Blending Academics and Behavior Dawn Miller Shawnee Mission School District Steve Goodman Michigan’s Integrated Behavior and Learning Initiative (MiBLSi) miblsi.cenmi.org

Presentation Description This session describes the logic for integration of behavior and academics in a Response to Intervention model. Key features of an integrated schoolwide model will be discussed. Examples of implementation, systems of supports and outcomes will be provided from Kansas and Michigan.

Why look an integrated Behavior and Academic support model Both are critical for school success Share critical feature of data-based decision making Both utilize three tiered prevention model Both incorporate a team approach at school level, grade level, and individual level Models of integrated behavior and reading supports produce larger gains in literacy skills than the reading-only model –(Stewart, Benner, Martella, & Marchand- Martella, 2007)

Integrated Functions Across All Tiers of Support Team approach Progress monitoring Data-based decisions Evidence-based practices Behavior Support Reading Support Universal Screening

Implementation of schoolwide positive behavior support leads to increased academic engaged time and enhanced academic outcomes (Algozzine & Algozzine, 2007; Horner et al., 2009; Lassen, Steele, & Sailor, 2006)

High quality academic instruction (e.g., content matched to student success level, frequent opportunity to respond, frequent feedback) by itself can reduce problem behavior (Filter & Horner, 2009; Preciado, Horner, Scott, & Baker, 2009, Sanford, 2006)

Children who fall behind academically will be more likely to find academic work aversive and also find escape-maintained problem behaviors reinforcing (McIntosh, 2008; McIntosh, Sadler, & Brown, 2010)

Relationship between behavior and reading Children of the Code: A Social Education Project

Summary Academic and Behavior supports are symbiotic. Academic and Behavior supports can be implemented together The common functions provide the framework for implementing Academic and Behavior supports at all three tiers.

Michigan’s model for behavior and reading RtI Steve Goodman National PBIS Leadership Forum October, 2010

Mission Statement To develop support systems and sustained implementation of a data-driven, problem solving model in schools to help students become better readers with social skills necessary for success.

MiBLSi Project Scope 3 Project Directors 6 Project Coordinators 10 Regional Coordinators 13 Additional Project Staff 82 State Trainers 667 coaches –283 External Coaches –384 Internal Coaches Supporting 633 schools Within 250 LEAs and 43 ISDs

Examples of Academic and Behavior Practices Continuum of Supports Universal Prevention Behavior Identify expectations Teach Monitor Acknowledge Correct Reading Evidence based curriculum focused on: Phonemic Awareness Alphabetic Principal Fluency Vocabulary Comprehension Adequate teaching time Trained instructors Progress monitoring Active participation with frequent feedback Targeted Intervention Behavior Check-in, Checkout Social skills training Mentoring Organizational skills Self-monitoring Reading Teacher-Directed PALS K PALS First Grade PALS Road to the Code REWARDS Peer Assisted Learning Strategies Read Naturally Intensive Intervention Behavior Individualized, functional assessment based behavior support plan Reading Scott Foresman Early Reading Intervention Reading Mastery Corrective Reading

Phases of Implementation over 3 year period Phase I: Building schoolwide foundations –Strengthening the core programs provided to all students with a goal of prevention of behavior or reading problems. (8 training sessions) Phase II: Developing a multi-tiered system of support for students in both reading and behavior. –As the significance of student need increases, the intensity of support also increases. (7 training sessions) Phase III: Developing a responsive system of ongoing evaluation and support –Use data to continuously advancing student outcomes by improving support structures and activities (3 data review/planning sessions)

Practices of Behavior and Reading Supports Reading Supports Behavior Supports Integrated Behavior and Reading Supports Independent Behavior and Academic Supports

Distribution of Elementary Reading Intervention Level a Michigan Example (based on DIBELS assessment) 33% 43% 56% 24% 20% (n = 201) 24% (n = 4074)

Proficiency on 4 th Grade and Percent of Major Discipline Referrals from Classroom: 132 Elementary Schools

Reducing Problem Behavior Resulting in More academic Time: Portage North Middle School “I see a definite difference! … I am able to spend more time visiting classrooms.” Celeste Shelton-Harris, Principal “We have more time to discuss academic concerns and we are getting a lot more accomplished.” Johanna Toth, 6th grade teacher

Average MEAP Reading Scores and fidelity in PBIS implementation based on Benchmarks of Quality (Sample data from MiBLSi) State Average

Looking at Julia’s data Problem solving from an individual student level to systems level

End of Year goal is to demonstrate this skill at 35 phonemes per minute (grey area) As an educator, do you have a concern about this child’s progress on the end of year goal/skill? (remember she is only in Kindergarten) What does this information tell you about Julia’s needs?

End of Year goal is to demonstrate this skill at 35 phonemes per minute (grey area) And now… the rest of the class. Now that you see Julia in the context of the whole class, how does this information change supports for Julia? Her classmates? What does this information tell you about Julia’s needs and the needs of her classmates?

Same building, same grade, different teacher Does this information change how you might support Julia? Her classmates?

Julia’s class Same building, same grade, different teacher Does this information change how you might support Julia? Her classmates? What does this information tell you about Julia’s needs and the needs of her classmates? Major discipline referrals per student per class

MiBLSi Project Data

Elementary Schools with complete data sets: Average Major Discipline Referrals per 100 Students per Day

Percent of Students meeting DIBELS Spring Benchmark for Cohorts (combined grades)

Percent of Students at DIBELS Intensive Level across year by Cohort