Written by Natalie Grady Illustrated by Jessica Giurbino and Natalie Grady.
Behavior Supports Academics: Three-Tiered Model in Relation to Discipline and Achievement Joan...
-
Upload
eugene-owens -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Behavior Supports Academics: Three-Tiered Model in Relation to Discipline and Achievement Joan...
Behavior Supports Academics:Three-Tiered Model
in Relation toDiscipline and Achievement
Joan Ledvina Parr Baltimore County Public Schools
Margaret Grady Kidder Baltimore County Public Schools
Susan Barrett Sheppard Pratt Health Systems
Fourth International Conference on Positive Behavior SupportBoston, Massachusetts
March 8, 2007
Baltimore County Public Schools• Dr. Joe A. Hairston, Superintendent• 24th largest school system in the nation• 106,182 students• 169 schools, centers, and programs
– 103 Elementary• FARMS 37.43%, Mobility 22.6%, ELL 4.76%,
– 27 Middle• FARMS 36.06%, Mobility, 30.8% ELL 1.38%
– 24 High• FARMS 24.76%, Mobility, 31% ELL 0.88%
– 4 Special Education Schools, 9 Centers, 2 Programs
• Over 15,000 employees including 8,351 teachers
PBIS in Baltimore County
Department of Student Support Services
Mr. Dale R. Rauenzahn, Executive Director, Student Support Services
Ms. Patsy Holmes, Director, Student Support Services• Dr. Margaret Grady Kidder, Coordinator
PsychologicalServices, PBIS Contact/Coordinator
• Dr. Joan Ledvina Parr, School Psychologist, PBIS/SWIS
Facilitator• BCPS PBIS Leadership Workgroup, 7 PBIS Coaches• 63 PBIS Schools (38 ES, 17 MS, 8 HS) • 54 PBIS Coaches
Maryland PBIS Partnership and Collaboration
Maryland S tateDepartment of
E duc ation
S heppard P rattH ealthS ystem
J ohnsH opkins
U nivers ity
L oc alS c hool
S ystems
P o s itive B e h a v io r a lIn te r ve n tio n s a n d S u p p o r ts
Behavior Supports Academics: Three-Tiered Model for Prevention and Intervention
Academic Systems Behavioral Systems
1-5% 1-5%
5-10% 5-10%
80-90% 80-90%
Tier 3:Intensive Interventions•Small groups/individual students•Reduce complexity and severity of academic problems
Tier 3:Intensive Interventions•Small groups/individual students•Reduce complexity and severity of behavior problems
Tier 2: Targeted Interventions•Groups of students/at risk•Reduce academic problems
Tier 2:Targeted Interventions•Groups of students/at risk•Reduce behavior problems
Tier 1:Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Prevent academic problems
Tier 1:Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Prevent behavior problems
Academic and Behavioral Interventions
• Consistent implementation of Core Curriculum/Voluntary State Curriculum
• On-going curriculum-based assessments
• Differentiated instruction
• Intensive special education interventions and services
• School-wide behavior planning/discipline
• Effective classroom organization and behavior management
• Targeted interventions for groups of students
• Individualized interventions for specific students, e.g., FBA/BIPs
~80% of Students
~5-15%
~ 1-5%
Tier 3: Intensive InterventionsReduce complications, intensity, and severity of current cases of
problem behavior
Tier 2: Targeted Interventions
Reduce current cases of problem behaviorTier 1: Universal
Interventions:Reduce new cases of
problem behavior
Department of Student Support Services Programs/Activities
Universal Interventions
• School Improvement Planning
• School Emergency Safety Plans
• School-Wide Behavior Planning/Code of Conduct
• Character Education Programs
• Parent/Family Resources
• Health Screenings/Protocols
• School Nurse/Assistant Services
• Essential Guidance Curriculum
• School Counseling Services
• School Psychology Services
• School Social Work Services
• Pupil Personnel Services
• Residency/Attendance Officer Services
Targeted Interventions
• Project Attend• Pupil Personnel
Home Visits• Parent/Guardian Trainings• School Resource Officer
Program• D.A.R.E./ S.A.D.D.
Programs• Student Assistance Programs• Wellness Centers/Mental
Health Expansion
• Health Action Plans/Appraisals
• Alternative Schools/Programs
• Peer Helper/Mediation• Bullying Prevention• Social Skills, Anger
Management, Conflict Resolution Trainings
• Interagency Partnerships• Community Partnerships
Targeted Interventions
• Student Support Teams• Instructional Support Teams• Bilingual Resource Teams • Infant & Toddlers/Child Find Teams• Student Case Management• Curriculum-Based Assessments• Behavioral Assessments• Student Support Plans• Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBA)• Behavior Intervention Plans (BIP)• Individual Student 504 Plans
Intensive Interventions
• Parent/Guardian Services• Homeless Program• Abuse Neglect Reporting
Program (CPS Liaisons)• Spot Light On Schools/
Probation Officers• Court/Institutional Liaisons• Traumatic Loss Teams• Functional Behavioral
Assessments (FBA)• Behavior Intervention
Plans (BIP)
• Psychological Assessments• Psychosocial Assessments• Social Histories • Individualized Education
Programs (IEP)• Threat Assessments• Social Skills, Anger
Management, Conflict Resolution Interventions
• Individual/Group Therapeutic Counseling
• Crisis Response
Intensive Interventions
• Bridge School/Regional Team• Evening High Schools• Saturday High Schools• Afternoon Middle School Group Learning Centers• Alternative Middle and High Schools• Home Teaching• Home Hospital Instruction/Therapeutic Services• Maryland’s Tomorrow Program• Interagency Partnerships• Community Partnerships
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports in Baltimore County
Universal Interventions• All schools are encouraged to use the BCPS Positive
Behavior Planning Guide to develop a Code of Conduct
• BCPS Schools– 169 Schools, Centers, and Programs– 103 Elementary Schools– 27 Middle Schools– 24 High Schools– 4 Special Education Schools– 9 Centers– 2 Programs
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports in Baltimore County
Targeted Interventions• Selected schools are invited to participate in PBIS
Training• Schools selected by suspension rates/behavior issues• Schools self-select based on their School
Improvement Plan• 63 PBIS Schools (37% of 169 BCPS Settings)
– 38 Elementary Schools– 17 Middle Schools – 7 High Schools– 1 Evening High School
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports in Baltimore County
Intensive Interventions• Selected schools face greater challenges
– implementation of PBIS features• changes in school staff • changes in administration• changes in community and student population
– focus on data-based problem solving not blame• Schools benefit from centralized support
– on-site visits from PBIS coaches/resource staff– faculty/staff trainings on specific topics like social skills trainings or hallway behavior– redevelopment of PBIS action plans based on review of school data
History of PBIS in Maryland and Schools Trained in PBIS
• 1998 Collaboration:
MSDE and Sheppard Pratt Health System
• 1999 Tough Kids Tough Times Forum
• 14 schools trained statewide
• Maryland Summer Institute
• in 2000, 20 schools trained
• in 2001, 30 schools trained
History of PBIS in Maryland and Schools Trained in PBIS
• Project Target and Johns Hopkins University join the collaboration with MSDE and SEPH, 2002
• Maryland Summer Institute• in 2002, 54 schools trained• in 2003, 60 schools trained• in 2004, 85 schools trained• in 2005, 94 schools trained• in 2006, 118 schools trained
PBIS Schools Trained in Maryland
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
(14) (20) (30) (54) (60) (85) (94) (118)
Basic Concepts of PBIS
School Teams are trained at the
Summer Institute sponsored by
Maryland State Department of Education,
Sheppard Pratt Health System,
and the Johns Hopkins University
The following training materials are adapted from the PBIS model as developed by
George Sugai, University of Connecticut, and Rob Horner, University of Oregon
Key Elements of PBISSchool-wide behavior planning is based on a balance
of four key elements:
SYSTEMS that support staff buy-in and sustained use of effective practices
Evidence-based PRACTICES and interventions that are effective for staff and students
DATA gathered by the school to make decisions about improving behavior and learning
Clearly specified OUTCOMES that are related to behavior and student achievement
SYST
EMS
PRACTICES
DATA
SupportingStaff
Behavior
SupportingDecisionMaking
SupportingStudent Behavior
Process for Supporting Social Competence and Academic Achievement
OUTCOMES
School-wideClassroomNon-classroomIndividual
Define behavior expectationsSpecify routinesTeachAcknowledgeCorrectFollow up and feedbackReinforcementGeneralization
Office Discipline ReferralsStaff InputAcademic ProgressAttendance
PBIS School-wide InterventionsOverview
1. Establish commitment and maintain team
2. Establish school-wide expectations
3. Establish an on-going system of rewards
4. Establish a system for responding to behavioral violations
5. Establish a data system to monitor progress and aid in decision making
6. Arrange for consistent implementation and utilize district level support
1. Establish commitment and maintain team
• Establish PBIS Leadership Team– Strong, administrative support– School-wide representation on PBIS Team
• Secure school-wide agreements and supports– Strive for “full” (>80%) faculty participation– Prioritize resources (time, materials, cost)– Plan on a 3 – 5 year commitment
• Establish a data-based action plan– Use the PBIS Staff Survey results– Use behavioral incident data (office referrals, etc.)
2. Establish school-wide expectations• Develop rules of behavior
– 3 to 5 positively stated rules– Easy to remember– Apply to all students, settings, and staff
• Develop a matrix of expected behavior in target contexts– Contexts include: classrooms, hallways, gym, cafeteria,
common areas, bus loading zone, etc.
• Teach the expected behaviors using an instructional approach– Directly teach (tell/explain, model/show, practice, give
reminders and pre-corrections)– Actively supervise– Positively reinforce
Develop Rules of Behavior• High 5’s
– Be respectful
– Be responsible
– Be there, be ready
– Follow directions
– Hands/feet to self
• The Respect School– Respect others
– Respect property
– Respect yourself
• Formula 4 Success– Respect
– Responsibility
– Ready-to-learn
– Re-thinking
• The 5 Be’s– Be kind– Be safe– Be cooperative– Be respectful– Be peaceful
• Code of Conduct– I am respectful– I am responsible– I am safe– I am prepared
• Respect + Responsibility = Pride– Show respect– Show responsibility
Develop Rules of Behavior
• Viking Code of Conduct– Be respectful
– Be responsible
– Be ready
• Eagle PRIDE– P reparation
– R esponsibility
– I ntegrity
– D iligence
– E arn Respect
• RAMS Rules– R esponsibility and
Respect
– A cademic Achievement
– M otivation
– S uccess
• Tenets of Kenwood Pride– B e there and prepared
– L ive responsibly
– U phold integrity
– E arn and give respect
Matrix of Expected Behavior
3. Establish an on-going system of rewards
• Acknowledge expected behavior
• Use tangible rewards and acknowledgements– High Five’s, coupons, gotchas, etc.
• Use social recognition– Assemblies, bulletin boards, names over the intercom
• Use guidelines– Fade tangibles– Schedule strategically
• Maintain 6-8:1 positive to correction ratio
4. Establish a system for responding to behavioral violations
• Develop an agreement about which behaviors are handled in the classroom and which are managed in the office
• Use verbal redirection, teacher consequence, and/or office referral
• Use pre-correction and restatement of expected behaviors
5. Establish a data system to monitor progress and aid in decision making
• Utilize a data management system, e.g., SWIS
• Develop procedures for ongoing monitoring and evaluation
• Meet regularly to review data and implement interventions
6. Arrange for consistent implementation and utilize district
level support• Develop targeted interventions for groups of
at-risk students• Build capacity for function-based support in
order to develop individualized plans for specific students (FBA/BIPs)
• Connect PBIS Team with School Improvement Team and Student Support Team
• Utilize district level support and other leadership resources
How Baltimore County supports its PBIS schools
• Levels of PBIS support include:
– School-based team• Strong, administrative leadership is encouraged• School-wide representation on PBIS team
– PBIS coach assigned to school team• Provides expertise on the PBIS process, behavior
analysis, and data interpretation
– MSDE/BCPS Leadership Teams• Provides consultation and support
Phases in the BCPS Model of PBIS Training as a Support to the
Summer Institute Training• Phase 1—Administrator Commitment
• Spring Forum arranged and Coach Facilitator consults with administrator
• Phase 2—Training the PBIS School Team• Coach assigned to each school
• Phase 3—Implementing PBIS within the School• Coach, Coach Facilitator, and BCPS
Leadership Team assists
Phase 1—Administrator Commitment
• Administrators of identified schools attend a Spring Forum to learn about PBIS
• Follow-up meeting with the Coach Facilitator to share sample information such as:
– School rules – Matrix of expected behaviors– Classroom managed vs. office managed behaviors– Flowchart of the disciplinary process– Gotcha and recognition tickets
Phase 1—Administrator Commitment(continued)
• School completes a Staff Survey to document areas of concern
• The new school is encouraged to send faculty members to visit exemplar PBIS schools within Baltimore County
Phase 2—Training the PBIS School Team
• PBIS school team members attend the Summer Institute hosted by MSDE-SPHS-JHU
• School teams begin to plan their implementation of PBIS
• They attend a poster session of exemplar schools and dialogue with those schools’ representatives
• BCPS Coach Facilitator follows up with new school teams throughout the summer to provide guidance
Phase 2—Training the PBIS School Team(Continued)
• School teams develop their products and plan for teacher training the first week of school
• Each school is assigned a coach who works with that school during the planning as well as implementation phases
• Schools are encouraged to review and adapt the work of experienced PBIS schools– Lesson plans – Teacher training models – Incentive programs for students and staff– Acknowledgement assemblies– Motivational strategies for students and staff
Phase 3—Implementing PBIS within the School
• PBIS team trains faculty about PBIS concepts– Works best with multiple leaders training small groups– Encourage discussion and questions
• Faculty is given samples of all products and trained in their use– Gotchas– Minor incident reports (for teacher managed behavior)– Office referrals
• Rules are posted in all classrooms, hallways, and throughout the building
Phase 3—Implementing PBIS within the School (continued)
• Gotchas are collected and reinforcement systems are implemented
• Students are acknowledged for appropriate behavior
• Staff are acknowledged for their support of the program
• Office referrals are entered in the SWIS system and are analyzed
Phase 3—Implementing PBIS within the School (continued)
• PBIS Team meets at least monthly to coordinate on-going implementation, analyze data, and develop new interventions
• Schools are encouraged to maintain a binder with all their school products, team notes, and other information for reference
• A coach works with every school team to provide additional support, PBIS knowledge, and behavioral expertise
• Schools are encouraged to attend state level and county level PBIS meetings for new ideas and support
Baltimore County Schools Trained in PBIS
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
(1) (4) (11) (9) (6) (16) (15) (1)
Baltimore County Schools Trained in PBIS
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Elementary (38) Middle Schools (17) High Schools (8)
Percentage of Baltimore County PBIS Schools and Length of Time Implementing PBIS
15 schools16 schools 6 schools 9 schools11 schools 6 schools
1st Year
24%
2nd Year
25%3rd Year
10%
4th Year
14%
5th+ Year
17%
6th+ Year
10%
How Well are Schools Implementing the Concepts of PBIS?
• Team Implementation Checklist (Form A) – School self-report – Completed monthly for new schools, quarterly for returning
schools– Measures the number of critical features in place
• School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)– Observational data from independent assessor– Completed annually– Measures the 7 features of school-wide implementation
• Implementation Phases Inventory (IPI)– Completed semi-annually– Measures 4 levels of implementation– Measures 36 critical elements
Self-Report Data from Returning Elementary Schools
Form A—Percentage of features in place
0
20
40
60
80
100
n = 28 returning schools
Self-Report Data from New Elementary Schools
Form A—Percentage of features in place
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
A B C D E F G H I J
n = 10 new schools
Self-Report Data from Form A– Mean Percentage of Features in Place
Reported by Elementary Schools
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Returning ES New ES All ES
n = 28 schools n = 10 schools n = 38 schools
Self-Report Data from Returning Middle Schools
Form A—Percentage of features in place
010
20
30
40
50
60
7080
90
100
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
n = 14 returning schools
Self-Report Data from New Middle Schools
Form A—Percentage of features in place
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
A B Cn = 3 new schools
Self-Report Data from Form A– Mean Percentage of Features in Place
Reported by Middle Schools
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Returning MS New MS All MS
n = 14 schools n = 3 schools n = 17 schools
Self-Report Data from High SchoolsForm A—Percentage of features in place
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
A B C D E F
n = 6 returning schools
Self-Report Data from New High Schools
Form A—Percentage of features in place
010
2030
405060
708090
100
A Bn = 2 new schools
Self-Report Data from Form A– Mean Percentage of Features in Place
Reported by High Schools
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Returning HS New HS All HS
n = 6 schools n = 2 schools n = 8 schools
Self-Report Data from Form A—Mean Percentage of Features in Place for
PBIS Schools
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Elementary Middle High
n = 38 schools n = 17 schools n = 8 schools
School-Wide Evaluation Tool (SET)
• Research quality tool for assessing Universal/School-wide PBIS
• External person spends 2 hours at school reviewing documents, interviewing staff, and interviewing students
• PBIS is “in place” with a score of at least 80% total
• Measures 7 critical features of PBIS
Seven Critical Features of SET
Seven critical features of PBIS listed, defined, and scored within SET:
– Behavioral Expectations Defined– Behavioral Expectations Taught– On-Going System for Rewarding Behavioral
Expectations– System for Responding to Behavioral
Violations– Monitoring and Decision-Making– Management– District-Level Support
Mean SET Scores for Elementary Schools by Year of Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Baseline 1st Yr 2nd Yr 3rd Yr 4th Yr 5th Yr 6th Yr(10) (2)(4)(9) (12)(14)(26)
Note: Not all schools received a SET each year
Mean SET Scores in May 2006 for Elementary Schools by Year of Training
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
TrainedSummer
2005
TrainedSummer
2004
TrainedSummer
2003
TrainedSummer
2002
TrainedSummer
2001<
(4)(14) (7)(3)(0)
Mean SET Scores for Middle Schools by Year of Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Baseline 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year(3) (2)(6)(8)(14) (10)
Note: Not all schools received a SET each year
Mean SET Scores in May 2006 for Middle Schools by Year of Training
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
TrainedSummer
2005
TrainedSummer
2004
TrainedSummer
2003
TrainedSummer
2002
TrainedSummer
2001
(2)(2) (4)(2)(4)
Mean SET Scores for High Schools by Year of Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Baseline 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year
(3) (6) (6) (4)
Mean SET Scores in May 2006 for High Schools by Year of Training
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Trained Summer2005
Trained Summer2004
Trained Summer2003
(4)(0) (2)
Mean SET Scores for PBIS Schools by Year of Implementation
010
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Baseline 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th Year
Elementary Middle High
Implementation Phases Inventory (IPI)
• Features of PBIS listed, defined, and scored to obtain scores in the following categories:– Preparation Phase– Initiation Phase – Implementation Phase– Maintenance Phase
• Percentage of the 36 Critical Elements also obtained
Percentage of Baltimore County PBIS Schools and their Implementation Phases
Preparation
Initiation
Implementation
Maintenance
63 schools represented
56%35 Schools
35%22 Schools
3%2 Schools
6%4 Schools Schools)
Implementation Phases Inventory—Percentage of Schools in each Phase
by Year of Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1st Yr 2nd Yr 3rd Yr 4th Yr 5th Yr 6th+ Yr
Preparation Initiation Implementation Maintenance
(16)(15) (9) (11) (6)(6)
Implementation Phases Inventory—Percentage of Schools in each Phase
by Elementary, Middle, and High
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
PreparationInitiationImplementationMaintanence
Elementary Schools(38)
Middle Schools(17)
High Schools(8)
Implementation Phases Inventory—Percentage of Critical Features in Place
by Year of Implementation
0
1020
30
40
5060
70
80
90100
1st Yr 2nd Yr 3rd Yr 4th Yr 5th Yr 6th+ Yr
(16) (6) (9) (11) (6)(15)
Implementation Phases Inventory—Percentage of Critical Features in Place
by Elementary, Middle, and High
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Elementary Middle High(38) (8)(17)
Discipline Data:Suspensions & Expulsions
and Office Discipline Referrals
• Elementary School
• Middle School
• High School
Elementary Schools:Suspensions & Expulsions by Year of Implementation
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Baseline (14)
1st Yr (14)
2nd Yr (14)
3rd Yr (14)
4th Yr ( 11)
5th Yr+ ( 4)
n = 1-14 of 28 schoolsData through June 2006
Elementary Schools:Suspensions & Expulsions by Year of Implementation
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB
Baseline (14)
1st Yr (14)
n = 15-28 of 28 schoolsData through June 2006
PBIS Elementary Schools:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by Year of Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
PBIS Elementary Schools
Baseline (28)
1st Yr (28)
2nd Yr (14)
3rd Yr (14)
4th Yr (11)
5th Yr+ ( 4)
Data through June 2006
PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2001:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2001 (N=2)
Baseline SY00-01
1st Yr SY01-02
2nd Yr SY02-03
3rd Yr SY03-04
4th Yr SY04-05
5th Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2002:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2002 (N=7)
Baseline SY01-02
1st Yr SY02-03
2nd Yr SY03-04
3rd Yr SY04-05
4th Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2003:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2003 (N=3)
Baseline SY02-03
1st Yr SY03-04
2nd Yr SY04-05
3rd Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2005:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2005 (N=14)
Baseline SY04-05
1st Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
Examples of Elementary SchoolReduction in Suspensions by Year
010203040
Base Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3
32% Reduction
0
20
40
Base Yr 1 Yr 2
63% Reduction
0
50
100
Base Yr 2 Yr 4
72% Reduction
0
100
200
Base Yr 1 Yr 2
66% Reduction
Examples of Elementary SchoolReduction in Office Discipline Referrals
by Year
0
200
400
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4
68% Reduction
0
500
1000
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4
63% Reduction
0
200
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3
58% Reduction
0
1000
2000
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3
36% Reduction
PBIS Middle Schools:Suspensions & Expulsions by Year of Implementation
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Baseline (14)1st Yr (14)2nd Yr (12)3rd Yr ( 8)4th Yr ( 6)5th Yr ( 2)
n = 14 schoolsData through June 2006
PBIS Middle Schools:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by Year of Implementation
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
PBIS Middle Schools
Baseline (14)1st Yr (14)2nd Yr (12)3rd Yr ( 8)4th Yr ( 6)5th Yr ( 2)
Data through June 2006
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2001:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2001 (N=2)
Baseline SY00-01
1st Yr SY01-02
2nd Yr SY02-03
3rd Yr SY03-04
4th Yr SY04-05
5th Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2002:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2002 (N=4)
Baseline SY01-02
1st Yr SY02-03
2nd Yr SY03-04
3rd Yr SY04-05
4th Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2003:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2003 (N=2)
Baseline SY02-03
1st Yr SY03-04
2nd Yr SY04-05
3rd Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2004:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2004 (N=4)
Baseline SY03-04
1st Yr SY04-05
2nd Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2005:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2005 (N=2)
Baseline SY04-05
1st Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
PBIS High Schools:Suspensions & Expulsions by Year of Implementation
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
A B C D E F
Baseline ( 6)1st Yr ( 6)2nd Yr ( 6)3rd Yr ( 4)
n = 6 schoolsData through June 2006
PBIS High Schools:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by Year of Implementation
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
PBIS High Schools
Baseline ( 6)1st Yr ( 6)2nd Yr ( 6)3rd Yr ( 4)
Data through June 2006
PBIS High Schools Trained in 2003:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
-50
50
150
250
350
450
550
650
750
850
PBIS High Schools Trained in 2003 (N=4)
Baseline SY02-03
1st Yr SY03-04
2nd Yr SY04-05
3rd Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
PBIS High Schools Trained in 2004:Mean Number of Suspensions &
Expulsions by School Year
-50
50
150
250
350
450
550
650
750
850
PBIS High Schools Trained in 2004 (N=2)
Baseline SY03-04
1st Yr SY04-05
2nd Yr SY05-06
Data through June 2006
Examples of Secondary SchoolReduction in Suspensions by Year
0
5001000
1500
Base Yr 1 Yr 2
56% Reduction
0
1000
2000
Base Yr 1
57% Reduction
0
500
1000
Base Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3
32% Reduction
0
200
400
Base Yr 1
35% Reduction
Examples of Secondary SchoolReduction in Office Discipline Referrals
by Year
0
1000
2000
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4
20% Reduction
0
2000
4000
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3
39% Reduction
0
1000
2000
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3
27% Reduction
Attendance Data
• Elementary School
• Middle School
• High School
PBIS Elementary School Attendance Rates by Year of Implementation
0102030405060708090
100
A C E G I K M O Q S U W Y AA
Baseline (28) 1st Yr (28) 2nd Yr (14) 3rd Yr (14)4th Yr (11) 5th Yr ( 4) 6th Yr ( 2) 7th Yr ( 1)
Mean % of Attendance Rates for PBIS Elementary Schools by Year of
Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Base Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
(28) (14) (11) (4) (2) (1)(28) (14)
PBIS Middle School Attendance Rates by Year of Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Baseline (14)1st Yr (14)2nd Yr (12)3rd Yr ( 8)4th Yr ( 6)5th Yr (2)
n = 12 schools
Mean % of Attendance Rates for PBIS Middle Schools by Year of
Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Base Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6
(14) (8) (6) (3)(14) (12) (2)
PBIS High School Attendance Rates by Year of Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
A B C D E F
Baseline (6)1st Yr (6)2nd Yr (6)3rd Yr (4)
n = 6 schools
Mean % of Attendance Rates for PBIS High Schools by Year of
Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
(6) (6) (4)(6)
PBIS Supports Academic Achievement:PBIS Schools and Results of the
Maryland School Assessments (MSA)
• Elementary School
• Middle School
% of Third Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
A B C D E F G H I J K L M NMSA Year 2003 MSA Year 2004MSA Year 2005 MSA Year 2006
n = 14 schools; schools were trained in July 2003 or before
Mean % of Third Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006
37 % Increase in Third Grade Reading Scores
% of Third Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
A B C D E F G H I J K L M NMSA Year 2003 MSA Year 2004MSA Year 2005 MSA Year 2006
n = 14 schools; schools were trained in July 2003 or before
Mean % of Third Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006
27% Increase in Third Grade Math Scores
% of Fifth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
A B C D E F G H I J K L M NMSA Year 2003 MSA Year 2004MSA Year 2005 MSA Year 2006
n = 14 schools; schools were trained in July 2003 or before
Mean % of Fifth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006
17 % Increase in Fifth Grade Reading Scores
% of Fifth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
A B C D E F G H I J K L M NMSA Year 2003 MSA Year 2004MSA Year 2005 MSA Year 2006
n = 14 schools; schools were trained in July 2003 or before
Mean % of Fifth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006
41 % Increase in Fifth Grade Math Scores
% of Eighth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
A B C D E F G H I J K LMSA Year 2003 MSA Year 2004MSA Year 2005 MSA Year 2006
n = 12 schools; schools were trained in July 2004 or before
Mean % of Eighth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006
23 % Increase in 8th Grade Reading Scores
% of Eighth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
A B C D E F G H I J K LMSA Year 2003 MSA Year 2004MSA Year 2005 MSA Year 2006
n = 12 schools; schools were trained in July 2004 or before
Mean % of Eighth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006
69 % Increase in 8th Grade Math Scores
Summary of MSA Results from 2003-2006 for PBIS Schools
Reading Math
3rd Grade 37 % Increase(29% for all BCPS Schools)
27 % Increase(17% for all BCPS Schools)
5th Grade 17 % Increase(14% for all BCPS Schools)
41 % Increase(38% for all BCPS Schools)
8th Grade 23 % Increase(17% for all BCPS Schools)
69 % Increase(43% for all BCPS Schools)
Percent Change in MSA Scores from 2003-2006
for PBIS Schools vs. all BCPS Schools
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
3rdReading
3rd Math
5thReading
5th Math
8thReading
8th Math
MSA Scores for PBIS Schools MSA Scores for all BCPS Schools
How Does Behavior Support Academics?
• Improved behavior decreases office referrals and suspensions and increases instructional minutes
• Improved behavior makes instructional minutes more effective
• Improved behavior creates a climate that is calm and conducive to learning
For additional information please contact:
Office of Psychological ServicesBaltimore County Public Schools
410-887-0303
Joan Ledvina Parr [email protected]
Margaret Grady Kidder [email protected]
Susan Barrett [email protected]
Maryland’s PBIS website www.pbismaryland.org
Building Success in
SchoolsBaltimore Co
Timeat aOne Step
Thank you for your support
as we continue to
REACH FOR THE STARS
and help students believe in
themselves and achieve in
Baltimore County Schools
Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports in Baltimore County
Schools