1. The Process of Change: Resolving Barriers to Universal Intervention Implementation Sharon Lohrmann Stacy Martin Sonia Patil

2. Visit www.njpbs.org for handouts. Click on Upcoming Events and Scroll to the APBS listingwww.njpbs.org

3. Buy-In: (n.) Commitment to achieving a shared goal Successful change begins with acquiring employees buy-in to the change process …( MSN Encarta) But, what does buy-in really mean?

4. Buy-in and commitment to change is a dynamic process Conclusions drawn from sustainability research: Knowing that a practice results in good outcomes is insufficient for implementation (Gersten, Chard, & Baker 2000). Teachers beliefs, feelings of self-efficacy, attitudes, and perceptions affect the extent to which teachers try new strategies and persist using them when confronted with challenges (Klinger, Ahwee, Pilonieta, Merendez, 2003). Sustained use of innovative, research based practices seem directly related to practices that teachers view as being helpful in working with difficult-to- teach students (Gersten et al., 2000). Teachers can benefit from on-going sources of support that helps them to think deeply about their practice (Vaughn, Klinger, & Hughes 2000).

5. Motivation for this Line of Research Schools in NJ are targeted based on need for corrective actionSchools in NJ are targeted based on need for corrective action Schools struggle with the weight of pressures to fix the problemSchools struggle with the weight of pressures to fix the problem We want to understand what we can do to prevent as much of the resistance upfront as opposed to trying to reframing it in the middleWe want to understand what we can do to prevent as much of the resistance upfront as opposed to trying to reframing it in the middle

6. Part of a Line of Research on Attitude and Belief Barriers to PBS Universal InterventionUniversal Intervention –Lohrmann, Martin, & Patil (2007* unpublished pilot) –Lohrmann, Forman, Martin, & Palmieri (2008) Individual Student PlanningIndividual Student Planning –Lohrmann & Bambara (2006) –Bambara, Lohrmann, Nonnemacher, Goh, & Kern (in progress)

7. Purpose of the Study To understand, from the perspectives of external and internal coaches: The types of barriers that interfere with the adoption of universal interventions The factors that contribute to barrier conditions The extent to which barriers are resolved The factors/process that leads to resolution

8. Procedures: Sampling Process 1. Invitation and interview with state coordinator/director for PBS initiative Background and Context information 2. Distribution of invitation through the state network for external coaches 3. External coach screened and identified a focus school 4. External coach interviewed 5. External coach nominates the internal coach/key school contact 6. Internal coach interviewed

9. Recruitment Challenges 1.We interviewed 11 state coordinators but recruitment efforts only produced pairs from 5 of those states 2.Difficulty recruiting participants 1.Limitations imposed by our Institutional Review Board 2.Not a lot of response from recruitment efforts – especially school personnel 3.Harder to find implementation at the middle level

10. Brief Overview of States StateImplementation ModelTraining Model State A 400 schools Department of Education funding Began in 1995/evolved to school-wide District initiative - @ least 3 schools District coordinator and building level coaches Administrator orientation State project liaison provides training and monthly on site support to the coaches District coordinator provides day to day support 3 Day Summer Training Begin with UI Move to upper tiers based on 80% criteria and need State B 280 schools Department of Education funding Began 9 years ago Administrator orientation Individual schools can apply with the intent to go district-wide District and building coaches Regional consultant provides monthly on site support to the leadership team Administrators attend a 1 day training UI team attends a 3 day summer institute Coach attends off site meetings 4x a year

11. Brief Overview of States StateImplementation ModelTraining Model State C Department of Education & Safe /Drug Free Schools funding Began 6 years ago Individual schools can apply Two part start: administrative level buy in and staff buy in State project staff provide training Contracted facilitators provides monthly on site support to the school team Training on 3 tiers across three years UI team receives 6 days of training distributed over 2 years State D 300 schools Department of Education –Special Education funding Began about 8 years ago Regional consortiums to build coaching capacity Application process with administrator commitments State project staff and regional consultants provide training Regional consultants provide on site support to the school tem District coach provides ongoing support 2 day training the first year; 1 day training the second Annual coaching conferences

12. Brief Overview of States StateImplementation ModelTraining Model State E 600 schools Department of Education funding 8 years District – wide initiative Individual schools can apply Regional consultants provide coordination and support to district coaches – sometimes also provide the training District coaches provide training and on site support to schools 2 Day Summer Training Begin with UI and move to upper tiers based on need

13. Procedures – Inclusion Criteria SchoolsSchools –Middle Level 5 th -8 th grade –Minimum SET/Benchmarks score of 70% –Implementing for 1-3 years post the first instructional event kick off –Considered by external coach to have been a school that struggled initially but ultimately achieved success

14. School Summary 1 - 5-6 school1 - 5-6 school 7 - 6-8 schools7 - 6-8 schools 1 - 7-8 school1 - 7-8 school Average SET Score: 89% (r=80%-99%)Average SET Score: 89% (r=80%-99%) Mostly rural schoolsMostly rural schools

15. Schools SchoolGrades (Students) SET Score Characterized as: 15-6 (350) 80% A rural community Mostly Caucasian 2 6-8 (1500) 89% A rural community A rapidly growing school with changing demographics 3 6-8 in a 6- 12 blg (600) 87% As a small town A school within a school Having substantive poverty issues

16. Schools SchoolGrades (Students) SET Score Characterized as: 4 6-8 (1078) 99% A rural community Having a high number of F & R lunch rates A very diverse school 5 6-8 (500) 80% A semi rural community Having 70% F & R lunch rates Mostly Caucasian 6 6-8 (800) 90% A semi rural community changing to a more suburban community Having 30% F & R lunch rates

17. Schools SchoolGrades (Students) SET Score Characterized as: 7 6-8 (410) 90% A Moderate sized town Having 70% F & R lunch rates Having a substantive homelessness problem among student 8 7-8 (600) 90% A rural community Having conflicting socioeconomic levels 9 6-8 (450) 95% A rural community Having 70% F & R lunch rates A split between African American and Caucasian

18. Procedures – Inclusion Criteria External CoachesExternal Coaches –At least 2 years experience providing direct on-site assistance to schools to implement the universal level of the SWPBS prevention model; –Has on-site contact with schools and the schools universal intervention team – at least 4 visits in a year; and –Worked with at least 3 schools implementing the SWPBS model

19. 18 Participants (9 pairs) Across 5 States 9 External Coaches Mean 16.5 years (r=8-29) experience in education Mean 5 years (r=2-8) experience with the focus team/school Average 28 (r=4-60) schools supported to implement UI 2 external coaches worked for the district 7 external coaches worked for a state initiative either directly or through a university contract 8 with masters; 1 with a PhD 8 learned SWPBS through inservice with the state team; 1 learned through inservice from the OSEP center; 1 had coursework

20. Procedures – Inclusion Criteria Internal Coaches – –Designated as a coach or chair of a middle school level universal intervention team; – –A member of the team since the first training the school received on universal interventions; and – –Employed full time by the school in which they serve as the team chair.

21. es 18 Participants (9 pairs) Across 5 States 9 Internal Coaches* Mean 15.5 years (r= 8-26) experience in education Mean 4.5 years (r= 3-6) experience with the team/school 8 were building based 1 had cross building responsibilities 1 Bachelors; 4 with Masters; 1 Ed.S All learned SWPBS through inservice with the state team; in addition, some had exposure through conferences or training through the OSEP center **3 internal coaches did not return the demographic form (yet)

22. Interview Procedures Interviews Semi-structured, open-ended Generally 90 minutes Audio taped and transcribed Interview guide with three core sections Context: description of school, start up activities, team, strengths/needs of the school prior to implementation, implementation description Types of implementation support provided/received Barriers – –Description of the barrier – –Impact on implementation – –Contributing factors – –Resolution – –Explanation of resolution – –Strategies

23. Data Analysis Consensual Qualitative Research (CQR) (Hill, Thompson, & Williams, 1997) Research Team Rotating Roles (interviewers, primary coders, auditors) Multiple Stages of Data Analysis (audited, consensual agreement) Stage 1: Domain Code Development Stage 2: Domaining (Coding) Stage 3: Abstracting Stage 4: Cross Analysis and Recoding Stage 5: Final Thematic Analysis

24. Findings

25. Types of Barriers Problematic Across all participants, the number one problem encountered was the lack of consistency in implementation

26. Types of Barriers Problematic Each school had its own story for how it arrived at inconsistent implementation and how implementation issues were resolved.Each school had its own story for how it arrived at inconsistent implementation and how implementation issues were resolved. What was common across schools was that the problem and the resolution were some combination of:What was common across schools was that the problem and the resolution were some combination of: –Degree of administrative support –Degree of staff cognitive readiness for PBS –The general stability of and satisfaction with the school context

27. Types of Barriers Problematic Attitude and Belief Issues Knee jerk reaction to teaching and reinforcing social behaviors:Knee jerk reaction to teaching and reinforcing social behaviors: – –kids should know what to do – –this wont work – –focus on punitive consequences Perception of usefulness for the school:Perception of usefulness for the school: – –we dont need this – –its a special education thing – –what we are doing is fine – –just another initiative that will go away – –its the stupidest thing Ive ever heard of

28. Types of Barriers Problematic Attitude and Belief Issues Teaching and Reinforcing Social Behaviors External Coaches InternalCoaches Teaching Social Behaviors 82 Reinforcing Social Behaviors 38 Focus on Punitive Consequences 21 The student is the problem 20

29. Types of Barriers Problematic Attitude and Belief Issues Perceived Usefulness External Coaches InternalCoaches It wont work 31 What we are doing is fine 13 Just another initiative 12 Its a special education thing 11

30. Types of Barriers Problematic Administrative Support Issues Described as: inconsistent, unhelpful, obstructive, conflictual, or passivityDescribed as: inconsistent, unhelpful, obstructive, conflictual, or passivity Examples of the implication of administrative support were:Examples of the implication of administrative support were: –The team not having the resource they need –The team not getting the green light to implement –Staff receiving mixed messages –Planning efforts stalling –Negative or opting out staff were reinforced

31. Contributing Factors

32. Contributing Factors (Setting Events?) Contributing factors were historic or current contextual events that set a tone or atmosphere that was inhospitable for cultivating staff buy in to PBS.Contributing factors were historic or current contextual events that set a tone or atmosphere that was inhospitable for cultivating staff buy in to PBS. Interview Question: In the larger context of the school/district/community, what factors, if any, do you think contributed to difficulties you experienced with staff buy in to PBS?Interview Question: In the larger context of the school/district/community, what factors, if any, do you think contributed to difficulties you experienced with staff buy in to PBS?

33. Factors Described as Contributing to Attitude and Belief Issues Contributing Factors External Coaches Internal Coaches Administrative support issues 64 Staff morale 45 Lack of understanding of PBS 25 Too many initiatives come and go 32 Achievement issues 22 District issues 31 Community issues 30 Influence of Negative Staff 12

34. Administrative Support Issues The Chicken, The Egg or Both? In 6 schools – the administrator was a key barrier and contributing factorIn 6 schools – the administrator was a key barrier and contributing factor Inconsistent administrative support was a barrier for the team AND set the stage for staff to resist implementation:Inconsistent administrative support was a barrier for the team AND set the stage for staff to resist implementation: –If my principal isnt pushing this, why should I do/believe in it? No clear messageNo clear message No accountabilityNo accountability No visible administrator effortNo visible administrator effort

35. Resolving Barriers

36. Slow Process of Change – –Participants reported multi year efforts (3 or more) to transform attitude conditions Catalyst Events – –In the case of administrative support, typically this issue was only resolved once there was a change in administrators – –Changes in administrator often resulted in a within a year turn around in staff attitudes

37. How Barriers Were Resolved Strategies Used Contextual Changes

38. How Barriers Were Resolved Contextual Changes Staff turnover Changes in administrative support/participation Change in Administrator Disconnecting PBS from special education

39. How Barriers Were Resolved Strategies Used Involve staff in decision making – –Surveys, discussions, proposal comments Keep staff informed about PBS/ Keep PBS on the radar screen – –Updates at staff meetings, emails, memos Pay attention to staff morale – –Celebration events – –Rewards for staff – –Unity building activities

40. How Barriers Were Resolved Strategies Used Train and coach the team – –Retraining, action plan development, have team attend conferences Have the administrator take a stand – –PBS is a must do PBS is right for our building – –Holding staff accounting – –Encouraging more administrative participation in planning meetings

41. How Barriers Were Resolved Strategies Used Share data and showcase successes – –Graphs, testimonials, examples Provide training to educate on PBS and clarify misconceptions – –New staff orientation, small and large group in- services, individual coaching, model implementation Hold discussions to share ideas, problem solve, talk through issues – –Informal small group forums

42. How Barriers Were Resolved Strategies Used Demonstrate how PBS can help with high need students Use phrasing and terminology that staff can relate to and feel comfortable with – –It will make your job easier – –Youve already been doing this – –It wont require a lot of work/effort – –It will help the kids

43. How Barriers Were Resolved Strategies Used Meeting with the administrator – –External coach met with administrator – –Internal coach or other key team member met with administrator Involve the principal in special ways – –E.g., special principal ticket

44. How Barriers Were Resolved Resiliency Factors? District level supportDistrict level support Credible team who didnt give up – dedicated people who kept PBS alive long enough for other changes to happenCredible team who didnt give up – dedicated people who kept PBS alive long enough for other changes to happen Desire among staff to do the right thing for childrenDesire among staff to do the right thing for children

45. Take Away Messages 1. 1.In general external and internal coaches were on the same page about big picture issues (e.g., staff buy in) but were not always consistent in their explanation of the specific nature of the issues (e.g., reason for lack of buy in) 2. 2.Pay attention to and do something about the larger context or atmosphere issues of the school (e.g., staff morale)

46. Take Away Messages 3. 3.Participants discussed many strategies for changing staff attitudes but felt limited when the problem was the administrator 4. 4.Transforming barriers is often a slow process that requires multi-year efforts and combinations of persistently applied strategies 5. 5.Work to secure district level support and make that support visible

47. Take Away Messages 6. 6. Much of what was done focused on improving the impact of PBS at school (making implementation better) so that staff would have the experience of seeing students improve – –According to participants once staff began to REALIZE that PBS was having a positive effect with the students, increased cooperation and participation were observed

48. Visit www.njpbs.org for handouts. Click on Upcoming Events and Scroll to the APBS listingwww.njpbs.org