PBIS: Alternatives to Zero Tolerance and Punitive Discipline April 14, 2015 Matthew Phillips, M.A.,...

PBIS: Alternatives to Zero Tolerance and Punitive

Discipline

April 14, 2015

Matthew Phillips, M.A., CCC-SLPPBIS Coordinator, Ingham ISD

http://www.wiki.inghamisd.org/

Agenda

MORNING:• Rethinking Punishment and Zero Tolerance• Before the Critical Decisions• Introduction to Restorative Practices

AFTERNOON• Presentation: Waverly Middle School PBIS/RP Hybrid Model• Overview of Trauma-Informed Schools • Student Behavior Screeners

Why Re-Think Punishment?

Dear Chief State School Officers and State Attorneys General:


Dear Colleague:

Dear Colleague guidance letter, prepared with our partners at the U.S. Department of Justice, describing how schools can meet their obligations under federal law to administer student discipline without discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin;


Dear Colleague:

No student or adult should feel unsafe or unable to focus in school, yet this is too often a reality. Simply relying on suspensions and expulsions, however, is not the answer to creating a safe and productive school environment. Unfortunately, a significant number of students are removed from class each year — even for minor infractions of school rules — due to exclusionary discipline practices, which disproportionately impact students of color and students with disabilities.

In Texas, a groundbreaking longitudinal study of nearly 1 million students found that nearly six in 10 public school students studied were suspended or expelled at least once over a six-year period during their 7th to 12th-grade years; 15 percent of those students were disciplined 11 or more separate times.

One study found that 95 percent of out-of-school suspensions were for nonviolent, minor disruptions such as tardiness or disrespect.

Students who are suspended or expelled from school may be unsupervised during daytime hours and cannot benefit from great teaching, positive peer interactions, and adult mentorship offered in class and in school. Suspending students also often fails to help them develop the skills and strategies they need to improve their behavior and avoid future problems. Suspended students are less likely to graduate on time and more likely to be suspended again, repeat a grade, drop out of school, and become involved in the juvenile justice system.

…zero-tolerance policies… can erode trust between students and school staff, and undermine efforts to create the positive school climates needed to engage students in a well-rounded and rigorous curriculum. In fact, research indicates an association between higher suspension rates and lower schoolwide academic achievement and standardized test scores.

I encourage America’s educators to proactively redesign discipline policies and practices to more effectively foster supportive and safe school climates.

Why Re-Think Zero Tolerance?

The History of Zero Tolerance



Originally developed as an approach to drug enforcement, the term became widely adopted in schools in the early 1990s as a philosophy or policy that mandates the application of predetermined consequences, most often severe and punitive in nature, that are intended to be applied regardless of the seriousness of behavior, mitigating circumstances, or situational context. Such policies appear to be relatively widespread in America’s schools…



Zero tolerance policies assume that removing students who engage in disruptive behavior will deter others from disruption, and create an improved climate for those students who remain.


The Myths of Zero ToleranceMyth 1: School violence is at a serious level and increasing, thus necessitating forceful, no-nonsense strategies for violence prevention.

The evidence does not support that violence in schools is out-of-control. Serious and deadly violence remain a relatively small proportion of school disruptions; school violence and disruption have remained stable, or even decreased somewhat, since approximately 1985.


The Myths of Zero ToleranceMyth 2: Zero tolerance increases the consistency of school discipline and thereby the clarity of the disciplinary message to students.

Zero tolerance has not increased the consistency of school discipline. Rather, rates of suspension and expulsion vary widely across schools and school districts. Moreover, this variation appears to be due as much to characteristics of schools and school personnel as to the behavior or attitudes of students.


The Myths of Zero ToleranceMyth 3: Removal of students who violate school rules will create a school climate more conducive to learning for those students who remain.

Schools with higher rates of school suspension and expulsion appear to have less satisfactory ratings of school climate, less satisfactory school governance structures, and spend a disproportionate amount of time on disciplinary matters. Recent research indicates a negative relationship between the use of school suspension and expulsion and school-wide academic achievement…

Why Re-Think Punishment?Indiana Children Left Behind Project

Negative correlation for OSS/Exp and Academic Outcomes

Controlled for Demographics:• SES of districts• Urban vs. suburban vs. Rural

Correlational > CausalBut… weakens argument that swift and certain punishments improves school functionality


The Myths of Zero ToleranceMyth 4: The swift and certain punishments of zero tolerance have a deterrent effect upon students, thus improving overall student behavior and discipline.

School suspension in general appears to predict higher future rates of misbehavior and suspension among those students who are suspended. In the long term, school suspension and expulsion are moderately associated with a higher likelihood of school dropout and failure to graduate on time.

Why Re-Think Zero Tolerance?The Myths of Zero Tolerance

Myth 5: Zero tolerance policies are developmentally appropriate as a psychological intervention.

• Prior to age of 15: poor resistance to peer influence, attitudes toward and perception of risk, future orientation, and impulse control.

• Developmental neuroscience: brain structures of adolescents are less well-developed than previously thought; take greater risks and reason less adequately about the consequences of their behavior.

• Certain characteristics of secondary schools often are at odds with the developmental challenges of adolescence: need for close peer relationships, autonomy, support from adults other than one’s parents, identity negotiation, and academic self-efficacy.


The Myths of Zero ToleranceMyth 5 (cont): Zero tolerance policies are developmentally appropriate as a psychological intervention.

Why Re-Think Punishment? Further Research

High Suspension Schools and Dropout Rates for Black and White Students

Schools with high suspension rates had higher dropout rates• Controlling for demographics and student attitude measures• Comparable findings for both Black and White students

Lee, et al. (2011)


Suspensions Linked to Lower Graduation Rates in Fla. Study

• 9th graders never suspended - 75% graduated • Suspended once - 52%graduation rate • Suspended twice - 38 % graduated • And often students suspended also were failing courses and absent

from school for other reasons.

Balfanz, et al. (2013)


Suspensions Linked to Lower Graduation Rates in Fla. Study

“If the first suspension isn’t working, suspension isn’t a very effective strategy,”• Multiple suspensions add to the students’ disengagement and likelihood of quitting school altogether.• What’s at the heart of the behavior problems triggering the suspensions

Many students who were suspended as freshmen but not failing courses or otherwise chronically absent ended up missing school repeatedly or failing courses as they continued high school.•for 20 % of the students suspended in 9th grade, efforts to find alternatives to suspensions alone could have

a significant payoff in terms of reducing dropout and increasing postsecondary attainment rates

Balfanz, et al. (2013)

So What Should We Do Differently?

https://youtu.be/Zl8AVpjmy4I


A. Reforming Zero Tolerance Policies A.2. Policy

A. 2. 1 Reserve zero tolerance disciplinary removals for only the most serious and severe of disruptive behaviors.

A.2.2 Replace one-size-fits all disciplinary strategies with graduated systems of discipline, wherein consequences are geared to the seriousness of the infraction.

A.2.3 Require school police officers who work in schools to have training in adolescent development.


B. Alternatives to Zero Tolerance B.1 Practice

B.1.1 Implement preventive measures that can improve school climate and improve the sense of school community and belongingness.

B.1.2 Seek to reconnect alienated youth and re-establish the school bond for students at-risk of discipline problems or violence. Use threat assessment procedures to identify the level of risk posed by student words.

B.1.3 Develop a planned continuum of effective alternatives for those students whose behavior threatens the discipline or safety of the school.

B.1.4 Improve collaboration and communication between schools, parents, law enforcement, juvenile justice and mental health professionals to develop an array of alternatives for challenging youth.


B. Alternatives to Zero Tolerance B.2 Policy

B.2.1 Legislative initiatives should clarify that schools are encouraged to provide an array of disciplinary alternatives prior to school suspension and

expulsion and, to the extent possible, increase resources to schools for implementing a broader range of alternatives, especially prevention.

B.2.2 Increase training for teachers in classroom behavior management and culturally-sensitive pedagogy.

B.2.3 Increase training for teachers, administrators and other school personnel to address sensitivity related to issues of race.

B.2.4 Increase training on issues related to harassment and sexual harassment for teachers, administrators and other school personnel.


Before We Get to The Critical Decision Point:

How is our PBIS MTSS Model Serving Us?

Overview of process assessments and outcome data; Functional Behavioral Assessments and Behavior Intervention Plans; Culturally Responsive PBIS (CRPBIS)

Disproportionality Vulnerable Decision Points

What should we do before ISS, OSS, and EXP?Tier 1 and Data-Based Measurement

Process DataBenchmarks of Quality (BoQ)Self-Assessment Survey (SAS)School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)Benchmarks for Advanced Tiers (BAT)

Outcome DataSuspensionsAve. Referrals per Day per MonthLocationBehavior & MotivationTriangle ReportEthnicity ReportIlluminate On-Track Report

Survey DataCulture & Climate; Engagement

Shared Definitions and Clarity of Roles

Overview of process data…

Overview of outcome data…

Overview of survey data…

What should we do before ISS, OSS, and EXP?Tier 1 to 2 Transition and Data-Based Measurement

Process DataSelf-Assessment Survey (SAS)School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)Benchmarks for Advanced Tiers (BAT)

Outcome DataClassrooms/TeachersStudentEarly Stage Interventions

Observational DataCHAMPS / DiSCBasic 5 BenchmarksDecision-Making Flowchart

What should we do before ISS, OSS, and EXP?Tier 2 and Data-Based Measurement

What should we do before ISS, OSS, and EXP?Tier 2 to 3 Individual and Data-Based Measurement

Process DataBRT Referral FormsIntervention Fidelity Checklists

Outcome DataBehavioral DataAcademic Data

FBA Process…D.A.S.H (Lohman & Borgmeier, 2010)

•Define behavior in observable & measurable terms•Ask about behavior by interviewing staff &

student:• Specify routines where & when behaviors occur• Summarize where, when, & why behaviors occur

•See the behavior• Observe the behavior during routines specified• Observe to verify summary from interviews

•Hypothesize a final summary of where, when & why behaviors occur

http://www.wiki.inghamisd.org/

Teaching Behavior: John Hattie and The Science of How We Learn

Teaching Behavior: John Hattie and The Science of How We LearnMyth: Secure knowledge emanates automatically from personal discovery

• Cognitive Load: The additional load imposed from personal discovery detracts from our capacity to assimilate the information uncovered

• Under conditions of low guidance, the knowledge gap between low and high ability students tends to increase

• Learning is greater when provided a social model

Teaching Behavior: John Hattie and The Science of How We LearnMyth: Secure knowledge emanates automatically from personal discovery

• Learning through personal resources leaves one uncertain if the knowledge gained is adequate or complete.

• Information communicated through instruction, personal contact, direct social modeling and verbal transmission can be durable, more securely available, and more strongly validated.


Before We Get to The Critical Decision Point:

How is our PBIS MTSS Model Serving Us?

Overview of process assessments and outcome data; Functional Behavioral Assessments and Behavior Intervention

Plans; Culturally Responsive PBIS (CRPBIS)

Disproportionality Vulnerable Decision Points

Culturally Responsive PBIS

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/538/is-this-working

Act 1





Proportional: Objective Behaviors

Disproportional:Subjective JudgmentsSeverity of Behavior


Proportional: Number of Referrals in AM

Disproportional:Spike of Referrals for Students of Color in PM


The problem with “code switching”


Build It Better!

Behavior and Growth Mindset

https://youtu.be/g08JVTtSWhs

Restorative Practices

Restorative Practices

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxa-4RPDXSs

Wrapping Up the MorningWhy Re-Think Punitive Measures?

Our Efforts Before We Get There: • Review of the Research• The MTSS Model and Data• Behavior Intervention Plans and Explicitly Teaching Behavior• Disproportionality, CRPBIS, and Vulnerable Decision Points

Growth Mindset and Its Impact on Behavior

Introduction to Restorative Practices

Setting Up the Afternoon

The Waverly Middle School Model

• Combining PBIS and Restorative Practices• The Impact on Behavior and Academics

The Trauma-Informed School

Student Behavior Screeners Resume at 1:00

Waverly Middle School

Kristen HoodJeremiah BaynesNate Stevenson

Trauma-Informed Schools

Behavioral Screeners

Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS)

http://miblsi.cenmi.org/MiBLSiModel/Evaluation/Measures/StudentRiskScreeningScale.aspx

Check and Connect

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=158&v=3_-AFbDLn9c

Check and Connect

Silent Mentor

• Identify Kids• Connect with Parents• Intentional Connection with Kids• “I noticed…”• Proximity• Names• Smile and Eye Contact

PBIS: Alternatives to Zero Tolerance and Punitive Discipline April 14, 2015 Matthew Phillips, M.A.,...

Documents

Transcript of PBIS: Alternatives to Zero Tolerance and Punitive Discipline April 14, 2015 Matthew Phillips, M.A.,...