Session #A4 Universal Screening for Behavior

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

http://www.sdqinfo.org/


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


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

http://www.sdqinfo.org/

http://psychcorp.pearsonassessments.com/pai/ca/cahome.htm

http://psychcorp.pearsonassessments.com/pai/ca/cahome.htm

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


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


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


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]

mailto:[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


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


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

Documents

Session #A4 Universal Screening for Behavior