PBIS Evaluation Report

8/4/2019 PBIS Evaluation Report

1/36

Evaluation Report onSchool-Wide Positive

Behavior Intervention and

Supports (SWPBS)EdTech 505 Final Evaluation Project & Report

Vertoria Lagroon

EdTech 505-4172

December 8, 2010


2/36

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Learning Reflection .................................................................................................................................................. 4

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 5

Purposes of the Evaluation ................................................................................................................................... 6

Evaluation Purpose ............................................................................................................................................. 6

Central Questions................................................................................................................................................. 6

Impact of the Results .......................................................................................................................................... 7

Background Information ....................................................................................................................................... 8

Program Origin ..................................................................................................................................................... 8

Program Goals and Standards ........................................................................................................................ 8

Prior Programs ..................................................................................................................................................... 9

Program Stakeholders .................................................................................................................................... 10

Program Characteristics ................................................................................................................................ 11

Description of Evaluation Design .................................................................................................................... 14

Results ........................................................................................................................................................................ 17

Office Discipline Referrals by Quarter ..................................................................................................... 17

Elementary School ....................................................................................................................................... 17

Middle School ................................................................................................................................................ 18

High School ..................................................................................................................................................... 19

Relationship Between Rewards and Referrals ..................................................................................... 20

SWPBS Team Survey Results ....................................................................................................................... 21

SWPBS Stakeholder Attitudes ..................................................................................................................... 22

Discussion of the Results .................................................................................................................................... 23

Frequency of Desired and Undesired Behaviors ................................................................................. 23

SWPBS Implementation across the District ........................................................................................... 23

Correlation between Positive Reinforcements and Office Discipline Referrals ..................... 24

Attitudes of SWPBS Stakeholders in McCormick County School District .................................. 24

Impact of SWPBS on Stakeholders ............................................................................................................ 24

Overall Effectiveness of SWPBS .................................................................................................................. 24

Conclusions & Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 25

Immediate Results ............................................................................................................................................ 25

Long-Range Planning ...................................................................................................................................... 25

Evaluation Insights.......................................................................................................................................... 25

References ................................................................................................................................................................ 27


3/36

3

Appendices ............................................................................................................................................................... 28

Appendix A: Student Survey ......................................................................................................................... 28

Appendix B: SWPBS Team Member Survey ........................................................................................... 30

Appendix C: PBIS School Faculty, Staff, and Administration Survey ........................................... 34


4/36

4

LEARNING REFLECTION

As I reflect on the learning that has taken place over the course of thisentire semester and while completing this intricate evaluation project, one wordcomes to mind. That word is: Wow! I am literally amazed at the amount of

knowledge, skill, and experience I have attained as a result of engaging invarious evaluation readings, assignments, and projects. I was made aware ofhow significant and crucial evaluation is to the success of any project, program,or product. After discovering that evaluation was more than a tier in BloomsTaxonomy or the nerve-racking experience of a principal sitting in on your class Ilearned several reasons for evaluation. Evaluation can be used for a variety ofreasons, such as quality comparison, innovation, andimprovement. Comparative evaluations are used to determine the best or mosteffective program from several options. Evaluations are also used whenimplementing a new program. When a program needs to be improved or altered,evaluations are done as well. My final evaluation project had the purpose ofevaluating a newly implemented program. Specifically during the project, Ilearned some of the more difficult lessons about evaluations. Evaluation is not asmall, meaningless process. Evaluation requires much thought and effort.

I plan to use all that I have learned about evaluation in both my career asan educator and as a technology enthusiast. In the field of education andtechnology, the best, most innovative method, program, or machine isannounced almost monthly. With many fads to follow, being a good evaluator iscritical in order to prevent wasted time and effort on fruitless trends. The skillsthat I have acquired this semester will be beneficial t o me when determining

which strategies and instructional practices to employ. As a good evaluator, Ican determine the effectiveness and impact of new educational technologies onstudent learning. After performing mini evaluations, I will be able to determine

and use only the best in my classroom for my students.


5/36

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The evaluation reported in this document sought to evaluate a newlyimplemented program at McCormick County School District. The evaluatedprogram was school wide Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (SWPBS).

SWPBS was established to teach behavioral expectations and reward studentsfor following them, rather than waiting for misbehavior to occur beforeresponding. The purpose of school-wide PBIS is to establish a climate in whichappropriate behavior is the norm (PBIS.Org, 2010). The purpose of theevaluation was to ultimately determine if SWPBS is successfully achievingpublished outcomes and objectives. SWPBS advertises the following outcomes(PBIS.Org, 2010):

Decrease in office discipline referrals

Increase in instructional time

Decrease in administrator time spent on discipline issues Efficient and effective use of scare resources

Increase in perceived school safety Sustainability through team approach

The evaluation was performed using a goals-based model, of which theabove indicated objectives were evaluated on achievement and rate of success,effectiveness. Data was collected from each of the three schools across thedistrict to determine if grade-level of students is a factor in SWPBS success. Theconclusion of the evaluation resulted in the inability to determine theeffectiveness of SWPBS in McCormick County School District.


6/36

6

PURPOSES OF THE EVALUATION

EVALUATION PURPOSE

The purpose of this evaluation was to provide an in depth look at theoverall effectiveness of the School-Wide Positive Behavior Intervention andSupports program (SWPBS) currently being implemented in McCormick CountySchool District. The evaluation goal was to outline the possible impact theprogram may have on all stakeholders, which includes but is not limited to:school administration, all faculty and staff, and community members. Studentinput and attitudes were collected as valuable information as well. Data wascollected and analyzed in order to determine whether and to what degree theobjectives of SWPBS are being achieved. The evaluation accomplished the firstthree levels of evaluation defined by Kirkpatrick (1994). The evaluation soughtout to discover the impressions of the program by the participants, the

effectiveness of the program, and the impact the program had on theparticipants. Ultimately, the purpose of the evaluation is to determine if the

program, SWPBS, is successfully reducing undesired behaviors.

CENTRAL QUESTIONS

The evaluation sought to answer several key or central questions.

Is negative, undesired behavior decreasing?

Is positive, desired behavior increasing?

The two questions above are important because the answers determinewhether or not SWPBS have successfully met their objective of makingnegative behavior less frequent.

Is SWPBS being implemented identically across the district?

This question was asked to ensure that SWPBS was implemented asdirected. Without identical implementation methods, varying results would

be expected across the district.


7/36

7

Is there a correlation between the number of positive reinforcements givenby a faculty or staff member and the number of discipline referrals thatfaculty member completes?

This question seeks to determine if SWPBS is responsible for the outcome

of less frequent undesired behavior versus other conditions. A negativecorrelation would mean that as the number of positive reinforcementsincreased, the amount of discipline referrals decreased. It could then be

implied, that SWPBS was successful.

What are the attitudes held by the stakeholders about SWPBS?

How are stakeholders impacted by SWPBS?

The above questions are for gathering information and were answeredthrough surveys. The answers to these questions also help to determine ifpersonal opinions and attitudes towards SWPBS affect its success, eitherpositively or negatively.

How effective is SWPBS?

The question goes beyond SWPBS successfully accomplishing objectivesand goes into the rate in which the objectives are achieved. This questionwas asked to address how fast SWPBS can turn around negative student

behavior.

IMPACT OF THE RESULTS

The results of this evaluation would greatly impact school faculty and staff,including principals and assistant principals. All faculty and administration aredirectly impacted by the results, as certain results can yield buy-in among theseindividuals. Students are indirectly impacted. The results of this evaluation couldprompt new decisions in discipline policy, the way in which SWPBS isimplemented, or possibly the continuation of SWPBS among other decisions thatcould be made at the district level. Such changes trickle down to students andinadvertently to the community. Ultimately, the manner in which students areimpacted, determines the effectiveness of SWPBS, as the program seeks toreduce undesired behavior among students. Students are the target population

and the over-arching goal is to see long-term and sustained changes in negativebehavior.


8/36

8

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

PROGRAM ORIGIN

SWPBS began in 1998 as a special component of Positive BehaviorIntervention and Supports (PBIS). The program came into existence in responseto one size fits all approaches to school-wide discipline, which has focusedmainly on reacting to specific student misbehavior by implementing punishment-based strategies including reprimands, loss of privileges, office referrals,suspensions, and expulsions (PBIS.Org, 2010). The rationale for SWPBS is toprovide positive behavior support for all students by making targeted, negativebehaviors less frequent and desired behavior more functional.

Positive behavior support originated from behaviorally-based systems andseeks to enhance and design effective learning environments. Research has

shown that inconsistent punishment, without other positive strategies, isineffective. SWPBS includes proactive strategies to support appropriate studentbehaviors by teaching positive social behaviors. Introducing, modeling, andreinforcing positive social behavior is an important step of a student's educationalexperience (PBIS.Org, 2010).

SWPBS was established to teach behavioral expectations and rewardstudents for following them, rather than waiting for misbehavior to occur beforeresponding. The purpose of school-wide PBIS is to establish a climate in whichappropriate behavior is the norm (PBIS.Org, 2010).

PROGRAM GOALS AND STANDARDS

SWPBS is a program that provides continuous positive behavior supportfor all students within a school and is implemented in numerous areas of theschool, including the classroom and nonclassroom settings such as hallways,buses, and restrooms. The fundamental idea behind SWPBS is teaching

behavioral expectations just as core curriculum subjects are taught.


9/36

9

FIGURE 1- THE FOLLOWING DIAGRAM ILLUSTRATES THE MULTI-LEVEL APPROACH OFFERED TO

ALL STUDENTS IN THE SCHOOL. THESE GROUP DEPICTIONS REPRESENT SYSTEMS OF SUPPORT

NOT CHILDREN: RETRIEVED FROMHTTP://WWW.PBIS.ORG/SCHOOL/DEFAULT.ASPX

PRIOR PROGRAMS

After an extensive internet search, prior or current programs similar toSWPBS were not found. However, there was an early version of SWPBS knownas Effective Behavior Support (EBS). EBS sought to address concerns aboutschool climate and problem behavior and officially began in 1994, (Sugai, 2007).

EBS was founded under the conceptual foundations of behaviorism and appliedbehavior analysis (APA). The program was developed by the Institute onViolence and Destructive Behavior at the University of Oregon. EBS was aschool wide behavioral support program that was designed to prevent disruptive

behavior by all students, including those that exhibit chronic behavior problems(Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice CECP, 2001). Theimplementation and set-up of EBS is very similar to that of SWPBS.

Outcomes of EBS were as follows: Faculty support the EBS programbecause they feel it empowers them to create a structured environment wherelearning takes place without the interruptions caused by behavior problems.

Teachers are also pleased with the program since it appears to have been
http://www.pbis.org/school/default.aspxhttp://www.pbis.org/school/default.aspxhttp://www.pbis.org/school/default.aspxhttp://www.pbis.org/school/default.aspx


10/36

10

successful, even with children with the most problematic behaviors. In most EBSschools, the impact has been extremely significant in changing student behavior.According to recent research, one school that implemented EBS reports adecrease in the number of discipline referrals by an average of 42 percent duringthe programs first year of implementation, and another school projects a

decrease in office referrals from approximately 7,000 to less than 2,000 after fouryears of implementation (a reduction of about 71 percent) (Center for Effective

Collaboration and Practice CECP, 2001).

The school district provided character education to all students prior to theimplementation of SWPBS. The entire district would focus on a specific characterword each month. Instruction would be provided on the be particularcharacteristic in various ways at the different school levels. A traditionaldiscipline policy was also in place. The discipline policy provided consistent

punishments for undesired behaviors district wide.

PROGRAM STAKEHOLDERS

The design, development, and implementation of the general SWPBSprogram included the involvement of eight universities and four educational

agencies. Stakeholders include:

University of Oregon

University of Connecticut University of South Florida

University of Missouri

University of Kansas University of Florida

University of North Carolina University of Kentucky Illinois State Board of Education Mountain Plains Regional Resource Center

Sheppard-Pratt Health Systems

The May Institute

US Department of Education, Office of Special Education: TA Center onPBIS

The stakeholders in regard to the implementation of SWPBS in McCormickCounty School District include district administration, school administration, allschool faculty and staff, and involved community agencies and members.School faculty and staff include all school employees and volunteers, rangingfrom teachers to custodians and bus drivers. Guidance counselors, secretaries,and receptionists are included as well. Students are also a vital component of the

program and their feedback and attitudes will be collected and analyzed.


11/36

11

PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS

There are standard procedures to follow when implementing SWPBS as outlinedby the program creators. The order of tasks below is presented exactly asSWPBS suggests.

Typically, a team of approximately ten representative members of the school willattend a two or three day training provided by skilled trainers. This team will becomprised of administrators, classified, and regular and special educationteachers.

The school will focus on three to five behavioral expectations that are positivelystated and easy to remember. In other words, rather than telling students whatnot to do, the school will focus on the preferred behaviors.

After the SWPBS team determines the 3-5 behavioral expectations that suit the

needs of their school, they will take this information back to the staff to ensure atleast 80% of the staff buy into the chosen expectations. Consistency from classto class and adult to adult is very important for successful implementation ofSWPBS.

The team will then create a matrix of what the behavioral expectations look like,sound like, and feel like in all the non-classroom areas. This matrix will haveapproximately three positively stated examples for each area. See Figure 2.

FIGURE 2 SAMPLE MATRIX OF POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL EXPECTATIONS. RETRIEVED FROMHTTP://WWW.PBIS.ORG/SCHOOL/SWPBS_FOR_BEGINNERS.ASPX

The SWPBS team would take the matrix back to the whole staff to ensure 80%buy-in from the entire staff on what expectations are taught in each area.

Another primary activity for the SWPBS team is determining how the behavioralexpectations and routines will be taught in and around the school. Many schools
http://www.pbis.org/school/swpbs_for_beginners.aspxhttp://www.pbis.org/school/swpbs_for_beginners.aspxhttp://www.pbis.org/school/swpbs_for_beginners.aspx


12/36

12

choose to use several days at the beginning of each year to take the studentsaround the school to stations, where the skills are taught in setting specificlocations. For example, a bus may be brought to the school and the children willpractice lining up, entering the bus, sitting on the bus, and exiting the bus usinghula hoops to denote proper body space distance in lining up to enter the bus.

The next activity the SWPBS team will begin is the fine tuning of the officediscipline referral form. The team will decide "What behaviors are an instant tripto the office and what behaviors are taken care of in the classroom." It is veryimportant that every staff member is consistent.

Another activity for the SWPBS team is to determine a "gotcha" program. Thegotchas are a system for labeling appropriate behavior. Students are rewardedgotchas when they are demonstrating behavior outlined in the positive behaviormatrix. Examples of gotchas are provided below.

FIGURE 3 EXAMPLE OF A GOTCHA SWPBS REWARD TOKEN . RETRIEVED FROM

HTTP://WWW.PBIS.ORG/COMMON/CMS/DOCUMENTS/STUDENT/GOTCHA%20RESOURCES/CHAMP

ION%20CHIP%20PBS.PDF
http://www.pbis.org/common/cms/documents/Student/Gotcha%20Resources/Champion%20Chip%20PBS.pdfhttp://www.pbis.org/common/cms/documents/Student/Gotcha%20Resources/Champion%20Chip%20PBS.pdfhttp://www.pbis.org/common/cms/documents/Student/Gotcha%20Resources/Champion%20Chip%20PBS.pdfhttp://www.pbis.org/common/cms/documents/Student/Gotcha%20Resources/Champion%20Chip%20PBS.pdfhttp://www.pbis.org/common/cms/documents/Student/Gotcha%20Resources/Champion%20Chip%20PBS.pdf


13/36

13

FIGURE 4 - EXAMPLE OF A GOTCHA SWPBS REWARD TOKEN. RETRIEVED FROM NORTH POINT

H.S. PBIS FOR STUDENTS.PPT


14/36

14

DESCRIPTION OF EVALUATION DESIGN

The design and methodology of this evaluation followed a goal-based model.Data was collected and analyzed in a number of ways to determine whetherSWPBS successfully accomplished all of its objectives within the McCormick

County School district.

SWPBS advertises the following outcomes (PBIS.Org, 2010):

Decrease in office discipline referrals Increase in instructional time

Decrease in administrator time spent on discipline issues

Efficient and effective use of scare resources Increase in perceived school safety

Sustainability through team approach

All of the outcomes were tested by collecting both quantitative and qualitative

data. The outcome of a decrease in office discipline referrals was tested byacquiring records of the number of office discipline referrals that have beencompleted per teacher for the high, middle, and elementary school. The numberof rewards that were issued per teacher was also collected. The data wascharted to determine a correlation between the number of rewards issued by ateacher and the number of referrals completed by a teacher. The total number ofoffice discipline referrals was compared to the number of discipline referralscompleted in past years for each school for specific time periods. This was to

judge if the office discipline referrals have decreased in response to theimplementation of SWPBS. This data also addresses the issue of effectivenessof the program. From the charts, one can determine how fast change in behavior

is occurring.The remaining outcomes, excluding sustainability through team approach,

were tested through a series of surveys. Surveys were given to administrators,teachers, and students questioning the relevant outcomes of SWPBS incomparison to past years. Students were questioned about the amount of timespent on instruction in the classroom and their perception of school safety.Administrators were questioned about the amount of time spent on disciplineissues. For the student survey seeAppendix A.

The evaluation will also address the central questions posed earlier in thereport in the purpose section.

Is negative, undesired behavior decreasing?

Is positive, desired behavior increasing?

The evaluation will answer these questions by collecting pertinent datafrom the elementary, middle, and high school that make up the district.Each school will report the number of discipline referrals they have eachquarter.


15/36

15

The office discipline referrals will be categorized into the following sectionsof problem behavior:Minor- Warning

Tardy

Forgery/ Theft

Dress code violationUse/ Possession of tobacco

Use/ Possession of alcohol

Use/ Possession of combustibles

Bomb threat/ False alarm

Arson

Use/ Possession of weapons

Other behavior

Unknown behavior

Use/Possession of drugs

Minor - Property misuse

Minor - Other

Minor - Dress code violation

Minor - Technology violation

Minor - Tardy

Technology violation

Inappropriate display of affection

Inappropriate location/ Out of bounds area

Minor Unknown

Gang affiliation display

Skipping

Truancy

Fighting

Property damage/ VandalismVandalism

Lying/ Cheating

Minor Disruption

Minor - Inappropriate language

Minor - Physical contact/ Physical aggression

Physical aggression

Skip class/ Truancy

Harassment/ Bullying

Minor - Defiance/ Disrespect/ Non-compliance

Abusive language/ inappropriate language/ profanity

DisruptionDefiance/ Disrespect/ Insubordination/ Non-compliance

This data will be cross-referenced with data from the first semester of thelast school year before implementation of SWPBS. The purpose of this isto determine if undesired behaviors are decreasing over time with SWPBSusage and the relative speed of success.


16/36

16

Is SWPBS being implemented identically across the district?

A portion of this question will be answered from the data discussed above.However, this will also be gauged by responses to surveys of the SWPBSteam members. The SWPBS team members were selected faculty that

participated in the initial training and planning for SWPBS implementation.Is there a correlation between the number of positive reinforcements givenby a faculty or staff member and the number of discipline referrals that

faculty member completes?

This question will be answered in conjunction with the office disciplinereferral data collection along with data reported by school on the numberof positive reinforcement tokens given out by teachers. The number oftokens given and the number of office discipline referrals completed will becompared by teacher at the three different schools. A correlation will bedetermined.

What are the attitudes held by the stakeholders about SWPBS?

How are stakeholders impacted by SWPBS?

The answer to these questions will be gauged through survey results.

Every teachers first period class will also issue an online survey to their

students for valuable input.

How effective is SWPBS?

This question will be answered by analyzing all collected data and usingthe analysis to determine if SWPBS achieved all outcomes at McCormick

County School District.


17/36

17

RESULTS

OFFICE DISCIPLINE REFERRALS BY QUARTER

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

FIGURE 5 - RESULTS FOR TOTAL OF FICE DISCIPLINE REFERRALS FOR THE FIRST SEMESTER FOR

THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

FIGURE 6 - BREAKDOWN OF OFFICE DISCIPLINE REFERRALS FOR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL,

1ST QUARTER OF THE 2010 -2011 SCHOOL YEAR

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011

55

74

57

25

1st Quarter

2nd Quarter

12

5

12

7

8

21

000000000000000000000000000000

Elementary Behavior Infractions,

1st Quarter 2010 - 2011 School YearFighting

Lying/ Cheating

Minor - Inappropriate language

Abusive language/ inappropriate

language/ profanity

Disruption

Defiance/ Disrespect/ Insubordination/

Non-compliance


18/36

18

FIGURE 7 - BREAKDOWN OF OFFICE DISCIPLINE REFERRALS FOR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL,

2ND QUARTER OF THE 2010 -2011 SCHOOL YEAR

MIDDLE SCHOOL

FIGURE 8 - RESULTS FOR THE OFFICE DISCIPLINE REFERRALS FOR THE FIRST SEMESTER FOR THE

MIDDLE SCHOOL

4

17

4

Elementary Behavior Infractions,

2nd Quarter 2010 - 2011 School Year

Abusive language/

inappropriate language/

profanity

Disruption

Fighting

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011

67

73

79

89

1st Quarter

2nd Quarter


19/36

19

HIGH SCHOOL

FIGURE 9 - RESULTS FOR THE OFFICE DISCIPLINE REFERRALS FOR THE FIRST SE MESTER FOR THE

HIGH SCHOOL

FIGURE 10 - BREAKDOWN OF OFFICE DISCIPLINE REFERRALS FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL,

1ST QUARTER OF THE 2010 -2011 SCHOOL YEAR

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011

84

112

99

134

1st Quarter

2nd Quarter

13%

4%3%

2%

2%

4%

6%

5%2%

4%4%

17%

17%

17%

High School Behavior Infractions,

1st Quarter 2010 - 2011 School YearTardy

Forgery/ TheftDress code violation

Use/ Possession of tobacco



Skipping

Fighting

Property damage/ Vandalism



Abusive language/ inappropriate language/ profanityDisruption

Defiance/ Disrespect/ Insubordination/ Non-compliance


20/36

20

FIGURE 11 - BREAKDOWN OF OFFICE DISCIPLINE REFERRALS FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL,

2ND QUARTER OF THE 2010 -2011 SCHOOL YEAR

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN REWARDS AND REFERRALS

FIGURE 12 - LINE GRAPH REFLECTING NUMBER OF REWARDS VERSUS NUMBER O F REFERRALS

FOR ALL THREE SCHOOLS

21%4%

3%

1%

2%

3%5%5%

2%3%

3%18%

15%

15%

High School Behavior Infractions,

2nd Quarter 2010 - 2011 School YearTardy

Forgery/ Theft

Dress code violation

Use/ Possession of tobacco



Skipping

Fighting

Property damage/ Vandalism



Abusive language/ inappropriate language/ profanity

Disruption

Defiance/ Disrespect/ Insubordination/ Non-compliance

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0 500 1000 1500 2000

TotalNumberofOfficeDiscipline

ReferralsfortheFirstSemeste

r

Total Number of Rewards Redeemed the First Semester

Elementary

Middle

High


21/36

21

SWPBS TEAM SURVEY RESULTS

FIGURE 13 - SWPBS TEAM SURVEY RESULTS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SWPBS

2%

98%100% 100%

44%

33%

100%

37%

27%

100%

3% 2%

56%

67%

100%

63%

73%

95%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Yes No Other Response


22/36

22

SWPBS STAKEHOLDER ATTITUDES

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Faculty

Staff

Administration

Students


23/36

23

DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

FREQUENCY OF DESIRED AND UNDESIRED BEHAVIORS

As outlined in the purpose section, this evaluation sought to determine ifSWPBS was causing a decrease in undesired behaviors in students and anincrease in desired behaviors. The total number of office referrals was collectedfor a semester or two quarters for each school and compared the total number ofoffice discipline referrals from the previous school year for the same time period.As shown in the results section, the elementary school initially saw an increase inthe amount of office discipline referrals. The 2009 2010 school year reportedfifty-five office discipline referrals in the first quarter and the 2010 2011 schoolyear reported seventy-four. However, the second quarter showed a significant

drop. Last years report was fifty-seven referrals for the second quarter, whilethis year there was a fifty-six percent decrease in the amount of office discipline

referrals. With this short evaluation period, it appears that over time undesiredbehaviors have decreased while desired behaviors have increased at theelementary level. The middle school and high school both show a trend of anincrease in office discipline referrals from 1st quarter to 2nd quarter of the 09-10school year and 10-11 school year as well. From the data it is apparent thatundesired behaviors are not decreasing at the middle and high school level.

SWPBS IMPLEMENTATION ACROSS THE DISTRICT

Data for this component of the evaluation was collected through survey results

of surveys completed by the SWPBS team members from each school.Questions addressed the implementation of SWPBS at their various schools.Results were compared with the guidelines laid out by SWPBS. SeeAppendix Bfor the survey. As seen in the chart in the results section, the survey results werevery scattered. Across the district, the SWPBS team was not on one accordconcerning the implementation of SWPBS. Ninety-five percent of survey takersfelt somewhat familiar with the standard procedures for implementing SWPBS.

Five of the eleven steps of the implementation process were completed with onehundred percent or close to one hundred percent participation from the SWPBSteam. The remaining six steps were either not completed by the SWPBS team or

the majority of the SWPBS team felt that they were not completed.

The creators of SWPBS state that the success of SWPBS is conditional, basedupon strongly recommended steps of implementation. Without the achievementof those conditions, an accurate evaluation of the objectives of SWPBS cannot

rightly be performed.


24/36

24

CORRELATION BETWEEN POSITIVE REINFORCEMENTS AND OFFICE

DISCIPLINE REFERRALS

Data collection and analysis show that over the course of the first semester thereis a negative correlation between the number of positive reinforcements

redeemed and the amount of office discipline referrals completed for theelementary and middle school. Therefore, at these schools, as the number ofpositive reinforcements redeemed increased the amount of office disciplinereferrals decreased. The evaluation results illustrate a positive correlationbetween the number of positive reinforcements redeemed and the amount ofoffice discipline referrals.

ATTITUDES OF SWPBS STAKEHOLDERS IN MCCORMICK COUNTY SCHOOL

DISTRICT

Results of the surveys show that attitudes towards SWPBS by faculty, staff, andadministrators across the district are split. See the survey,Appendix C. The

results of the survey are organizedhere.

IMPACT OF SWPBS ON STAKEHOLDERS

The answer for this central question is provided with the results of the surveystaken by SWPBS stakeholders and students within the district. Seventy-ninepercent of faculty that participated in the survey felt that there were moredisruptions in class this year as opposed to last school year. However, sixty-three percent of the faculty and ninety-two percent of the administration felt that

there was an increase in teaching and learning.

OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS OF SWPBS

The effectiveness of SWPBS can only be judged by measuring the achievementof the published outcome of SWPBS, provided implementation requirements aremet. Since the results of this evaluation report reflect insufficient implementation

of the SWPBS program, the effectiveness cannot accurately be determined.


25/36

25

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

IMMEDIATE RESULTS

SWPBS teams members hold a meeting to discuss the results of theevaluation.

SWPBS team should review and revise the agreed upon characteristics ofmajor and minor behavior infractions for each school: elementary, middle,and high.

SWPBS team should agree on what behaviors constitute an officediscipline referrals and what behaviors constitute reward tokens.

The agreed upon method of teaching expected behaviors for each school

level, should be explained in detail to the remaining faculty and staff by theSWPBS team.

Faculty and staff should be encouraged to give more tokens.

LONG-RANGE PLANNING

The results of this initial and short-term evaluation project will help in the long-range planning of discipline policy implementation and maintenance in

McCormick County School District. The evaluation reflects that SWPBS shouldbe considered over several years in the future in order to accurately determinesuccess or failure. However, over a short time-span increasing rewards givenled to less discipline referrals. The district can plan on positively reinforcing

behavior expectations in years to come.

EVALUATION INSIGHTS

If given the opportunity to perform the evaluation project over completely, thereare some things that I would have done different. In terms of data collection, Iwould have liked to require all faculty and staff to keep a running tally of thenumber of tokens they individually give out and the number of office disciplinereferrals they individually complete. This kind of data would have made theresults more accurate, as the results I used were totals for the each school andcompared against rewards that were redeemed. There are incentives in placethat may entice students to keep their rewards to redeem for more attractiverewards later in the year. It would have been valuable to have a validcomparison between the attitude towards SWPBS held by a teacher and the


26/36

26

number of behavior problems that teacher has encountered since theimplementation of SWPBS. The original plan for the evaluation was also todetermine the success of SWPBS in meeting the published outcomes. This didnot go as planned due to the required implementation conditions not being met

by the district.


27/36

27

REFERENCES

(2010). Retrieved November 3, 2010, from PBIS.Org:

http://www.pbis.org/school/default.aspx

Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice CECP. (2001). Success Stories. RetrievedNovember 24, 2010, from Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice:

http://cecp.air.org/resources/success/ebs.asp

Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1994). Evaluating Training Programs. San Francisco: Berett-Koehler.

Sugai, G. (2007, November 1). Presentations. Retrieved November 24, 2010, from PBIS.org:

http://www.pbis.org/common/pbisresources/presentations/gs19982008swpbsperspectiv

e.pdf


28/36

28

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: STUDENT SURVEY

Survey accessible at this link:http://goo.gl/4xKL5PBIS Student Survey

This survey is for information only and to find out the opinion of the student bodyconcerning PBIS at your school. The purpose is to find out student feelingstowards the new way discipline is being handled and the rewards and incentivesthat are provided. All answers are confidential. Please be honest and answer

every question.

1. How would you rate yourself as a student in terms of behavior?

Behavior Do you make good or bad decisions at school?

2. How would you rate yourself as a student in terms of academics?

Academics Do you make good or bad grades?

3. Do you like receiving tokens for being a good student?Do you like being rewarded for obeying the rules? Yes No

4. Do you like receiving many chances to behave better before beingpunished?Do you like having another chance when you make a mistake?

Yes No

1 2 3 4 5

Bad Good

1 2 3 4 5

Bad Good
http://goo.gl/4xKL5http://goo.gl/4xKL5http://goo.gl/4xKL5http://goo.gl/4xKL5


29/36

29

5. In comparison to last school year, are students getting in more trouble orless trouble this school year? More Less Same

6. Do you feel safer at school this year in comparison to last school year? Yes No Same

7. In comparison to last school year, is more or less time spent on teachingand learning in class this year?Are you learning more or less this school year? More Less Same

8. In comparison to last school year, are there more or less distractions inthe classroom? More Less Same

9. Were you taught the school expectations at the beginning of the schoolyear?

Did your teacher teach you the school rules? Yes NoCant remember

10. In your opinion, is the overall behavior of the students getting better orworse? Better Worse Same

11. In a few sentences, write your true opinions of the new discipline policy.Do you agree or disagree with it? Do you feel it should be changed? Why

or why not?


30/36

30

APPENDIX B: SWPBS TEAM MEMBER SURVEY

Survey accessible at this link:http://goo.gl/1qtSO

SWPBS Team Member Survey

This survey is for faculty that participated in the professional developmenttraining for Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) in the summer of2010. Results are anonymous and are being collected solely for the purpose ofinformation in an evaluation project. Please be honest and answer all questions.

* Required

1. Are you familiar with the standard procedures for implementing PBIS school

wide, which is also known as SWPBS? *

Yes

No

Somewhat

2. Rate your familiarity with the standard procedures for implementing SWPBS. *

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Very unfamiliar Very familiar

3. As a SWPBS team member did you attend a two or three day training as a

representative chosen from the school district? *

Yes

No
http://goo.gl/1qtSOhttp://goo.gl/1qtSOhttp://goo.gl/1qtSOhttp://goo.gl/1qtSO


31/36

31

4. Did you, along with other SWPBS team members, determine 3 to 5 behaviorexpectations that suited the needs of your respective school to be used in abehavioral expectations matrix? *

Yes

No

5. Did the SWPBS team create a behavior expectations matrix of what thebehavioral expectations look like, sound like, and feel like in all classroom and

non-classroom areas? *

Yes

No

6. Did the SWPBS team share the matrix with faculty and staff to ensure 80%

buy-in from the entire staff prior to implementation? *

Yes

No

7. In your opinion, what percentage of the staff bought into SWPBS at the time of

implementation? * What percentage of the staff was in favor of SWPBS at the

time of implementation?

8. Did the SWPBS team determine how the behavioral expectations and routines

would be taught in and around the school? *

Yes

No

9. Was the determined method for teaching the behavioral expectations

explained to all faculty? *

Yes

No


32/36

32

10. Rate how well the method of teaching the behavioral expectations wereexplained to faculty that were not members of the SWPBS team. *

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Very poor Very well

11. Was time set aside to teach behavior expectations at the specific locations to

the students? *

Yes

No

Don't know

12. Did the SWPBS team revise the office discipline referral form? *

Yes

No

13. Did the SWPBS team determine which behaviors were major and minor? *Major behaviors result in an immediate trip to the office.

Yes

No

14. Were the characteristics of major and minor misbehavior consistently shared

with the entire staff? *

Yes

No


33/36

33

15. Did the SWPBS team develop a rewards system? *

Yes

No

16. How would you rate the implementation of the "gotcha" program? * "Gotcha"

program is the rewards system.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Poorlyimplemented

Perfectlyimplemented

17. What school did you represent? *

High

Middle

Elementary


34/36

34

APPENDIX C: PBIS SCHOOL FACULTY, STAFF, AND ADMINISTRATION

SURVEY

The survey is accessible at this link:http://goo.gl/V4XbO

PBIS School Faculty, Staff, and Administration Survey

This survey is for information only and to find out the opinion of PBISstakeholders in your school district. The purpose is to find out feelings towardsthe new way discipline is being handled and the rewards and incentives that areprovided. All answers are confidential. Please be honest and answer every

question.

* Required

1. What job category best applies to you? *

Faculty - Teacher, Guidance, etc

Staff - Custodial, Transportation, Food/Nutrition, etc

Administration

2. In your opinion, is it a good idea to reward students for obeying school

behavior expectations? *

Yes

No

3. How many chances should a student get to exhibit expected behaviors? * How

many times should a student be allowed to misbehave before being punished?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
http://goo.gl/V4XbOhttp://goo.gl/V4XbOhttp://goo.gl/V4XbOhttp://goo.gl/V4XbO


35/36

35

4. In comparison to last school year, are students getting in more trouble or less

trouble this school year? *

More

Less Same

5. In your opinion, does the school campus feel safer this year in comparison tolast school year? *

Yes

No

Same

6. In comparison to last school year, is more or less time spent on teaching andlearning in the classroom this year? *

More

Less

Same

7. In comparison to last school year, are there more or less disruptions in the

classroom? *

More

Less

Same

8. In your opinion, is the overall behavior of the students getting better or worse?*

Better

Worse

Same


36/36

9. In a few sentences, write your true opinions of the new discipline policy. Doyou agree or disagree with it? Do you feel it should be changed? Why or why

not? *

Documents

PBIS Evaluation Report