5/3/2013

DR. CHARLES WILLIAM LENTZ MCKINLEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ABINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT

Education B.S. of Education – Indiana University of PA M.A. of Education – Gratz College M.A. of Educational Leadership – Arcadia University D.Ed. Of Educational Leadership – Widener University

Professional Experience Taught Grades 4 and 6 for nine years Assistant Principal Abington Junior High School 6 years Principal McKinley Elementary School 5 years Adjunct Professor Gratz College and College of New Jersey Board of Trustees Arcadia University State Ad-Hoc Committee on Bullying

1

5/3/2013

What are the key elements of the SWPBIS Program?

What are the key elements of the OLWEUS Antibullying Program?

What do you see as some of the similarities? What are the differences?

In groups of three or four discuss your answers to the questions.

Be prepared to report out to the larger group. Designate one representative from your group as the reporter.

2

5/3/2013

Suburban elementary school located just outside the city of Philadelphia in Elkins Park, Pennsylvania.

A school within the Abington School District. Student population of about 650 students Staff population of about 60 faculty and staff Very diverse student population in all areas

(ethnicity and socioeconomic status) Sizeable special education population (autism,

emotional support, and learning support)

2008-2009 school year – HEART philosophy is established at McKinley without SWPBIS framework. Planning for SWPBIS framework begins.

2009-2010 school year – SWPBIS Program implemented with help of PATTAN – specific focus on tier one level interventions.

2011-2012 school year – Olweus Program implemented as a tier one level intervention. SWPBIS and RTII Programs refined. (SET Evaluation Conducted)

2012 – 2013 school year – Both programs are refined. Universal screeners implemented to refine tier 2 and tier 3 level intervention model. No new programs areadded. (Olweus Evaluation Conducted)

3

5/3/2013

McKinley Elementary School determined that a more clear structure for behavioral intervention needed to be established.

SWPBIS was explored as a model through which a more consistent behavioral structure could be implemented.

In 2008-2009 McKinley forms a committee for the purpose of developing a plan for SWPBIS implementation with PATTAN consultation.

Plans for SWPBIS Implementation are developed 2008-2009 through the summer of 2009.

In late 2008-2009 school staff are trained in the SWPBIS philosophy and framework.

Over the summer of 2008-2009 final plans for the HEART program is developed and lessons were developed for program implementation.

A student handbook was developed to support the SWPBIS Program implementation.

In 2009-2010 the SWPBIS Program was implemented.

4

5/3/2013

In 2009-2010 the school introduced the SWPBIS Program to students at the beginning of the school year through school assemblies and lessons on behavior.

In 2009-2010 parents were educated in the SWPBIS Program through PTO meetings and Open House Presentations for whole school and in classrooms.

Students received handbooks explaining the SWPBIS Program and behavioral expectations across school settings.

In 2009-2010 data was collected about SWPBIS implementation and behavior and analyzed.

In 2010-2011 Revisions were made to the program and greater focus was put into Tier 2 and Tier 3 level interventions.

In 2012-2013 McKinley entered a pilot for universal screeners to assist in identification of students who needed support at the Tier 2 and Tier 3 levels of intervention.

5

5/3/2013

(Lewis & Sugai, 1999; Sugai et al., 2000; Walker et al., 1996)

HEART Honesty Excellence Awareness Respect Tolerance

6

5/3/2013

CAFETERIA GOLDEN SPATULA AWARD IN ORDER TO EARN THE GOLDEN SPATULA AWARD CLASSES MUST SHOW

H . E . A . R . T . BY Following directions the first time they are given Keeping hands, feet and objects to yourself. Keeping the table and floor clean. Using quiet, 3 inch voices. Using only positive talk. WINNING CLASSES RECEIVE Classroom certificate to be displayed proudly Class Photo to be displayed on bulletin board Name of classrooms announced on MK-TV Special Lunch

Occurs several times per year through classroom and building lessons in identified settings.

Review lessons are given throughout the course of the school year when particular expectations are not being followed

Student handbook outlines behavioral expectations and rewards and consequences for behavior.

7

5/3/2013

TIER ONE LEVEL REWARDS INCLUDE School-wide Reward Event each marking period

(Bingo, McKinley Squares, Sock Hop, Laser Show, BMX Bike Show, etc.)

Principal 200 Club Program Golden Spatula Award for Cafeteria Bus Award for Bus Behavior Notes and phone calls home to parents

Tier Two Level Program and Activities are designed to support those students for whom the Tier One level Interventions are not providing for their needs. At McKinley these programs include: Check In/Check Out McMentor Program Behavior Contracts Parent Conferences/Meetings Counseling Groups Individual Counseling Truancy Elimination Plans McKinley Academy Homework Club Board Games Club Peer Mediation Program Parents as Tutors

8

5/3/2013

At tier three we are working with children who are in the most critical need of support and intervention. At this level our involvement of parents has included: Interagency meetings with parents as partners in the

process of developing an intervention plan. Wrap Around coordinated services which blur the

boundary between home and school services. Development of behavior plans to support students

with special behavioral needs.

Initial results showed an increase in reported student behavioral infractions in 2009-2010

The number of suspensions declined during the years of implementation.

The number of referrals for special education evaluation increased in 2009-2010

Increasingly staff indicated that school-wide expectations were more clear and consistently implemented

School staff perceived nonclassroom expectations to be more in place and enforced.

Staff perceived classroom and individual expectations to be more in place and enforced.

9

5/3/2013

Gallup Poll measuring student hopefulness, engagement and well-being reflected improvement, particularly in the area of hope and the school was identified as one of the most hopeful schools nationally.

Student engagement also measureably increased.

10

5/3/2013

11

5/3/2013

-10

-15

-25 -7

-6

+6

How does this compare to last year?

-5 -6

-3

-10

-39

-5

How does this compare to last year? •Total recess referrals are down 3

12

5/3/2013

Despite the overall positive results evidenced through the implementation of the SWPBIS Program, bullying continued to surface as an area of concern which was seeming to not be effectively addressed through the program.

In the Olweus Bullying Prevention Survey administered in 2009-2010 concerns became illuminated with regards to bullying behavior at McKinley Elementary School

13

Frequency of Female Bullying at McKinley Elementary School in Past Couple of Months

80

70

60

50

Percent of Girls 40 Grade 3

Grade 4

30 Grade 5

Grade 6 20

10

0 Not Bullied Once or Twice 2 or 3 Times Per Once a Week Several Times Per

Month Week

Student Reported Frequency of Bullying in Past Several Months

Frequency of Male Bullying at McKinley Elementary School

80

70

60

50

Percent of Boys 40

30

20

10

0

in Past Couple of Months

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Not Bullied Once or Twice 2 or 3 Times Per Once a Week Several Times Per Month Week

Student Reported Frequency of Bullying in Past Several Months

5/3/2013

14

Frequency of Bullying McKinley Elementary School

by Grade Level 70

60

50

40

Precent of Students

30

20

10

0

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Not Bullied Bullied Once or Bullied 2 or 3 Times Bullied Once per Bullied Several Twice Per Month Week Times per Week

Student Reported Frequency of Bullying in Past Year

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Have Not Bullied Bullied once or twice

Bullied 2 to 3 times per month

Bullied once per week

Bullied several times a week

Percent of Students

Level of Involvement in Bullying

Student Reported Involvement in Bullying at McKinley Elementary School

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

5/3/2013

15

5/3/2013

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Verbal Exclusion Physical Rumors Damage Threat Racial Sexual Cyber Another Way

Percent of Students

Bullying Behaviors Reported

Types of Bullying Incidents Reported by Students at McKinley Elementary School

Girls

Boys

Overall

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Percent of Students

Locations of Reported Bullying

Reported Locations of Bullying Incidents at McKinley Elementary School

Girls

Boys

Combined

16

5/3/2013

The data provided in the Olweus Bullying Survey as well as other observations, teacher reports, and behavioral referrals, it was determined that bullying continued to be a problem for McKinley Elementary School despite the success of the SWPBIS Program overall.

As a result McKinley decided to explore the implementation of the OLWEUS Antibullying Program as an additional intervention provided at the Tier 1 Level of Intervention of the SWPBS Framework.

In 2009-2010 a committee of teachers, parents, administrators, and community members were invited to participate in the development of a plan for the implementation of the OLWEUS Program at McKinley Elementary School

Through the support of the PATTAN Network, McKinley was able to develop a model through which the OLWEUS Program could be implemented at the Tier 1 level of intervention.

17

5/3/2013

Both have leadership teams coordinating their implementation.

Both have classroom time dedicated to instruction on appropriate behavior whether related to bullying or related to behavior in general.

Both have data driving interventions and strategies to address student behavior.

Both have links to outside resources and agencies to guide implementation.

How can both programs be implemented without competing with each other?

How can one concerted plan for behavior modification and intervention be woven from both programs?

How can these two programs be woven together so as not to take additional time from instruction with two different programs?

How can the goals of both programs be achieved effectively?

18

5/3/2013

SWPBIS Provides an overarching framework which supports the implementation of other strategies and interventions which effectively address behavior – Olweus is one such strategy which specifically targets bullying.

Teachers were already incorporating lessons on student behavior as a part of the SWPBIS Program, but including the recommended lessons on bullying supported through OLWEUS would be a natural segue in what was already being done

The team meeting component of Olweus would provide a forum through which all behavioral issues and concerns both bullying as well as other behaviors addressed through SWPBIS could be addressed.

Support groups, counseling, and other interventions provided at the tier two level of intervention in SWPBIS could also be developed to support students who were bullies or victims of bullying.

Data obtained from SWPBIS and Olweus Surveys could allow school to effectively address concerns and monitor progress.

Staff were trained in the Olweus Bullying Prevention Model with the support of PATTAN.

Grade level teams worked to develop grade level appropriate lessons based on the Olweus Model for Bullying Prevention to address this as a component of the SWPBIS lessons through grade level class meetings.

Grade levels implemented class meeting framework and maintained notes about meetings.

19

5/3/2013

Staff used data from the Olweus Survey to identify particular areas where SWPBIS lessons could be further honed to address concerns about bullying

Staff developed signs and contracts about bullying which were used in the rolling out of the Olweus component of the program.

The all school assembly at the beginning of the year to introduce behavioral expectations was expanded to include antibullying information.

The Core Team Model for student intervention was modified to be more comprehensive and increase school responsiveness to student needs. Three branches of intervention were identified Branch 1 – Students with academic needs Branch 2 – Students with behavioral needs Branch 3 – Students with socio/emotional needs

When a student was referred for intervention the type of needs the student presented with would determine the branch of intervention.

A subcommittee would then review the case and recommend a plan for intervention

20

5/3/2013

CORE TEAM •Reviews all referrals generated by teachers and identifies the proper subcommittee to

review the case. •Identifies temporary measures to be put in place until further decisions are made.•After referral to subcommittee and

interventions, CSSP mtg may be held with parent

RTII SUBCOMMITTEE SWPBS SUBCOMMITTEE ESAP SUBCOMMITTEE

Chairperson: Bonnie Howe Chairperson: Bob Kelly Chairperson: Terry Muldawer

Types of Issues Resulting in Types of Issues Resulting in Referral Types of Issues Resulting in Referral Bullying, Aggression, Stealing, Disrespect, Referral Academic Decline Acting Out in Class, Multiple Referrals Truancy/Attendance, Withdraw, Failure Academically Peer Relations, Grief, Family Issues, Basic/Below Basic on PSSA Abuse Issues, Substance Abuse PVAAS Decline Issues, Eating Disorders, ADHD, Not Reaching AYP Distractibility, Mood disorders,

Health Related Issues, Frequent Visits to Nurse

The Core Team process remains as an effective model for intervening in student referrals

The Olweus and SWPBIS Committees which were originally separate now have been merged into one comprehensive committee called the HEART Committee

The school continues to monitor data from student referrals, Olweus and SWPBIS surveys to determine areas of needs.

The school continues to reinforce behavioral expectations in both areas.

21

5/3/2013

Every year behavioral expectations for both SWPBIS and OLWEUS are reviewed with parents at Open House events

Updates on data relative to both SWPBIS and Olweus are reviewed with parents annually at PTO Meetings.

Updates on data relative to both SWPBIS and Olweus are reviewed with staff three times annually and input is received about how to improve the programs.

Ongoing training for all staff on both Olweus and SWPBIS is conducted annually.

Bullying behavior has been increasingly reported by individual students since the implementation of the blended model. We have attributed this to parent and student increased awareness of bullying.

Student intervention on behalf of bullied students have significantly increased and students are more responsive to and reporting bullying behavior they witness.

Parent reinforcement and support of school bullying prevention measures has increased.

22

5/3/2013

23