1. Addressing Bullying Behavior W/in a PBIS Framework George Sugai OSEP Center on PBIS Center for Behavioral Education & Research University of Connecticut October 6, 2011 www.pbis.org www.cber.org

2. PURPOSE To improve our understanding of & responding to bullying behavior from perspective of school-wide positive behavior support.

5. Suggestions

6. Bullying Program Component Review Purpose Maggin & Sugai, 2011

7. Search Methodology (Independent Coders)

8. Inclusion Criteria

9. Main Program Questions

10. Program Materials Primary Source Typen% Book Chapter1125.00 Dissertation24.55% Journal Article2250.00% Program Manual920.45% Total44100.00% Total programs identified = 51 Total programs reviewed = 44 –Program materials non-English = 6 –Manual for purchase only = 1

11. Preliminary Results – Key Groups Key Group Component Present Definition of Group Observable Focus Skills Observable Skills Initiator27 (61.36%) 19 (43.18%) 8 (18.18%) Accept responsibility; Recruit attention positively Target31 (70.45%) 13 (29.55%) 20 (45.45%) Ignore; Seek help; Verbally confront initiator; Walk away Bystander27 (61.36%) 12 (27.27%) 19 (43.18%) Model appropriate behavior; Report incidents; Verbally confront initiator Staff*21 (47.73%) 8 (18.18%) 21 (47.73%) Develop clear consequences; Develop protocol for intervening on incidents; Public posting of expectations * 33 (75%) of programs required curriculum implementation

12. Examples of Nonobservable Behaviors for Initiators

13. Preliminary Results – Systems Logic Systems Feature n% Notes Faculty Team Developed 1329.55% Use of Initiator Data 1022.72% School staff referral; parent referral; Needs assessment of aggression, anger management; self-assessment Use of Target Data 613.63% School staff referral; parent referral; Needs assessment Use of Bystander Data 24.54% Self-assessment; Incidence reporting Staff Training Provided 2353.49% LEA Endorsement 49.09% LEA Coordinator 613.63%

14. Preliminary Results -- RTI RTI Featuresn%Notes Identification Screening 36.82% Data Referenced 1227.27% Data Specified 920.45% School-wide survey of bullying needs; Student incident reports; Teacher incident reports; Referrals Initiator Continuum 1431.81% Group counseling sessions Target Continuum 1329.55% Group counseling sessions Bystander Continuum 818.18% Staff Continuum 24.54% No formal strategies described. Fidelity Checks 36.82%

15. Preliminary Conclusions

16. SWPBS: Basics

17. SWPBS is

19. RtI Reducing Bullying

20. All Some Few Continuum of Support for ALL Dec 7, 2007

21. ~80% of Students ~5% ESTABLISHING CONTINUUM of SWPBS SECONDARY PREVENTION Check in/out Targeted social skills instruction Peer-based supports Social skills club TERTIARY PREVENTION Function-based support Wraparound Person-centered planning PRIMARY PREVENTION Teach SW expectations Proactive SW discipline Positive reinforcement Effective instruction Parent engagement SECONDARY PREVENTION TERTIARY PREVENTION PRIMARY PREVENTION ~15%

22. All Some Few RTI Continuum of Support for ALL Dec 7, 2007

23. Continuum of Support for “Manuella” Dec 7, 2007 Harassment Computer Lab Social Studies Physical Intimidation Adult Relations. Attendance Literacy Label behavior…not people

24. SYSTEMS “BULLY BEHAVIOR” PRACTICES DATA Supporting Staff Behavior Supporting Student Behavior OUTCOMES Supporting Social Competence & Academic Achievement Supporting Decision Making Integrated Elements

25. SWPBS look at bullying behavior

27. Our Starting Point

29. Victim attention Bystander attention Self-delivered praise Tangible access

30. PREVENTION De-emphasis on adding consequence for problem behavior

31. Context or Setting Context or Setting Initiator Target Bystander Staff Continuum of Behavior Fluency

32. Is Behavior an Issue?

33. Reconceptualizing Bullying from Behavior Analytic Perspective for SWPBS

34. SWIS Definition of Bullying Behavior

35. Three basic strategies….if you do nuthin’ else….

36. Label student Exclude student Blame family Punish student Assign restitution Ask for apology Teach targeted social skills Reward social skills Teach all Individualize for non-responsive behavior Invest in positive school-wide culture Doesn’t WorkWorks

37. MUST….. Be easy & do-able by all Be contextually relevant Result in early disengagement Increase predictability Be pre-emptive Be teachable Be brief

38. www.pbis.org

39. Scott Ross, University of Oregon 39 BaselineAcquisitionFull BP-PBS Implementation Number of Incidents of Bullying Behavior School Days School 1 Rob Bruce Cindy Scott Anne Ken School 2 School 3 3.14 1.88.88 72%

40. Scott Ross, University of Oregon BP-PBS, Scott Ross40 21% increase 22% decrease

42. Allday & Pakurar (2007)

44. Name______________________________Date_____________ Setting □ Hallway □ Entrance □ Cafeteria □ Playground □ Other_______________ Time Start_________ Time End _________ Tally each Positive Student ContactsTotal # Ratio of Positives to Negatives: _____: 1 Tally each Negative Student ContactsTotal # Non-Classroom Management: Self-Assessment

45. 1.Did I have at least 4 positive for 1 negative student contacts? Yes No 2. Did I move throughout the area I was supervising? Yes No 3. Did I frequently scan the area I was supervising? Yes No 4. Did I positively interact with most of the students in the area? Yes No 5. Did I handle most minor rule violations quickly and quietly? Yes No 6. Did I follow school procedures for handling major rule violations? Yes No 7. Do I know our school-wide expectations (positively stated rules)? Yes No 8. Did I positively acknowledge at least 5 different students for displaying our school-wide expectations? Yes No Overall active supervision score: 7-8 “yes” = “Super Supervision” 5-6 “yes” = “So-So Supervision” <5 “yes” = “Improvement Needed” # Yes______

48. Big idea: Use PBIS framework to address bully behavior prevention