pbis-nh targeted team training: new thinking, review and practice
DESCRIPTION
PBIS-NH Targeted Team Training: New Thinking, Review and Practice. Presented by Eric Mann & Howard Muscott October 24, 2008. Targeted Team Training: Agenda. New thinking and Review of recommended system and practice features at the targeted level, including: - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
PBIS-NH Targeted Team Training: New Thinking,
Review and Practice
Presented by Eric Mann & Howard Muscott
October 24, 2008
Targeted Team Training: Agenda
New thinking and Review of recommended system and practice features at the targeted level, including: Criteria for students not responding to universal
systems Targeted Group Interventions FBA & BSP
Develop team action plan through June Differentiated team time with NH CEBIS coaching to
assess and improve the quality of behavior support plans &/or work on action items
The PBIS Triangle: A Continuum of Care and Education Supports
Links to Wraparound-NH Facilitation
School-basedIntensive Supports
Coordinator
Effective School-wide & General Education Classroom SystemsInstructional & Behavior Management Practices
Systematic ScreeningPositive Parent Engagement
An Array of ‘Function-Based’ Group Interventions for Non-Responders to School-Wide Systems
or Early Primary Intervention
Individualized Function-Based Support Plans for School-Wide & Group
Non-Responders
School-basedIntensive Supports
Links to Community Collaboratives
Mann & Muscott (2007)
An Efficient Primary Intervention for Early Non-Responders to School-Wide and Classroom Prevention and Response Systems (e.g. scheduled feedback)
Intensive Support Plans &Crisis Intervention
Primary
Prevention:
~80%
Secondary
Preventio
n:
~15%
Tertiary
Preven
tion:
<5% Links to MH and other Community-Based Supports
The PBIS Triangle: A Continuum of Care and Education Supports
School-basedIntensive Supports
Coordinator
An Array of ‘Function-Based’ Group Interventions for Non-Responders to School-Wide Systems
or Early Primary Intervention
Individualized Function-Based Support Plans for School-Wide & Group
Non-Responders
Mann & Muscott (2007)
An Efficient Primary Intervention for Early Non-Responders to School-Wide and Classroom Prevention and Response Systems (e.g. scheduled feedback)
Secondary
Preventio
n:
~15%
Secondary PreventionTargeted Approaches
A Function-BasedPerspective
2. Data-Based Decision Making
4. Early Identificationand Referral
Processes
3. Communication with Staff and
Families
6. Targeted Group Interventions
7. Functional Assessment
Muscott & Mann (2007)
DATA
SYSTEMS
PRACTICES
5. Teacher Check, Connect, Expect
Universal Primary Prevention
SAU/District-wideAdministrative Team
1. Targeted Team and Processes
8. BehaviorSupport Planning
Targeted Team RequiresMultiple Forms of
Knowledge
Knowledge aboutthe Setting
Knowledge about Behavioral Theory
Knowledge about the Student
Adapted from Horner (2006)
Knowledge about Data-based
Decision Making
Knowledge aboutFamilies
Knowledge about Mental Health
PBIS Secondary Processes Implemented with Fidelity
Efficient Initial Intervention ImplementedEffective with Many At-Risk Students
PBIS-NH Secondary Systems Logic ModelMuscott (2008)
Targeted Group Interventions ImplementedEffective with Additional At-Risk Students
PBIS Primary Prevention System Implemented w/ FidelityVast Majority of Students Respond
FBA & Behavior Support PlansEffective with Additional At-Risk Students
Early Identification of At-Risk Students
Secondary PreventionTargeted Approaches
A Function-BasedPerspective 4. Early Identification
and Referral ProcessesMuscott & Mann (2007)
DATASYSTEMS
PRACTICES
Determining Criteria for When Students Are Not Responding to School-Wide Supports: Assure
Universal Supports Have OccurredMann (2008)
Prevention Practices: Response Continuum:Consistent language Reminders, redirection and
reteaching of positive behavior
Consistent processes for teaching expected behavior & responding to problem behavior
1:1 conference with student
Effective classroom management Team conference with student
Effective instruction practices Administrative conference
Common definitions for desired behaviors
Phone conversation with parent
Common definitions for problem behaviors
Conference with parent (promote engagement)
Detention and Suspension
Referral to Guidance
Behaviors Frequency
Class DisruptionDisrespectNon-ComplianceLanguage
3 majors or repeated minors (9 minors) per week with no response (improvement) after steps taken on response continuum
Homework Not completed 2 out of 6 assignments. 2 per week.
Retreat/ Withdrawal/ Internalizing
Continued occurrence following parent contact, observation & referral to guidanceAddress frequency and intensity criteria
Hygiene Continued occurrence following parent contact, teacher conference & referral to guidanceAddress frequency and intensity criteria
Determining Criteria for When Students Are Not Responding to School-Wide Supports:
Behavior and Frequency CriteriaMann (2008)
Procedure Outcomes for Referral to Secondary Supports
Student meets criteria for non-response/ Primary supports implemented with fidelity
Staff know the types of concerns that are appropriate to trigger secondary level supports
Staff know what informal/ formal steps to take prior to referral
Staff know how to initiate the process and what to expect when a student is referred
Staff know what information must be available at an initial meeting
Procedure Outcomes for Referral to Secondary Supports
Staff know what “function” meansStaff think about predictors before
referralStaff are trained in conflict cycle, de-
escalation techniques Staff are trained in effective family
engagement practices
Teacher Check, Connect and Expect
Efficient Systematic Intervention for Students Who Do Not Respond to
SW and Classroom Prevention and Response Systems
Teacher Check, Connect and Expect (TCCE) is a highly efficient, early, systematic response for students who do not respond to primary systems of behavior support.
TCCE occurs prior to implementing more sophisticated/ less efficiently accessed secondary supports.
Teacher Check, Connect and Expect Mann and Muscott (2007)
TCCE is a procedure in which classroom teachers provide higher rates of feedback & attention to students for exhibiting expected classroom behaviors.
Feedback is linked to school-wide expectations.
Effect on behavior is monitored using data-based decision-making.
Teacher Check, Connect and Expect Mann and Muscott (2007)
TCCE offers an immediate/ low effort approach whereby teachers:1) Greet students at the beginning of the
day/ beginning of class (MS/ HS)2) Rate behavior on a daily report card at
scheduled intervals throughout the day3) Provide brief end of day review,
feedback and encouragement on student performance relative to pre-established criteria
Teacher Check, Connect and Expect Mann and Muscott (2007)
Potential Benefits of Involvement in
Teacher Check, Connect and Expect Increases positive teacher-student contacts prior relationship
damage caused by repetitious conflict Early, effective, efficient response to emerging problem
behavior before chronic & ingrained Increased recognition for following expectations Increased opportunity for home-school communication &
partnership Connects logically/ easily to school-wide expectations Measurable assessment of progress -- helps determine if
interventions are working Provides data useful for identifying predictors of behavior
should functional assessment be needed
Teacher Check, Connect and Expect A Helpful Outcome is Almost Guaranteed!
Either: Improves student behavior
OR
Provides useful data with greater precision to help Targeted Team with assessment of function
Student Nominated for Teacher Check, Connect and ExpectSystematic Screening
Meets Criteria for Non-response to Primary SupportsTeacher or Parent Referral
Parental Approval / SC Coach Assigned Review Meeting Date Set
Teacher(s) ‘Coached’CCE Implemented
Classroom Teacher feedback at set intervals
throughout day
CCE Card with SW Behavioral Expectations
Provided in AM
CCE CoachSummarizes Data
Keeps Targeted Team informed
Meet after 20 School Days with Student, Teacher, Parent
to Review Progress
Exit Program
ReviseProgram
One Minute Review at end of day with Classroom Teacher / Lead Teacher
Sheet to Coach Consider Different Support
Mann & Muscott (2007)
Learning Zone Progress Card Be Safe, Considerate and Do the Right Thing!
3 = Strength 2 = Showed Both Strength AND Need 1 = Need 0= Major Office Referral
Period or Subject Safe Considerate Do the Right Thing
Total points HomeDate: _____
Total Checks:___/ 54 = ___%
Goal Met: __ Yes __ No
Goal: __ points
A
___/9B
___/9C
___/9D
___/9E
___/9F
___/9Total ___/54
___%
Secondary PreventionTargeted Approaches
A Function-BasedPerspective
6. Targeted Group Interventions
Muscott & Mann (2007)
DATASYSTEMS
PRACTICES
Targeted Group Interventions
TGIs address groups of students who:
1. Fail to respond to system of primary supports
2. Are not currently engaging in dangerous or extremely disruptive behavior
3. Share similar functions based on a functional assessment, and/or require similar skill development
Adapted from Crone, Horner, & Hawken, 2004; Hawken & Horner, in press; March & Horner, 2002
“ To Get”(gain
access to)
“To Avoid”(escape from)
Attention
Activity/ Task
Tangible
Sensory
Function ‘To Get or Avoid’ that is the Question
Targeted Group Interventions and Functions of Behavior
Access Adult Attention/Support The Behavior Education Plan (BEP) Mentoring Programs
Access Peer Attention/Support Social Skills Instruction Peer Mentoring Self-management Programs
Access Academic Support (function: academic task escape) PASS Program Homework Club Peer Tutoring
Procedures for Assigning Students to Targeted Group Interventions
1. Student does not respond to primary supports or TCCE and there is confidence in a hypothesis of function
2. T-Team & teacher(s) view available TGIs and determine if there is a good fit based on student function & skills If no match, initiate procedure to
develop function-based BSP
3. T-Team provides student information to lead staff member of the TGI that matches to determine if/ when the intervention could begin
4. Parent is contacted/ engaged; options discussed; permission provided
5. Meeting with student & parent is scheduled Program information, expected outcomes
discussed, 1st review meeting scheduled
6. Student agrees to participate/ contract signed by student & staff.
Procedures for Assigning Students to Targeted Group Interventions
Antrim Elementary School 07-08A Piloting of Practices Year
Enrollment is approximately 150 The Triangle for 07-08
85% Green; 13% Yellow; 2% Red Teacher Check, Connect, Expect Targeted Groups
Math Club; Walking, Running Club, Mural Makers Club
Mural Makers – Six students 9/1 – 2/28 22 ODRS or 3.7 month 3/1 – 5/21 1 ODR of .3 month
Secondary PreventionTargeted Approaches
A Function-BasedPerspective7. Functional
Assessment
Muscott & Mann (2007)
DATA
SYSTEMS
PRACTICESUniversal Primary Prevention
SAU/District-wideAdministrative Team
8. BehaviorSupport Planning
Function- Based Behavior Support Plans
Function of Behavior: What is gained or avoided as a result of the behavior (i.e. what motivates the behavior and makes it likely the behavior will repeat given similar context)FBA: A process to identify the reliable predictors of behavior resulting in a hypotheses of the ‘function’ of behaviorFunction-based BSP: A strategic support plan that incorporates teaching, identified ‘function’ and strengths to create increased likelihood that student will engage in more frequent socially and academically appropriate behavior
Behavior Pathway
A practical goal of an FBA is to develop a reliable behavior pathway for problem behavior routines
Setting Events
TriggeringAntecedents
ProblemBehavior
Testable Hypothesis:Simple Behavior Pathway
MaintainingConsequence
Function?
FBA to Behavior Support Plan
Once a reliable pathway is determined, a function-based plan is developed by influencing the components along the pathway and by assuring that function can be efficiently met through positive rather than problem behavior
COMPETING PATHWAYS
Desired Behavior Typical Result
Setting Event Trigger Problem Behavior Maintaining Consequence
Replacement Behavior
BEHAVIOR SUPPORT PLANNING
Setting Event Manipulations
(Make Problem Behavior Unnecessary)
Antecedent Manipulations (Make Problem Behavior Unnecessary)
Behavior Teaching (Make Problem Behavior Inefficient)
Consequence Manipulations (Make Problem Behavior Ineffective)
Function?
FBA/BSP Fidelity of Implementation Evaluation Tool
Muscott, Benjamin, Bradley, Gersten, and Mann (2007)
20 item tool to evaluate features and skills Five Features
Develop a Behavior Pathway and Summary Statement
Developing Replacement Behavior Based on Function
Identify Strategies For Behavior Support Plan Develop a Plan to Monitor Progress Develop a Detailed Action Plan to Implement the
BSP
Percent of 2007-08 Behavior Support Plans from All PBIS-NH Cohort Schools Reaching Competence on Behavior
Support Plan Skills (n = 18)
0%10%20%
30%40%50%60%
70%80%90%
FBA/BSP Skill
Per
cent
of S
choo
ls A
chie
vein
g C
ompe
tenc
e
Comparison by PBIS-NH Cohort of Percent of 2007-08 Behavior Support Plans Reaching Competence on
Behavior Support Plan Skills (n = 18)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
FBA/BSP Skill
Per
cent
of
FBA
/BS
Ps
Ach
ievi
ng
Com
pete
nce
Cohort 1
Cohort 2
Cohort 3
Cohort 4
Cohort 5
Cohort 3-5 Behavior Support Plans: Common Problems
Not including quantifiable baseline data when
defining problem behavior Jane moves from her seat, speaks out, taps,
and/or talks with peers or adults.
Not breaking out function by routine Jill skips classes, is disrespectful to teachers,
and “flips out” to access more time with/attention from friends.
Trying to address multiple problem behaviors and multiple functions
Fast Triggers Problem Behavior Possible Function
Being asked to writeSpellingTransitionsUnexpected changePerceived criticismReal criticismPENot having choicesInvasion of personal space
Takes things personallyBecomes defensiveMay w/drawEasily frustratedAggressiveTemper OutburstsNoncomplianceBullyingEmotional OverreactionInappropriate responses
Needs to feel acceptedNeeds to save faceAvoid failureSafetyControlNeed for structureNeed for choiceTo meet sensory needs
Cohort 3-5 Behavior Support Plans: Common Problems
Not matching replacement behavior with function Problem behavior and stated function: Jane
moves from her seat, speaks out, taps, and/or talks with peers or adults in order to get interactions with others and to be able to move after long periods of sitting.
Replacement behavior: Jane will display a break sign to take a one minute walk to the bubbler or to quietly change seats.
Cohort 3-5 Behavior Support Plans: Common Problems
Inadvertently reinforcing problem behavior When Jill is disrespectful in class, she should be
sent to her guidance counselor, Ms. Jones, during class time to discuss her inappropriate behavior.
Not selecting punishment strategies that will reduce the likelihood that problem behavior will reoccur When Jane skips classes she will receive
detention.
Cohort 3-5 Behavior Support Plans: Common Problems
Not incorporating strengths in reinforcement strategies
Not including target/outcome behaviors (quantifiable criteria for success) Bill and his parents will meet with his
teachers after 4 weeks to review his progress as reflected by his contract cards.
Submitting data collection forms that do not meet criteria for a plan
FBA/BSP Evaluation Tool Activity
Who: Targeted Teams
What: Using one of the example BSPs, evaluate the BSP with the FBA/BSP Evaluation Tool
Timeframe: 40 Minutes
Report Out: Group Share
Example Improved Activity
Who: Individuals and Team
What: Individuals read through improved example and discuss as team
Timeframe: 30 minutes
Report Out: Group Share
Secondary PreventionTargeted Approaches
A Function-BasedPerspective
2. Data-Based Decision Making
Muscott & Mann (2007)
DATASYSTEMS
PRACTICES
Identifying Broad Outcomes By Asking Key Questions
1. What do you want to achieve in terms of creating a secondary system of supports?
2. How will we measure the overall effectiveness of the secondary system?
Intervention Function Served
Common Behaviors
Staff Involved
Schedule Data Available to Determine
Success
“Working Smarter” Targeted Group Interventions
Intervention Function Served Common Behaviors Staff Involved
Schedule Data Avail.
Check-In, Check Out
Access adult attention
Varied, result in attention from adults
Muscott, Mann
Daily Arrival /Dis
Yes
Peer Mentoring
Access peer attention
Attention-Seeking from peers
DillonGriswold
Individual schedules
Yes
Service-Learning Programs
Avoid typical classroom; Gain adult attention
Attention-Seeking; Class / school avoidant; Work oriented
MuscottApfel, LeBrun
Individual Schedules / after school
Yes
Tutoring / After School HW Group
Access adult attention; Access academic support
Demonstrates Academic Need; Fail classes; Not completing HW; Seeks adult help
Gately, Bradley, Pomerleau, LeClair
M, W, F1-3 PM and after school
Yes
Social Skills Group
Peer and adult attention
Trouble make/keep friends; disruptive to gain peer attention
Smith, Jones
Mondays at 1:00
No
Family / Parent Supp Group
Access Behavior Support; Access Attention
Frequent parent contact with school
Gleckel, Mann
T 2 PM; Th 7:30 PM
Yes
“Working Smarter” Targeted Group Interventions(Some interventions such as Service Learning may be available to all students as a universal intervention)
Benchmarking the Targeted System
Team is established and functioning Have identified decision rules about non-responders Have identified decision rules about what needs to have
been tried prior to referral have been identified Referral process/protocol is completed Referral form is completed Team has begun accepting referrals Team has begun providing supports/plans Decision to use/ Developed / Implemented TCCE made Decision to use/ Developed / Implemented TGI made
Benchmarking the Targeted System
Team has begun providing supports/ developing plans
Decision whether to use Social Contracting as a first support for early non-responders to SW system
Decision to implement one or more targeted group interventions (TGI) has been made (what TGI addressing what ‘function’?) : ________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Staff have provided input for procedures and forms and have received any necessary training to understand purpose of team
Families have provided any relevant input and received information to understand purpose of team
Targeted Team BenchmarksFall 2008, By School, n=22 schools, 35 questions
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Percent In Place Percent Partially in Place Percent Not in Place
PBIS NH Big IdeaData-based Decision-Making
Sustainability requires that we use a data-based decision-making model to achieve the outcomes we desire and evaluate whether we have achieved those results.
Where do we want to be?
How do we know when we’ve gotten there?
Activity: Targeted Team Status Report
Who: Team What: Complete the Targeted
Team Benchmarks sheetProvide a copy to usTimeframe: 15 minutesReport Out: None
PBIS NH Big IdeaData-based Decision-Making
Sustainability requires that we use a data-based decision-making model to achieve the outcomes we desire and evaluate whether we have achieved those results.
Where do we want to be?
How do we know when we’ve gotten there?
Annual Action Plan Activity
Who: Targeted Teams What: Using Data-based decision making, identify
outcomes re: Targeted Systems and Practices for this school year (where do want to be by 6/1/09). Be specific and realistic Outcomes should feel satisfying without being
overwhelming “If we do this, we will have made solid progress”
Timeframe: 30 Minutes Report Out: None
Differentiated Team Time Based on Your Action Plan
(CEBIS Coaching Support Available)
Team and Systems
Criteria Development
Teacher Check, Connect and Expect
Targeted Group Interventions
FBA Practice