The Role of Behavior Screening in Tiered Systems Agenda of ......Ci3T Primary Plan: Roles and...
9
1 The Role of Behavior Screening in Tiered Systems of Support Allison Gandhi, American Ins2tute of Research Kathleen Lynne Lane, University of Kansas Steve Kilgus, University of Missouri www.intensiveinterven2on.org § Systematic Screening: An Overview of the Logistics § National Center on Intensive Intervention: An Overview § Review Standards: An Overview Agenda 2 Systematic Screening: An Overview of the Logistics 3 Thank you… For Your Commitment Internalizing Externalizing ED <1% EBD 12-20% • Students with emo2onal and behavioral disorders (EBD) represent a diverse and challenging group of students to teach (Forness, Freeman, Paparella, Kauffman, & Walker, 2011) • Historically as a field we have • viewed behavioral and social challenges to be within individual deficits (Landrum & Tankersley, 2013) • relied on reac2ve approaches to address these challenges (Horner & Sugai, 2015) Shi[ to a systems level perspec2ve Michael Yudin urged educators and educa@onal system leaders to “pay as much aBen@on to students’ social and behavioral needs as we do academics” … 2014 Na2onal PBIS Leadership Conference, Michael Yudin, Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special Educa2on and Rehabilita2on of the United States Department of Educa2on Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tiered Model of Preven9on (Lane, Kalberg, & Menzies, 2009) Academic Behavioral Social PBIS Framework Validated Curricula ≈80% ≈15% ≈5% Goal: Reduce Harm Specialized individual systems for students with high-risk Goal: Reverse Harm Specialized group systems for students at-risk Goal: Prevent Harm School/classroom-wide systems for all students, staff, & seUngs Primary Preven9on (Tier 1) Secondary Preven9on (Tier 2) Ter9ary Preven9on (Tier 3)
Transcript of The Role of Behavior Screening in Tiered Systems Agenda of ......Ci3T Primary Plan: Roles and...
1
The Role of Behavior
Screening in Tiered Systems
of Support
AllisonGandhi,AmericanIns2tuteofResearchKathleenLynneLane,UniversityofKansas
SteveKilgus,UniversityofMissouri
www.intensiveinterven2on.org
§ Systematic Screening: An Overview of the Logistics § National Center on Intensive Intervention: An Overview § Review Standards: An Overview
Agenda
2
Systematic Screening: An Overview of the Logistics
3
Thank you…
For Your Commitment
Internalizing Externalizing
ED<1%
EBD12-20%
• Studentswithemo2onalandbehavioraldisorders(EBD)representadiverseandchallenginggroupofstudentstoteach(Forness,Freeman,Paparella,Kauffman,&Walker,2011)
• Historicallyasafieldwehave• viewedbehavioralandsocial
challengestobewithinindividualdeficits(Landrum&Tankersley,2013)
• reliedonreac2veapproachestoaddressthesechallenges(Horner&Sugai,2015)
Shi[toasystemslevelperspec2ve
Michael Yudin urged educators and
educa@onal system leaders to “pay
as much aBen@on to students’
social and behavioral needs as we
do academics” …
2014Na2onalPBISLeadershipConference,MichaelYudin,AssistantSecretaryfortheOfficeofSpecialEduca2onandRehabilita2onoftheUnitedStatesDepartmentofEduca2on
Comprehensive,Integrated,Three-TieredModelofPreven9on(Lane,Kalberg,&Menzies,2009)
Academic Behavioral Social
PBISFramework
ValidatedCurricula
≈80%
≈15%
≈5%Goal:ReduceHarmSpecializedindividualsystemsforstudentswithhigh-risk
Goal:ReverseHarmSpecializedgroupsystemsforstudentsat-risk
Goal:PreventHarmSchool/classroom-widesystemsforallstudents,staff,&seUngs
PrimaryPreven9on(Tier1)
SecondaryPreven9on(Tier2)
Ter9aryPreven9on(Tier3)
2
Ci3T Primary Plan: Roles and Responsibili@es
allstakeholdergroups
Ci3T Primary Plan: Procedures for Teaching
Ci3T Primary Plan: Procedures for Reinforcing
Ci3T Primary Plan: Procedures for Monitoring
Communica@on:
Solici@ng Feedback, Sharing Progress,
Providing Professional Learning
Systema9cScreeningAcademic Behavior
TreatmentIntegrity
SocialValidity
SeeLane,Menzies,Oakes,andKalberg(2012)
What screening
tools are
available?
12
www.ci3t.org
Systema2cScreening
3
13
Considera@ons
PsychometricallySound
SociallyValid
If social validity is lacking, even psychometrically strong tools are
likely to remain unused by educators.
14
Systema@c
Screener for
Behavior Disorders
AvailablefromPacificNorthwest
Publishing
(SSBD2nded.;Walker,Severson,&Feil,2014)
15
Externalizing
1.44%
13 7 7
17 13
6
47 62 59 43 56
60
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Winter 2007 (N=60)
Winter 2008 (N=69)
Winter 2009 (N=66)
Winter 2007 (N=60)
Winter 2008 (N=69)
Winter 2009 (N=66)
Num
ber o
f Stu
dent
s
Screening Time Point
Nominated But Did Not Exceed Criteria
Exceeded Normative Criteria
Internalizing Externalizing
6.18% 3.50% 3.18% 8.90% 6.50% 2.73%%computedbasedon
total#studentsscreened
Source.Lane,Menzies,Oakes,&Kalberg,2012.Figure2.2WESElementarySystema2cScreeningforBehaviorDisorders(SSBD;Walker&Severson,1992)resultscomparingthepercentageofstudentsnominatedandexceedingnorma2vecriteriaforbothexternalizing
andinternalizingbehaviordisordersoverathreeyearperiod.
SSBDResults–Winter2007throughWinter2009RiskStatusofNominatedStudents
16
Student Risk
Screening Scale
for Internalizing
and
Externalizing
Availableonci3t.org(SRSS-IE;Drummond,1994andLane&Menzies,2009)
17
STUDENT RISK SCREENING SCALE-IE
12 items scale for use at the elementary, middle, and high schools Subscale scores used for interpretation. No total scale score.
18
SRSS-IE: Cut Scores • Enter‘prac2ce’dataintothatonesheetsothatthetotalscoresandcondi2onalformalngaretested.
• Confirmthe“Count”columniscompleted(students’numberedsequen2ally).Formulasareanchoredbythe“Count”column;itmustcontainanumberforeachstudentlistedforaccuratetotalformulas.
ElementarySchool MiddleandHighSchoolSRSS-E7 SRSS-I5 SRSS-E7 SRSS-I6
Items1-7 Items8-12 Items1-7 Items4,8-12
0-3=lowrisk4-8=moderaterisk9-21=highrisk
0-1=lowrisk2-3=moderaterisk4-15=highrisk
0-3=lowrisk4-8=moderaterisk9-21=highrisk
0-3=lowrisk4-5=moderaterisk6-18=highrisk
Elementary School Level: Lane, K. L., Oakes, W. P., Swogger, E. D., Schatschneider, C., Menzies, H., M., & Sanchez, J. (2015). Student risk screening scale for internalizing and externalizing behaviors: Preliminary cut scores to support data-informed decision making. Behavioral Disorders, 40, 159-170. Middle and High School Levels: Lane, K. L., Oakes, W. P., Cantwell, E. D., Schatschneider, C., Menzies, H., Crittenden, M., & Messenger, M. (in press). Student Risk Screening Scale for Internalizing and Externalizing Behaviors: Preliminary cut scores to support data-informed decision making in middle and high schools. Behavioral Disorders.
4
19
SRSS-E7 Results – All Students
Sample Elementary School Fall (Externalizing)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
F14 F15 F16 F17
73.61% 79.18% 82.49%
19.64% 15.18% 12.90%6.75% 5.64% 4.61%
%ofS
tude
ntsS
creene
d
ScreeningTimePointLowRisk(0-3) Moderate(4-8) High(9-21)
N=34
N=99
N=371
N=29
N=78
N=407 N=358
N=56
N=20
20
SRSS-I5 Results – All Students
Sample Elementary School: Fall (Internalizing)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
F14 F15 F16 F17
71.23% 76.07% 77.19%
17.86% 14.98% 14.75%10.91% 8.95% 8.06%
%ofS
tude
ntsS
creene
d
ScreeningTimePointLowRisk(0-1) Moderate(2-3) High(4-15)
N=55
N=90
N=359
N=46
N=77
N=391 N=335
N=64
N=35
21
Examining your
screening data …
…implica9onsforTier1prac9ces…implica2onsforteacher-deliveredstrategies…implica2onsforTier2andTier3supports
SeeLane,Menzies,Bruhn,andCrnobori(2011)22
Social Skills Improvement System – Performance Screening Guide
Spring 2012 – Total School
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
ReadingSkills MathSkills ProsocialBehavior
Mo2va2ontoLearn
43.35 47.96 56.1255.42
45.60 47.55 36.73 38.24
11.04 4.49 7.14 6.34
Percen
tofStude
nts
Subscales
Adequateprogress ModerateDifficul2es SignificantDifficul2es
N=54
N=223
N=212
n=489n=490n=490n=489
N=22
N=233
N=235
N=35
N=180
N=275
N=31
N=187
N=271
Lane,K.L.,Oakes,W.P.,&Magill,L.(2013).Primarypreven2onefforts:HowdoweimplementedandmonitortheTier1componentofourComprehensive,Integrated,Three-Tiered(CI3T)Model?
23
Student Risk Screening Scale
Middle School Fall 2004 - Fall 2011
Fall Screeners
n = 12
n = 20
n = 507
Per
cent
age
of S
tude
nts
N=534 N=502 N=454 N=476 N=477 N=470 N=524 N= 539
Lane & Oakes 24
Examining your
screening data …
…implica2onsforTier1prac2ces…implica9onsforteacher-deliveredstrategies…implica2onsforTier2andTier3supports
SeeLane,Menzies,Bruhn,andCrnobori(2011)
5
25 Lane,K.L.,Menzies,H.M.,Ennis,R.P.,&Oakes,W.P.(2015).Suppor(ngBehaviorforSchoolSuccess:AStep-by-StepGuidetoKeyStrategies.NewYork,NY:GuilfordPress.
Examining Academic and Behavioral Data:
Elementary School Level
26
Opportunities to Respond
Behavior Specific Praise
Active Supervision
Instructional Feedback
High p Requests
Precorrection
Incorporating Choice
Self-monitoring
Behavior Contracts
Low-Intensity Strategies
27 20152016IESCi3TESImplementa2on27
28
Examining your
screening data …
…implica2onsforTier1prac2ces…implica2onsforteacher-deliveredstrategies…implica9onsforTier2andTier3supports
SeeLane,Menzies,Bruhn,andCrnobori(2011)
Academic � Behavioral � SocialValidatedCurricula PBISFramework ValidatedCurricula
(Lane,Kalberg,&Menzies,2009)Comprehensive,Integrated,Three-TieredModelofPreven9on
Secondary (Tier 2) Intervention Grids
Academic � Behavioral � SocialValidatedCurricula PBISFramework ValidatedCurricula
(Lane,Kalberg,&Menzies,2009)Comprehensive,Integrated,Three-TieredModelofPreven9on
Tertiary (Tier 3) Intervention Grids
6
31 State of Tennessee DOE Technical
Assistance Grant IRB # 090935
SAMPLE TERTIARY (Tier 3) INTERVENTION GRID
Support Description Schoolwide Data: Entry Criteria
Data to Monitor Progress
Exit Criteria
Functional Assessment-Based Intervention
Individualized interventions developed by the behavior specialist and PBS team
Students who: Behavior -scored in the high risk category on the Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS), or scored in the clinical range on one following Strengths and Difficulties (SDQ) subscales: Emotional Symptoms, Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity, or Prosocial Behavior, -earned more than 5 office discipline referrals (ODR) for major events during a grading period OR Academic identified at highest risk for school failure: recommended for retention; or scored far below basic on state-wide or district-wide assessments
Data will be collected on both the (a) target (problem) behavior and (b) replacement (desirable) behavior identified by the team on an on-going basis.
Weekly teacher report
on academic status
ODR data collected
weekly Treatment Integrity Social Validity
The function-based intervention will be faded once a functional relation is demonstrated using a validated single case methodology design (e.g., withdrawal design) and the behavioral objectives specified in the plan are met.
National Center on Intensive Intervention: An Overview
33
“Our mission is to build capacity of state and local educational agencies, universities, practitioners, and other stakeholders to support implementation of intensive intervention in reading, mathematics, and behavior for students with severe and persistent learning and/or behavioral needs.”
National Center on Intensive Intervention
34
NCII
SEA
LEA
School
35
What is Intensive Intervention? Intensive intervention addresses severe and persistent learning or behavioral difficulties.
Driven by data
Characterized by increased intensity and individualization
Multi-tiered Systems of Support (MTSS)
7
37
What is NCII’s Approach to Intensive Intervention? Data-Based Individualization (DBI): § Has its origins in experimental
teaching § Is a process § Is not a one-time fix § Integrates data-based decision
making across academics and social behavior
ü Comprehensive nature of assessment packages
ü Guidance on assessment for implementation of full MTSS framework
ü Fast-track screening
What does screening have to do with intensive intervention?
38
§ Behavior Progress Monitoring Tools Chart
§ Behavior Intervention Tools Chart
§ Academic Progress Monitoring Tools Chart
§ Academic Interventions Tools Chart
NCII Tools Charts
39
2004-07
2008-11
2012-16 2016-20
History of Tools Charts
40
1. Academic Progress Monitoring
2. Academic Screening 3. Academic Intervention
4. Behavior Progress Monitoring 5. Behavior Intervention 6. Behavior Screening
Review Standards: An Overview
41 42
8
§ The National Center on Intensive Intervention defines screening as a process using tools with convincing evidence of classification accuracy, reliability, and validity to identify students who may require intensive intervention efforts to meet their academic, social, emotional, and/or behavioral needs.
Review Standards: Definition
43
Review Standards
44
1 A. Classification Accuracy
45
2A. Reliability
46
2B. Validity
47
2C. Sample Representativeness
48
9
2D. Bias Analysis
49
FAQ
50
Allison Gandhi [email protected] Kathleen Lynne Lane [email protected] Steve Kilgus [email protected]
Thank you
51
