Kathleen Lynne Lane, Ph.D., BCBA-D, University of Kansas

1. Universal Screening: A Look at Behavior Screening Tools in Tiered Systems of SupportChicago, October 29, 2014 Kathleen Lynne Lane, Ph.D., BCBA-D, University of Kansas Lisa Powers, Ph.D., St. Louis Special School District Wendy Peia Oakes, Ph.D. Arizona State University

2. Agenda • Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-tiered (CI3T) Models of Prevention • The Importance of Systematic Screening • Using Screening Data ... • implications for primary prevention efforts • implications for teachers • implications for student-based interventions at Tier 2 and Tier 3 • Directions and Experiences from the Field

3. Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tier Model of Prevention (Lane, Kalberg, & Menzies, 2009) Goal: Reduce Harm Specialized Individual Systems for Students with High-Risk ≈ Tertiary Prevention (Tier 3) ≈ Goal: Reverse Harm Specialized Group Systems for Students At-Risk Secondary Prevention (Tier 2) PBIS Framework Goal: Prevent Harm School/Classroom-Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings Validated Curricula ≈ Primary Prevention (Tier 1) Lane & Oakes Social Academic Behavioral

4. Lane & Oakes 2012

5. Essential Components of Primary Prevention Efforts

7. See Lane, Menzies, Oakes, and Kalberg (2012) What screening tools are available? Lane & Oakes

8. SSBD Screening Process Pool of Regular Classroom Students TEACHER SCREENING on Internalizing and Externalizing Behavioral Dimensions 3 Highest Ranked Pupils on Externalizing and on Internalizing Behavior Criteria PASS GATE 1 TEACHER RATING on Critical Events Index and Combined Frequency Index Exceed Normative Criteria on CEI of CFI PASS GATE 2 DIRECT OBSERVATION of Process Selected Pupils in Classroom and on Playground Exceed Normative Criteria on AET and PSB (Lane & Oakes, 2012) PASS GATE 3 Child may be referred to Child Study Team Pre-referral Intervention(s)

9. SSBD Results – Winter 2007 through Winter 2009 Risk Status of Nominated Students Externalizing % computed based on total # students screened 2.73% 6.18% 3.50% 8.90% 6.50% 3.18% 1.44% Source. Lane, Menzies, Oakes, & Kalberg, 20120. Figure 2.2 WES Elementary Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD; Walker & Severson, 1992) results comparing the percentage of students nominated and exceeding normative criteria for both externalizing and internalizing behavior disorders over a three year period.

10. Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS; Drummond, 1994)

11. Student Risk Screening Scale(Drummond, 1994) The SRSS is 7-item mass screener used to identify students who are at risk for antisocial behavior. Uses 4-point Likert-type scale never = 0, occasionally = 1, sometimes = 2, frequently = 3 Teachers evaluate each student on the following items - Steal - Low Academic Achievement - Lie, Cheat, Sneak - Negative Attitude - Behavior Problem - Aggressive Behavior - Peer Rejection Student Risk is divided into 3 categories Low 0 – 3 Moderate 4 – 8 High 9 – 21 (SRSS; Drummond, 1994)

12. Student Risk Screening Scale(Drummond, 1994) Lane & Oakes

13. Student Risk Screening ScaleMiddle School Fall 2004 - Fall 2011 n = 12 n = 20 n = 507 Percentage of Students N=534 N=502 N=454 N=470 N=477 N=476 N=524 N= 539 Lane & Oakes Fall Screeners

14. sample data: SRSS Middle School Study 1: Behavioral & Academic Characteristics of SRSS Risk Groups Lane & Oakes (Lane, Parks, Kalberg, & Carter, 2007)

15. Convergent Validity: SRSS-E7, SRSS-I5, & SRSS-IE12 with the SSBD Note. SSBD refers to the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (Walker & Severson, 1992). SRSS-IE5 refers to the version with 5 times retained. SRSS-IE12 refers to the original 7 items from the SRSS developed by Drummond (1994) combined with the new five items constituting the SRSS-IE5. The SRSS-E7 refers to the original 7 items constituting the SRSS. Lane, K. L., Oakes, W. P., Harris, P. J., Menzies, H. M., Cox, M. L., & Lambert, W. (2012) Initial evidence for the reliability and validity of the Student Risk Screening Scale for internalizing and externalizing behaviors at the elementary level. Behavioral Disorders, 37, 99-122.

16. Student Risk Screening Scale-IE Original SRSS-IE 14 12 items retained for use at the elementary level 14 items under development in middle and high schools (Lane, Oakes, Harris, Menzies, Cox, & Lambert, 2012)

17. How do we score and interpret the SRSS-IE at the Elementary Level? All scores will be automatically calculated. SRSS scores are the sum of items 1 – 7 (range 0 – 21) Internalizing scores are the sum of items 8-12 (range 0-15)

18. … implications for primary prevention efforts … implications for teachers … implications for student-based interventions Examining your screening data … See Lane, Menzies, Bruhn, and Crnobori (2011)

19. Social Skills Improvement System – Performance Screening GuideSpring 2012 – Total School N = 22 N = 31 N = 54 N = 35 N = 233 N = 187 N = 223 N = 180 N = 235 N = 212 N = 275 N = 271 n = 489 n = 490 n = 490 n = 489

20. Student Risk Screening ScaleMiddle School Fall 2004 - Fall 2011 n = 12 n = 20 n = 507 Percentage of Students N=534 N=502 N=454 N=470 N=477 N=476 N=524 N= 539 Lane & Oakes Fall Screeners

21. … implications for primary prevention efforts … implications for teachers … implications for student-based interventions Examining your screening data … See Lane, Menzies, Bruhn, and Crnobori (2011)

22. Examining Academic and Behavioral Data Elementary Level

23. Examining Academic and Behavioral Data Middle and High School Levels

24. Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support Comprehensive, Integrative, Three-tiered (CI3T) Models of Support Low Intensity Strategies Basic Classroom Management Effective Instruction Low Intensity Strategies Behavior Contracts Self-Monitoring - - Functional Assessment-Based Interventions Higher Intensity Strategies Assess, Design, Implement, and Evaluate Assessment

25. Low-Intensity Strategies for Academics and Behavior

26. Self-Assessment How am I doing with … basic classroom management strategies? Instructional considerations? Low-intensity strategies?

27. Choice Active Supervision Behavior Specific Praise Increased OTRs Consider a book study … Build school site capacity

28. … implications for primary prevention efforts … implications for teachers … implications for student-based interventions Examining your screening data … See Lane, Menzies, Bruhn, and Crnobori (2011)

29. Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tier Model of Prevention (Lane, Kalberg, & Menzies, 2009) ≈ Goal: Reduce Harm Specialized Individual Systems for Students with High-Risk Tertiary Prevention (Tier 3) ≈ Goal: Reverse Harm Specialized Group Systems for Students At-Risk Secondary Prevention (Tier 2) PBIS Framework Goal: Prevent Harm School/Classroom-Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings Validated Curricula ≈ Primary Prevention (Tier 1) Social Academic Behavioral

30. Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support Comprehensive, Integrative, Three-tiered (CI3T) Models of Support Low Intensity Strategies Basic Classroom Management Effective Instruction Low Intensity Strategies Behavior Contracts Self-Monitoring - - Functional Assessment-Based Interventions Higher Intensity Strategies Assess, Design, Implement, and Evaluate Assessment

31. BASC2 – Behavior and Emotional Screening ScaleSpring 2012 N = 24 N = 67 N = 533 N = 624 n = 219 n = 202 n = 203

32. Intervention Grids A Step-by-Step Process Step 1: Construct your assessment schedule Step 2: Identify your secondary supports • Existing and new interventions Step 3: Determine entry criteria • Nomination, academic failure, behavior screening scores, attendance data etc. Step 4: Identify outcome measures • Pre- and posttests, CBM, office discipline data, GPA etc. Step 5: Identify exit criteria • Reduction of discipline contacts, academic success, reduction of truancies and absences etc. Step 6: Consider additional needs

33. Procedures for Monitoring: Assessment Schedule

34. Looking at Data …Expanding Your Tool Kit • What data do you already collect? • What are the cut scores for each screening tool? • Remember … It is a just a screener.

35. Examining Academic and Behavioral Data Elementary Level

36. Sample Secondary Intervention Grid Sample Secondary Intervention Grid Lane, Kalberg, & Menzies (2009). pp. 131 - 137, Boxes 6.1 - 6.4

37. Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tier Model of Prevention (Lane, Kalberg, & Menzies, 2009) ≈ Goal: Reduce Harm Specialized Individual Systems for Students with High-Risk Tertiary Prevention (Tier 3) ≈ Goal: Reverse Harm Specialized Group Systems for Students At-Risk Secondary Prevention (Tier 2) PBIS Framework Goal: Prevent Harm School/Classroom-Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings Validated Curricula ≈ Primary Prevention (Tier 1) Social Academic Behavioral

38. Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support Comprehensive, Integrative, Three-tiered (CI3T) Models of Support Low Intensity Strategies Basic Classroom Management Effective Instruction Low Intensity Strategies Behavior Contracts Self-Monitoring - - Functional Assessment-Based Interventions Higher Intensity Strategies Assess, Design, Implement, and Evaluate Assessment

39. Changes in Harry’s Behavior Cox, M., Griffin, M. M., Hall, R., Oakes, W. P., & Lane, K. L. (2012). Using a functional assessment-based intervention to increase academic engaged time in an inclusive middle school setting. Beyond Behavior, 2, 44 – 54.

40. A Look to the Field…

41. A Statewide Partnership The University of Kansas Professional Development Learning Center

42. Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tiered Model of Prevention (Lane, Kalberg, & Menzies, 2009) ≈ Goal: Reduce Harm Specialized Individual Systems for Students with High-Risk Tertiary Prevention (Tier 3) ≈ Goal: Reverse Harm Specialized Group Systems for Students At-Risk Secondary Prevention (Tier 2) PBIS Framework Positive Action Goal: Prevent Harm School/Classroom-Wide Systems for All Students, Staff, & Settings Validated Curricula ≈ Primary Prevention (Tier 1) Social Academic Behavioral

43. St. Louis CI3T Training CI3T Training Series 4/7/15 5/6/15 12/12/14 1/14/15 11/13/14 2/25/15 Your school has selected a TEAM to attend the training this year. Only they are asked to attend.

44. HW

45. We invite your participation…. To contribute important information to your school’s TEAM as they attend training and develop your school’s CI3T Plan ___________________________________ Specifically, TODAY • SESSS: Schoolwide Expectations Survey for Specific Settings.Share your opinions about student behaviorsimportant for success at your school (15 min) • Demo: Tell us about yourself – Complete the brief confidential demographic information form (5 min)

46. And…. • Provide your opinion on the developing plan in the SPRING • Primary Intervention Rating Scale (10 min) Complete a confidential survey giving your opinions on the first complete draft of the plan • Comprehensive Three-Tiered Prevention Plan Feedback form(10 min) Complete a short feedback form on the revised and completed CI3T Plan **You will receive e-mail links to these surveys**

47. CI3T: Ticket Examples

48. MTSS: CI3T Training Series Implementation Stages of Tier 2 and 3 within CI3T CI3T Team Training Sequence Additional Professional Development on Specific Topics Core Content Curriculum Check In - Check Out Functional Assessment-based Interventions Reading, Math, Writing Benchmarking and Progress Monitoring Tools Additional Tier 3 Supports Student Driven Interventions, Strategies, & Practices Teacher Drive Supports: Instructional Techniques to Improve Students’ Motivation; General Classroom Management Practices; Low Intensity Behavior Supports

49. Professional Development: A Collaborative Effort to Empower Public School Systems Project Empower www.ksdetasn.org (Go to Calendar and Search Project Empower) October 7 November 21 January 30 March 5 September 12 Five 2-hour sessions held after school: 5-7pm

50. Recommendationsto Consider • Recommendation #1: Build Stakeholders’ Expertise • Recommendation #2: Develop the Structures to Sustain and Improve Practices • Recommendation #3: Conduct Screenings in a Responsible Fashion • Recommendation #4: Consider Legal Implications- know your state laws (Lane & Oakes, 2012)