View
4
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Exploring the Possibilities
Thomas C. Manthey, Ph.D., VTSS Coordinator, Virginia Department of Education Sophia Farmer, VTSS Implementation Specialist, VTSS Research and Implementation Center
Virginia Tiered Systems of Supports (VTSS)
2 Adapted from the OSEP Center on PBIS, 2010
… is a data-informed decision making framework for establishing the social culture and academic and behavioral supports needed for the school to be an effective learning environment (for academics, behavior and social-emotional wellbeing) for all students.
data-informed decision making framework social culture
academic and behavioral supports effective
learning environment
all
Increase effectiveness AND efficiency A Process for Continuous Improvement
Virginia Tiered Systems of Supports
• Prevention first
• One setting: Multiple levels of support intensity – Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III
• Early intervention
• Align academic, behavioral, mental health, and social supports
• Collect and use data
• Shifts focus from the Student to the System
WHAT IS THIS WAY OF WORK IN DIVISIONS?
What is this exactly?!
4
What does VTSS look like? What we you mean by ‘way of work’?
5
Data Informed Decision Making Evidence Based Practices M
onitoring Student Progress
Aligned Organizational Structure and Culture Evaluation
Fam
ily, S
choo
l and
C
omm
unit
y P
artn
ersh
ips
SYSTEMS
PRACTICES
DATA
OUTCOMES
Data informed decision making
Evidence based practices
Aligned organizational structure and culture
Monitoring student progress
Family, school and community partnerships
Evaluation
Six core components
6
=
in order to meet benchmarks.
These students
+
get these tiers of support
The goal of the tiers is student success, not labeling.
Three Tiered Framework of Student Supports
7
TIER I: Core, Universal GOAL: 100% of students achieve at high levels!
Implementing well researched programs and practices
demonstrated to produce good outcomes for the majority of
students
Tier 1 is effective if at least 80% are meeting benchmarks
Guiding questions for Tier 1: 1. What do we expect ALL students to
learn? 2. How will we know if and when a
student has learned core curriculum? 3. How will we respond when some
students aren’t successful? 4. How will we respond when some
students have already demonstrated success with the curriculum?
8
TIER II: Supplemental, Targeted GOAL: No more than approximately 20% of students needing supplemental instruction in addition to the core instruction to achieve benchmarks.
Tier II is effective if at least 70-80% of students improve
performance (i.e. gap is closing toward benchmark
and/or progress monitoring goals)
Guiding questions for Tier II: 1. Where are students performing
now? 2. Where do we want the students to
be performing? 3. How long do we have to get the
students to meet their achievement goals?
4. How are we going to progress monitor skill attainment?
5. What resources do we need to build skills at an acceptable rate?
9
TIER III: Intensive, Individualized GOAL: 0-5% of students needing intensive, individualized instruction in addition to core and supplemental instruction in order to achieve benchmarks.
Tier III: is effective if at least 70-80% of students
improve performance (i.e. gap is closing toward
benchmark and/or progress monitoring goals)
Guiding questions for Tier III 1. Where is the student performing now? 2. What is a realistic and attainable goal for
achievement for the student? 3. How long do we have to get the student to
meet that goal? 4. What supports has the student received
prior to Tier III? 5. What resources do we need to build skills
at an acceptable rate?
10
Universal
Targeted
Intensive Continuum of
Support for ALL
Science
Social Studies Reading
Math
Social skills Lacrosse
Spanish
Label behavior…not people
What does this mean for special education?
12
What about mental health and wellness?
13
Supporting Staff
Supporting Decision Making
Supporting Students
Supporting Improvements in Behavioral Competence, Academic Achievement and Social-Emotional Wellness
SYSTEMS
PRACTICES
DATA
OUTCOMES
14
VTSS - PBIS Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports as part of the VTSS Framework
15
Governor’s Classrooms not Courtrooms Initiative Governor Terry McAuliffe recently announced his Classrooms not Courtrooms initiative! It is a multi-agency, administration-wide push to reduce student referrals to law enforcement, reduce suspensions and expulsions, address the disparate impact these practices have on African-Americans and students with disabilities, and address the emphasis on subjective offenses like disorderly conduct.
PBIS -VTSS
Educate Every Child: Promoting Positive Solutions to School Discipline in Virginia
• Exclusion does not improve behavior.
• Today’s suspended and expelled youth are more likely to become tomorrow’s dropouts.
• Poor school climate leads to lower student achievement and increased teacher turnover.
• Harsh penalties for minor misbehavior do not make communities safer.
A report by the Legal Aid Justice Center’s Just Children Program
16
As an instructional process!
We change STUDENT behavior by changing
ADULT behavior
Interventions = changes in staff procedures & practices
VTSS helps us rethink behavior change…
17
The Implementation Equation
Fixsen, Blase, Naoom, & Wallace (2007)
Effective Instruction and
Intervention The “WHAT”
Effective
Implementation with Fidelity The “HOW”
Positive Outcomes
18
Enabling Contexts
The “WHO” and
“WHERE”
In summ
ary…
We organize our resources So kids get help early We do stuff that’s likely to work
We provide supports to the staff to do it right
And make sure they’re successful
19
Implementation Occurs in Stages
• Exploration
• Installation
• Initial Implementation
• Full Implementation
• Innovation & Sustainability
(Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005)
3-5 Years
20
WHY DIVISIONS ADOPT THIS WAY OF WORK
Start with the WHY!?
21
Consistency Matters
Common Vision/Expectations
Common Language
Common Practices
SCHOOL COMMUNITY
(USDOE OSEP PBIS TA Center, 2010)
Experimental Research 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 group-randomized 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 (MTSS-B) 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 (MTSS-B) in elementary schools: Observations from a randomized trial. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 1-26.
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.
Bradshaw, C., Waasdorp, T., Leaf. P., (in press). Effects of School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on child behavior problems and adjustment. Pediatrics.
Waasdorp, T., Bradshaw, C., & Leaf , P., (2012) The Impact of Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Bullying and Peer Rejection: A Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial. Archive of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine. 2012;166(2):149-156
Results are experimentally related to:
1. Reduction in problem behavior 2. Increased academic performance 3. Increased attendance 4. Improved perception of safety 5. Improved organizational efficiency 6. Reduction in staff turnover 7. Increased perception of teacher efficacy 8. Reduction in teacher reported bullying behavior and
peer rejection
We can gain minutes, hours, DAYS!
The average school estimates 20 MINUTES of administrator’s time per referral processed…
24
420 office referrals x 20 minutes = 140 hours or 17.5 work days!
The average school estimates 15 MINUTES of lost instructional time per student per referral processed…
420 office referrals x 15 minutes = 105 hours or a little over 13 days of ‘found’ instructional time!
Could you benefit from more instructional time?
HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THIS WORKS IN VA?
Why would VA schools want to do this!
25
Data Collected • Student Enrollment (gender, ethnicity/race, IEP/504)
• Outcome Data (gender, ethnicity/race, IEP/504) – Office Discipline Referrals (ODRs) – In-School Suspensions (ISSs) – Out-of-School Suspensions (OSSs)
• PBIS Fidelity of Implementation – School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET) – Benchmarks of Quality (BoQ) – Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI)
• State Accreditation Results (SOLs) – English – Mathematics
PBIS of VTSS Outcome Data Comparisons – General Education
27
- 22%
- 21%
- 11%
GE – General Education Students
- 20% - 26%
- 25%
PBIS of VTSS Outcome Data Comparisons – Special Education
28
- 11%
- 6%
0%
GE – General Education Students
- 3% - 17% - 10%
Administrative and Instructional Time Lost as a Function of Disciplinary Actions: General Education Students
4100
2050
1400
700
1260
630
6520
3260
1800
900
1800
900
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
ODRs-GE Admin ODRs-GE Instruction ISSs-GE Admin ISSs-GE Instruction OSSs-GE Admin OSSs-GE Instruction
Tim
e Lo
st (m
in)
Fidelity Non-Fidelity
Administrative and Instructional Time Lost as a Function of Disciplinary Actions: Students with Special Needs
1360
680
400
200
480
240
2020
1010
620
310
760
380
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
ODRs-SE Admin ODRs-SE Instruction ISSs-SE Admin ISSs-SE Instruction OSSs-SE Admin OSSs-SE Instruction
TIm
e Lo
st (m
in)
Fidelity Non-Fidelity
Fidelity and Disciplinary Actions
31
EOY 2015 Correlations between OSD Incident Rates and MDY 2015 BoQ Final Scores
OSD Incident Rates
BoQ Final Scores
ODRs −0.038
ODRs – SE −0.047
ISSs −0.122*
ISSs – SE −0.121*
OSSs −0.061
OSSs - SE −0.088 *statistically significant using a 5% significance level
Fidelity and SOL Scores
32
MDY 2015 Correlations between BoQ Final Scores and SOLs
SOLs BoQ Final
Scores
English 0.114*
Math 0.188*
*statistically significant using a 5% significance level
33
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PARTICIPATION
Recommended