Facilitator Training
Jr. High Facilitator Training:• Time Lines • BASC-2/BESS Facilitator Training
Preparing for ScreeningYear 2 (con’t)
Facilitator Responsibilities (Sept-December) Review and follow timeline
• Facilitator and Teacher timeline• “Jump-start” Time Line
CICO up and running since mid-September• Increase in students participating as result of screener• Changes to support internalizing students identified via screener
– CICO Parent letter– DPR cards
Schedule screening dates with administrator• 20-30 min. overview • 1-1.5 hr. administration
Present overview and screening administration with External Coach to staff• 5 buildings presented without assistance from External Coach
Prepare screening protocols for use for staff and scoring• SSBD: Facilitators copied/labeled protocols and scored on-site• BASC-2: Facilitators labeled protocols and PBIS scored off-site
Review results with administrator and staff
Universal Screening Parent Letter
October 2011 Dear Parent/Guardian, As you know, ___________ school has been implementing Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) which is a proactive approach to establishing the behavioral supports and social culture needed for all students in a school to achieve social, emotional, and academic success.
Our school was selected to be a replication site by the Illinois PBIS organization, which provides us with training and support as we work to continually improve ways to support our children and families. As part of being a replication site this year, we will be utilizing an assessment tool for teachers that will help identify students who may be having minor challenges in school, such as following rules and expectations, or making friends. Our goal in using this teacher assessment tool is to identify which children may need some assistance before minor challenges become big problems.
Over the next few weeks, your child’s classroom teacher will review the class roster and identify students who currently may be having problems or difficulties in school. We will contact the parents of children who have been selected by their classroom teacher to participate in a simple intervention focused on supporting the child in a proactive and positive manner.Please feel free to contact me at ________ if you have any questions.
Sincerely, Principal
Universal ScreeningElementary Facilitator “JumpStart” List
Universal Screener To Do Checklist (ELEMENTARY)Schedule Date with Administrator, External Coach, & PBIS TAC
__Staff Overview (following coordinator meeting with External Coach & PBIS TAC- 20 to 30 min during STAFF DEVELOPMENT__Screening Administration (Schedule no sooner than 2 weeks after Overview- 1 to 1.5 hours during STAFF DEVELOPMENT__Review and Mail Parent Letter (at least 2 weeks prior to screening date)
Prep for Overview___Copy Teacher timeline to be given at/during overview (1 per teacher)___Reserve meeting place with projector to view power point___Review power point
Prep for Screening Administration___Reserve meeting place with projector and place for teachers to complete protocol___Find place to keep protocols locked-up until input into excel spread sheet (keep protocols locked up until end of school year then shred) ___Extra Pens or Pencils (just in-case some teachers forget)___Prep protocols (Identifying information Label is attached to white copy to be sent by External Coach week of October 11)__Copy 3 of each per teacher (Green for Internalizers and Blue for Externalizers). ___Review power point
**CONTACT EXTERNAL COACH WITH ANY QUESTIONS! EXTERNAL COACH AND/OR PBIS TAC NEED TO BE PRESENT DURING ADMINISTRATION!!***
Universal Screening ToolsSSBD: Overview
Overview 1st-6th Staff attend a 20min presentation that includes rationale for screening
• District Support• Parent Letter
Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors Teacher timeline and ranking form
• Teachers given timeline for preparation and completion of screener• Teachers provided ranking forms for Internalizers and Externalizers with descriptors• Given 2 weeks to identify Top 10 Internalizers and Top 10 Externalizers from class roster
Review Administration• Supplies
– Pen/Pencil– Student roster with identifying information (DOB, Race/Ethnicity, ID, etc.)– Ranking forms with Top 3 Internalizers and Externalizers identified
• Expectations– Limit talking during administration to protect student information– Complete all forms (incomplete forms returned)– Come prepared – Ask questions prior to ensure the students who need support get it
Universal Screening ToolsSSBD: Administration
Administration Two weeks prior(following overview)
• Parent Letter mailed home • Staff attend overview• Facilitators prepare protocols
One week prior • Staff sent reminder email (no less than 2 days prior)• Facilitators and External Coaches make final arrangements
Day of Administration• Present brief overview of process• Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors• Review expectations • Facilitators collect and check forms for accuracy and completion• Facilitators lock completed forms in designated area until scoring date
Screening Data-ElementaryYear 1 (2 Schools)
Total Number of Students screened: 986 Total Number of Students identified: 89
• Total Number of Externalizers: 41• Total Number of Internalizers: 48
Year 2 (4 Schools) Total Number of Students screened: 1,475 Total Number of Students identified: 115
• Total Number of Externalizers: 40• Total Number of Internalizers: 75
SD54 Screening Results-Elementary
Internalizers Externalizers Total0.00%
1.00%
2.00%
3.00%
4.00%
5.00%
6.00%
7.00%
8.00%
9.00%
10.00%St
uden
ts Id
entifi
ed a
s % o
f Enr
ollm
ent
Universal Screening ToolsBASC-2: Overview
Overview Jr. High Teaching Staff attend a 20min presentation that includes rationale for screening
• District Support• Parent Letter
Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors Teacher timeline and ranking form
• Teachers given timeline for preparation and completion of screener• Teachers provided ranking forms for Internalizers and Externalizers with descriptors• Given 2 weeks to identify Top 10 Internalizers and Top 10 Externalizers from class roster
Review Administration• Supplies
– #2 Pencil(s)– Student roster with identifying information (DOB, Race/Ethnicity, ID, etc.)– Ranking forms with Top 3 Internalizers and Externalizers identified
• Expectations– Limit talking during administration to protect student information– Complete all forms (incomplete forms returned)– Come prepared – Ask questions prior to ensure the students who need support get it
Universal Screening ToolsBASC-2: Administration
Administration Two weeks prior(following overview)
• Parent Letter mailed home • Staff attend overview• Facilitators label protocols• Facilitators attend grade level team meetings to provide support
One week prior • Staff sent reminder email (no less than 2 days prior)• Facilitators and External Coaches make final arrangements
Day of Administration• Present brief overview of process• Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors• Review expectations • Facilitators collect and check forms for accuracy and completion• Facilitators lock completed forms in designated area until picked up for scoring• External coaches make arrangements to deliver protocols to PBIS TAC
Screening Data-Jr. High
Year 1 (2 Schools) Total Number of Students screened: 1,256 Total Number of Students identified: 106
• Total Number of Externalizers: 69 • Total Number of Internalizers: 37
Year 2 (4 Schools) Total Number of Students screened: 2, 441 Total Number of Students identified: 228
• Total Number of Externalizers: 167• Total Number of Internalizers: 61
SD54 Screening Results-Jr. High
Internalizers Externalizers Total0.00%
1.00%
2.00%
3.00%
4.00%
5.00%
6.00%
7.00%
8.00%
9.00%
10.00%St
uden
ts Id
entifi
ed a
s % o
f Enr
ollm
ent
SD54 Tier 2 Interventions
CICO• DPR card same for all students• Check-In and Out with same staff member• Parents notified of participation through calls and/or letter
SAIG • Pro Social• Problem Solving• Academic
Check N Connect• Used when student may need more than generic check-in• Used when student needs change of check-in station or change of staff
FBA/BIP• Problem solving team identifies need for more support• Utilize SAIG groups to teach skills to support replacement behavior
Universal Screener Roadblocks (Year 1)
Scheduling screening window after start of school year Assessment schedule (MAP, ISSET) overlapping Staff Development schedule difficult to change Created scheduling conflicts for External Coaches
Delay in students receiving support once identified Building unprepared for increase in students participating in CICO Not enough staff to open new CICO stations More externalizers identified than internalizers
Delay in scoring and identifying students (Jr. High) Staff refusing to “bubble-in” identifying information on scantron Scoring done off-site
Staff support limited due to lack of knowledge about internalizers “I don’t have any students to screen” “Why are we calling out these students when they already have low self-esteem”
Universal Screener Successes (Year 2)
Scheduling screening window earlier allowed for flexibility with External Coaches and/or PBIS TAC to support teams
Facilitators who participated Year 1 had the option conduct Screening Overview and Administration without outside support
Increased number of students identified and given Tier 2 support sooner
Increased staff support due to knowledge and experience from Year1
Number of Internalizers identified in Year 2 increased 25% in Elementary buildings and by 50% in Jr. High buildings
Contact Information
Lynn Owens, MSW, M.Ed., Schaumburg CCSD 54, District External Coach, [email protected]
Before you leave the session...
Take a moment to reflect on the session Record your thoughts in the back of your
program booklet These notes will assist you in completing
the online evaluation after the conferenceYour comments are valued and assist in
developing future conference sessions