universal screening using the systematic screening for behavior disorders (ssbd) louisiana positive...

Universal Screening Using the Universal Screening Using the Systematic Screening for Systematic Screening for

Behavior Disorders (SSBD)Behavior Disorders (SSBD) Louisiana Positive Behavior SupportLouisiana Positive Behavior Support

11stst Annual Conference Annual ConferenceJuly 11, 2008July 11, 2008

Cindy Morgan-D’Atrio, Ph.D.Cindy Morgan-D’Atrio, Ph.D.Gale Naquin, Ph.D.Gale Naquin, Ph.D.

University of New OrleansUniversity of New OrleansPupil Assistance Model (PAM) TeamPupil Assistance Model (PAM) Team

OverviewOverview

How does universal behavior screening fit How does universal behavior screening fit in to the “big RTI picture?”in to the “big RTI picture?”

Description of SSBDDescription of SSBD

How do we look at SSBD data?How do we look at SSBD data?

Screenings in Jefferson Parish Screenings in Jefferson Parish Public Schools 2006-2007 & 2007-2008Public Schools 2006-2007 & 2007-2008

Future DirectionsFuture Directions

22UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008

Response to InterventionResponse to Intervention(RTI)(RTI)

ISIS

A multi-tiered process that A multi-tiered process that enables early identificationenables early identification

Allocates instructional Allocates instructional resources to student needsresources to student needs

Use of scientific research to Use of scientific research to guide instruction and direct guide instruction and direct interventionsinterventions

Uses data to drive student-Uses data to drive student-related decisions and related decisions and problem-solving problem-solving

IS NOTIS NOT

An Instructional ProgramAn Instructional Program

A CurriculumA Curriculum

A StrategyA Strategy

An InterventionAn Intervention

A CommitteeA Committee

A FadA Fad

An Educational RevolutionAn Educational Revolution


An RTI Model includes:An RTI Model includes:

High quality, High quality, research-based research-based instructioninstruction

Actively involved Actively involved administrators and administrators and teachersteachers

Universal screening Universal screening of academics and of academics and behaviorbehavior

Continuous progress Continuous progress monitoring and use of monitoring and use of datadata

Ongoing interventionsOngoing interventions

Problem-solving Problem-solving framework to be applied framework to be applied to the system, to the system, classroom and classroom and individual studentindividual student


AdvantagesAdvantages of RTI:of RTI:

Focus on providing effective instruction Focus on providing effective instruction across the board (instead of WHO is across the board (instead of WHO is eligible)eligible)Identification is not dependent on teacher Identification is not dependent on teacher referralreferralEncourages placement of student in Encourages placement of student in intervention immediately rather than intervention immediately rather than waiting for time-consuming and often waiting for time-consuming and often expensive assessmentsexpensive assessments


How RTI Relates to NCLB:How RTI Relates to NCLB:

Academic and behavior problems are Academic and behavior problems are identified early; intervention is EARLYidentified early; intervention is EARLY

Progress monitoring is ongoingProgress monitoring is ongoing

Design and implementation of remedial Design and implementation of remedial and individualized interventions for and individualized interventions for children not responding to scientifically children not responding to scientifically based curriculum and instructionbased curriculum and instruction


Integrating RTI and PBS makes Integrating RTI and PBS makes sense:sense:

Effective educational environments meet Effective educational environments meet both the academic and social needs of both the academic and social needs of studentsstudents

Effective behavioral support enhances Effective behavioral support enhances academic outcomesacademic outcomes

Effective instruction enhances social Effective instruction enhances social behaviorbehavior


Children who engage in problem Children who engage in problem behavior typically do so for one of two behavior typically do so for one of two MAIN reasons:MAIN reasons:– Get access to attention (adult/ peer)Get access to attention (adult/ peer)– Avoid/escape work or demandsAvoid/escape work or demands

Good instruction improves behaviorGood instruction improves behavior

Good behavioral support improves Good behavioral support improves academic engagement… and academic academic engagement… and academic gainsgains

Integrating RTI and PBS makes Integrating RTI and PBS makes sense:sense:


Academic Systems

Behavioral Systems

TIER 3 Intensive, Individual InterventionsIndividual Students; Assessment-based; High Intensity; longer duration

TIER 3 Intensive, Individual InterventionsIndividual Students; Assessment-based; Intense, durable procedures

TIER 2

Targeted Group InterventionsSome students (at-risk)High efficiencyRapid response

TIER 1 Core Instructional/ Universal Interventions

All students; preventive, proactive

TIER 2Targeted Group InterventionsSome students (at-risk)High efficiencyRapid response

TIER 1

Universal InterventionsAll settings; all students; preventive; proactive

80%

15%

5%


Fluid Movement Through the Three Tiers

Tier III

Tier II

Tier I

Unsuccessful

Response to

Intervention

Successful

Response to

Intervention


SSBD – DescriptionSSBD – DescriptionHill M. Walker, Ph.D. & Herbert H. Severson, Hill M. Walker, Ph.D. & Herbert H. Severson, Ph.D.Ph.D.

Published in 1990Published in 1990

Universal-screening instrument (all reg. ed.)Universal-screening instrument (all reg. ed.)

Identifies “AT-RISK” studentsIdentifies “AT-RISK” students

3-stage, multiple-gating system 3-stage, multiple-gating system

Grades 1-6Grades 1-6

Behavior is 2-dimensional:Behavior is 2-dimensional:– EXTERNALIZING and INTERNALIZINGEXTERNALIZING and INTERNALIZING


SSBD:SSBD:The Multiple The Multiple

Gating Gating ProcedureProcedure

Teacher Screens class on Int. & Ext.

behavioral dimensions

Take 3 highest ranked on Int. & Ext. dimension

GATE 1

GATE 2

GATE 3

rate 3 highest ranked students on

Int. & Ext. dimension

Determine if scores meet cutoffs

DIRECT OBSERVATIONS

in classroom & on playground by

someone other than teacher

RANK ORDERING

RATING SCALES

ABIT or problem-solving team more involved

[INTERVENTION(S) or EVALUATION]

Determine if scores meet cutoffs


Stage 1:Stage 1:– Teachers rank order students along either the Teachers rank order students along either the

EXTERNALIZINGEXTERNALIZING or or INTERNALIZINGINTERNALIZING dimension dimension

Stage 2: Stage 2: – Rating scales completed on 3 highest ranked students Rating scales completed on 3 highest ranked students

from Stage 1 (3 for Ext. & 3 for Int. = 6 scales)from Stage 1 (3 for Ext. & 3 for Int. = 6 scales)– Each rating scale includes:Each rating scale includes:

CRITICAL EVENTS INDEXCRITICAL EVENTS INDEX (33 items) (33 items)COMBINED FREQUENCY INDEXCOMBINED FREQUENCY INDEX (23 items – (23 items – AdaptiveAdaptive and and Maladaptive BehaviorMaladaptive Behavior))

– Cutoff scores appliedCutoff scores appliedStage 3:Stage 3:– Professional other than teacher observes “at-risk” Professional other than teacher observes “at-risk”

students using structured observations (academic students using structured observations (academic engaged time & social behavior)engaged time & social behavior)

SSBD – Description (3 Stages)SSBD – Description (3 Stages)


SSBD – Technical PropertiesSSBD – Technical Properties

5 years to develop5 years to develop

Field tested in six school districts across Field tested in six school districts across countrycountry

Standardization samples:Standardization samples:– Stage 2 measures: 4500 casesStage 2 measures: 4500 cases– Stage 3 observations: 1300 casesStage 3 observations: 1300 cases


7 Assumptions of the Authors:7 Assumptions of the Authors:

1.1. Externalizers are more frequently Externalizers are more frequently referred than Internalizersreferred than Internalizers

2.2. Teachers’ assumptions are valid, Teachers’ assumptions are valid, accurate, cost-effective and accurate, cost-effective and underutilized in identification of students underutilized in identification of students having behavioral disordershaving behavioral disorders

3.3. Screenings require teachers to look at Screenings require teachers to look at behavior of all of their studentsbehavior of all of their students

SSBD – PropertiesSSBD – Properties


7 Assumptions of the Authors:7 Assumptions of the Authors:

4.4. Rankings, ratings and observations are Rankings, ratings and observations are necessary to adequately assess student necessary to adequately assess student behaviorbehavior

5.5. Academic engaged timeAcademic engaged time and and social social behaviorbehavior are important indicators of student are important indicators of student adjustment adjustment

6.6. ExternalizingExternalizing and and InternalizingInternalizing dimensions dimensions capture the majority of behavior disorderscapture the majority of behavior disorders

7.7. Early identification of students with behavioral Early identification of students with behavioral disorders is critical32disorders is critical32

SSBD – PropertiesSSBD – Properties



STAGE 1STAGE 1 ExternalizingExternalizing InternalizingInternalizing

Interrater Interrater ReliabilityReliability

.89 - .94.89 - .94 .82 - .90.82 - .90

Test-retest Test-retest ReliabilityReliability

.81 - .88.81 - .88 .74 - .79.74 - .79

Sensitivity Sensitivity (accuracy (accuracy of procedures in of procedures in identifying students who identifying students who had previously been had previously been identified)identified)

9 out-of 10 9 out-of 10 within within

highest 3 highest 3 rankedranked



STAGE 2STAGE 2

Adaptive Adaptive BehaviorBehavior

Maladaptive Maladaptive BehaviorBehavior

Internal Consistency Internal Consistency (coefficient alpha)(coefficient alpha) .85 - .88.85 - .88 .82 - .87.82 - .87

Stability of Teacher Stability of Teacher Ratings Ratings (Pearson correlations of (Pearson correlations of teacher ratings over 1 month)teacher ratings over 1 month)

.88.88 .83.83

Stability of Stability of Critical Events IndexCritical Events Index not conducted not conducted due to scoring system (1 or 0) and low due to scoring system (1 or 0) and low frequencies of checked eventsfrequencies of checked events



STAGE 3STAGE 3

Academic Academic Engaged TimeEngaged Time

Playground Playground Social BehaviorSocial Behavior

Interobserver Interobserver agreementagreement .86 – 1.00.86 – 1.00 .65 – 1.00.65 – 1.00


The DimensionsThe Dimensions

Internalizing DimensionInternalizing Dimension: : • behaviors directed behaviors directed inwardlyinwardly• self-imposedself-imposed• social deficitssocial deficits• patterns of avoidancepatterns of avoidance


Examples:Examples:– Low / restricted activity levelsLow / restricted activity levels– Quiet around othersQuiet around others– Shy, timid, unassertiveShy, timid, unassertive– Avoiding social situationsAvoiding social situations– Preference to be alonePreference to be alone– FearfulFearful– Doesn’t play games or engage in activitiesDoesn’t play games or engage in activities– Unresponsive to initiations by othersUnresponsive to initiations by others– Allowing self to be victimizedAllowing self to be victimized

Internalizing DimensionInternalizing Dimension


Non-Examples:Non-Examples:– Engaging socially with othersEngaging socially with others– Initiating conversationsInitiating conversations– Playing with othersPlaying with others– Exhibiting positive social behavior toward Exhibiting positive social behavior toward

othersothers– Participating in games and activitiesParticipating in games and activities– Resolving conflicts appropriatelyResolving conflicts appropriately– Joining in with othersJoining in with others

Internalizing DimensionInternalizing Dimension


The DimensionsThe Dimensions

Externalizing DimensionExternalizing Dimension: : • behavior are directed behavior are directed outwardlyoutwardly• behavioral excessesbehavioral excesses• behavior is considered inappropriate behavior is considered inappropriate

by most adultsby most adults


Examples:Examples:– Displaying aggression toward people or thingsDisplaying aggression toward people or things

– ArguingArguing

– Forcing others to be submissiveForcing others to be submissive

– Exhibiting defiance / noncomplianceExhibiting defiance / noncompliance

– Out-of-seatOut-of-seat

– Having tantrumsHaving tantrums

– Being overactiveBeing overactive

– Being disruptive or disturbing othersBeing disruptive or disturbing others

– StealingStealing

– Not following rules or directionsNot following rules or directions

Externalizing DimensionExternalizing Dimension


Non-Examples:Non-Examples:– Cooperating and sharingCooperating and sharing– Working on schoolwork / assignmentsWorking on schoolwork / assignments– Letting others know when he/she needs Letting others know when he/she needs

assistanceassistance– Listening to the teacherListening to the teacher– Interacting with others appropriatelyInteracting with others appropriately– Following directionsFollowing directions– Attending during activitiesAttending during activities– Complying with teacher requestsComplying with teacher requests

Externalizing DimensionExternalizing Dimension


Students can only be an Students can only be an InternalizerInternalizer

OR OR

ExternalizerExternalizer

NOT BOTH!NOT BOTH!


Stage Two Scoring: “At-Risk” Identification

Dimension Criteria to Pass to Stage 3

Internalizing

Critical Events Index Adaptive Behavior

Maladaptive Behavior

> 4 ---- ----

OR

> 1 AND < 41 AND > 19

Externalizing

Critical Events Index Adaptive Behavior


> 5 ---- ----

OR

> 1 < 5 AND < 30 AND > 35

27UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008

Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD) TRACKING SHEET

School: GREAT ElementarySUMMARY by CRITICAL EVENTS

INDEX Date: 11/14/07

Teacher Grade Student(M or F) Gender Race

Critical Events

Form Ext. or Int.

(E or I)

Critical Events Index

Adaptive Behavior

Score


Score

Check if Student is "At-Risk"

Simpson 2 Lance M B E 9 22 36 +

Charles 4 David M B E 4 26 41 +

Smith 2 Brian M B E 3 32 32

Smith 2 Javon M B I 7 44 12 +

Davis 4 Nell F H I 3 43 16

5 5

Dimension Criteria to Pass to Stage 3

Internalizing

Critical Events Index Adaptive Behavior Maladaptive Behavior

> 4 ---- ----

OR

> 1 AND < 41 AND > 19

Externalizing

Critical Events Index Adaptive Behavior Maladaptive Behavior

> 5 ---- ----

OR

> 1 < 5 AND < 30 AND > 35

28UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008

How do we How do we look at SSBD look at SSBD

data?data?


Primarily through Primarily through EXCEL EXCEL

spreadsheets spreadsheets we’ve created…we’ve created…


SSBD Results

Identify At-Risk Students


Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD) TRACKING SHEET

School: GREAT Elementary SUMMARY by CRITICAL EVENTS INDEX Date: 11/14/07

Teacher Grade Student(M or F) Gender Race

Critical Events Form Ext. or Int. (E or

I)

Critical Events Index

Adaptive Behavior

Score


Score

Check if Student is "At-Risk"

Davis 4 Jane F B E 15 24 40 +

Simpson 2 Lance M B E 9 22 36 +

Charles 4 David M B E 8 32 41 +

Smith 2 Brian M B E 7 31 32 +

Bernard 5 Bethany F B E 7 39 44 +

Thompson 3 Jeffrey M B E 4 30 41 +

Bernard 5 Lisa F B E 4 41 34 +

Reavis 1 Julio M H E 3 28 35 +

Carter 1 Davonte M B E 2 31 36 +

Smith 2 Javon M B I 7 44 12 +

Davis 4 Nell F H I 6 26 16 +

Bernard 5 Rufus M B I 6 23 32 +

Simpson 2 Darryl M B I 4 45 30 +

Mercer 1 Keshawn M B I 3 32 19 +

14 14


SSBD Results

School Summary


SSBD School Summary Report 2007-2008 School Year

School: GREAT ELEMENTARY

*Total Screened Population: 247 "At-Risk" Students# of

students in population

(minus SpEd.)

% of students in population

(minus SpEd.)

% of "At-Risk"

students in population

(minus SpEd.) # of Students Nominated on SSBD: 47 RACE # %

% of Students Nominated on SSBD 19.0% Black: 17 85.0% 140 56.7% 6.9%

# of Students "At-Risk" on SSBD: 20 Hispanic: 3 15.0% 84 34.0% 1.2%

% of Students "At-Risk" on SSBD: 8.1% White: 0 0.0% 9 3.6% 0.0%

"*" Total Student Population = all regular education students in grades 1-5 (or 6 if applicable), and students identified as Speech Only and Gifted or Talented

Asian: 0 0.0% 11 4.5% 0.0%

Other: 0 0.0% 3 1.2% 0.0%

20 100.0% 247 100.0% 8.1%

"At-Risk" StudentsCEI # %

Externalizing: 15 75.0% "At-Risk" Students# of "At-

Risk" students in each grade

% of "At-Risk"

total

Total # of students by

grade (minus SpEd.)

% of "At-Risk"

students in entire grade

# of students

nominated by grade (minus SpEd.)

% of students

nominated in entire gradeInternalizing: 5 25.0% GRADE

Externalizing

Internalizing

20 100.0% 1st: 2 1 3 15.0% 61 1.2% 16 26.2%

2nd: 3 2 5 25.0% 57 2.0% 12 21.1%

"At-Risk" Students 3rd: 3 0 3 15.0% 55 1.2% 4 7.3%

GENDER # % 4th: 5 1 6 30.0% 42 2.4% 8 19.0%

Males: 14 70.0% 5th: 2 1 3 15.0% 32 1.2% 7 21.9%

Females: 6 30.0% 15 5 20 100.0% 247 8.1% 47 19.0%

20 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 25.0%

refers to students "At-Risk" on SSBD

refers to students nominated on SSBD

refers to regular/entire student population


SSBD Results

Item Analysis – developed at UNO

Address training needs for PBS

Identify concerns by:– Grade– Gender– Dimension– School


School: GREAT Elementary SSBD Item AnalysisDate of Admin: 11/14/07 Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5

TotalsCRITICAL EVENTS INDEXEXT INT EXT INT EXT INT EXT INT EXT INT

M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F1 Steals 1 1 2 2 62 Sets fires 03 Vomits after eating 1 14 Tantrums 1 1 3 3 1 2 2 1 145 Physically assaults adults 06 Painful Shyness 1 2 1 1 57 Large weight loss/gain 08 Depression 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 109 Aggressive to others 1 1 1 3 3 1 2 1 1 2 1610 Damages property 1 2 2 2 711 Obsessive-compulsive 1 1 2 2 1 1 812 Nightmares/sleep problems 013 Inapprop. sexual behaviors 1 114 Self-abusive 1 115 Injure w/ weapons/objects 016 Suddenly cries in normal sit. 1 1 1 317 Headache/somatic thoughts 1 2 1 418 Suicidal/death thoughts 1 1 219 Thought disorders 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1020 Ignores teacher warnings 5 3 3 3 3 2 3 2221 Lewd or obscene gestures 022 Evidence of physical abuse 023 Evidence of drug use 024 Reports sexual abuse 025 Obscene language 1 1 2 1 526 Cruelty to animals 027 Teased/neglected by peers 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1128 Restricted activity levels 1 1 229 Enuretic (bladder control) 1 1 230 Encopretic (bowel control) 1 131 Sexually molests others 032 Auditory/visual halluc. 1 133 Severe lack of interest 1 2 1 434 Other 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1435 Other 1 1 2 4

36 Total 13 2 6 2 18 0 9 1 17 0 0 0 20 26 7 6 6 15 6 0 1543636UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008UNO-PAM/RTI, Copyright-2008

JPPSS – SSBD Screenings JPPSS – SSBD Screenings 2006-2007 & 2007-20082006-2007 & 2007-2008

06-07 07-08

# of schools screened 53 53

# of students screened 22,101 16,634

Grades screened K-51-5

(5 6th grade classes)


JPPSS – SSBD ScreeningsJPPSS – SSBD Screenings2006-2007 & 2007-20082006-2007 & 2007-2008

Nominated Students

06-07 07-08

Students nominated 3488 3521

% of students screened 15.8% 21.2%

Avg. # nominated per school 67 66

Range of nominated students 3.7%-34.3% 5.1%-33.8%



At-Risk Students

06-07 07-08

At-Risk Students 1533 1299

% of students screened 6.9% 7.8%

Avg. # At-Risk per school 30 25

Range of At-Risk students 1.3%-14.6% 2.0%-21.7%



At-Risk Students by GENDER

06-07 07-08

Male 71.7% 71.7%

Female 28.3% 28.3%

(100.0%) (100.0%)



At-Risk Students by SSBD DIMENSION

06-07 07-08

Externalizing 66.6% 66.6%

Internalizing 33.4% 33.4%

(100.0%) (100.0%)



At-Risk Students by RACE

06-07 07-08

Black 62.3% 60.6%

White 29.5% 29.3%

Hispanic 6.5% 6.2%

Asian & Other 1.7% 3.9%

(100.0%) (100.0%)


Jefferson Parish Public Schools ScreeningJefferson Parish Public Schools Screening 2007-20082007-2008

Item analysis for each schoolItem analysis for each school

Combined SSBD results with Combined SSBD results with disciplinary data (Infinite Campus)disciplinary data (Infinite Campus)

Provided each school with Provided each school with behavioral profilebehavioral profile

Assisted school personnel with Assisted school personnel with interpretation of data for their schoolinterpretation of data for their school



Train problem-solving teams to Train problem-solving teams to administer, score and review SSBD administer, score and review SSBD datadata

Consider results of SSBD in light of Consider results of SSBD in light of Office Disciplinary Referrals (ODRs)Office Disciplinary Referrals (ODRs)

Prioritize student needs based on Prioritize student needs based on these resultsthese results



Develop interventions based on these Develop interventions based on these datadata

Develop standard protocol behavioral Develop standard protocol behavioral interventions for use with students on interventions for use with students on Tier I and Tier 2Tier I and Tier 2

Assist with development of more Assist with development of more sophisticated interventions for sophisticated interventions for students needing Tier III intervention students needing Tier III intervention


What we know from behavioral What we know from behavioral science…science…

Children aren’t born with Children aren’t born with BADBAD behaviors behaviors– ExEx: Children aren’t born knowing how to steal, : Children aren’t born knowing how to steal,

cheat or liecheat or lie– ExEx: Children aren’t born knowing how to curse, : Children aren’t born knowing how to curse,

swear and “shoot the finger”swear and “shoot the finger”– ExEx: Children aren’t born knowing how to carry a : Children aren’t born knowing how to carry a

handgun or distribute heroinhandgun or distribute heroin

Children don’t learn healthy and socially Children don’t learn healthy and socially appropriate behaviors when they’re only issued appropriate behaviors when they’re only issued negatives, consequences and volatile reactionsnegatives, consequences and volatile reactions


What we know from behavioral What we know from behavioral science…science…

Children Children DODO learn healthy and learn healthy and appropriate behavior when they are appropriate behavior when they are provided with:provided with:

– INSTRUCTION (direct)INSTRUCTION (direct)– IMMEDIATE FEEDBACK (that is IMMEDIATE FEEDBACK (that is

also constructive)also constructive)


Response To Intervention (RTI): Response To Intervention (RTI): A Problem Solving PhilosophyA Problem Solving Philosophy

If a student isn’t performing as If a student isn’t performing as expected, we will change what expected, we will change what WE’REWE’RE doing … doing …

and continue problem solving until we find what works.


universal screening using the systematic screening for behavior disorders (ssbd) louisiana positive...

Documents