behavior supports academics: three-tiered model in relation to discipline and achievement joan...

Behavior Supports Academics:Three-Tiered Model

in Relation toDiscipline and Achievement

Joan Ledvina Parr Baltimore County Public Schools

Margaret Grady Kidder Baltimore County Public Schools

Susan Barrett Sheppard Pratt Health Systems

Fourth International Conference on Positive Behavior SupportBoston, Massachusetts

March 8, 2007

Baltimore County Public Schools• Dr. Joe A. Hairston, Superintendent• 24th largest school system in the nation• 106,182 students• 169 schools, centers, and programs

– 103 Elementary• FARMS 37.43%, Mobility 22.6%, ELL 4.76%,

– 27 Middle• FARMS 36.06%, Mobility, 30.8% ELL 1.38%

– 24 High• FARMS 24.76%, Mobility, 31% ELL 0.88%

– 4 Special Education Schools, 9 Centers, 2 Programs

• Over 15,000 employees including 8,351 teachers

PBIS in Baltimore County

Department of Student Support Services

Mr. Dale R. Rauenzahn, Executive Director, Student Support Services

Ms. Patsy Holmes, Director, Student Support Services• Dr. Margaret Grady Kidder, Coordinator

PsychologicalServices, PBIS Contact/Coordinator

• Dr. Joan Ledvina Parr, School Psychologist, PBIS/SWIS

Facilitator• BCPS PBIS Leadership Workgroup, 7 PBIS Coaches• 63 PBIS Schools (38 ES, 17 MS, 8 HS) • 54 PBIS Coaches

Maryland PBIS Partnership and Collaboration

Maryland S tateDepartment of

E duc ation

S heppard P rattH ealthS ystem

J ohnsH opkins

U nivers ity

L oc alS c hool

S ystems

P o s itive B e h a v io r a lIn te r ve n tio n s a n d S u p p o r ts

Behavior Supports Academics: Three-Tiered Model for Prevention and Intervention

Academic Systems Behavioral Systems

1-5% 1-5%

5-10% 5-10%

80-90% 80-90%

Tier 3:Intensive Interventions•Small groups/individual students•Reduce complexity and severity of academic problems

Tier 3:Intensive Interventions•Small groups/individual students•Reduce complexity and severity of behavior problems

Tier 2: Targeted Interventions•Groups of students/at risk•Reduce academic problems

Tier 2:Targeted Interventions•Groups of students/at risk•Reduce behavior problems

Tier 1:Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Prevent academic problems

Tier 1:Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Prevent behavior problems

Academic and Behavioral Interventions

• Consistent implementation of Core Curriculum/Voluntary State Curriculum

• On-going curriculum-based assessments

• Differentiated instruction

• Intensive special education interventions and services

• School-wide behavior planning/discipline

• Effective classroom organization and behavior management

• Targeted interventions for groups of students

• Individualized interventions for specific students, e.g., FBA/BIPs

~80% of Students

~5-15%

~ 1-5%

Tier 3: Intensive InterventionsReduce complications, intensity, and severity of current cases of

problem behavior

Tier 2: Targeted Interventions

Reduce current cases of problem behaviorTier 1: Universal

Interventions:Reduce new cases of

problem behavior

Department of Student Support Services Programs/Activities

Universal Interventions

• School Improvement Planning

• School Emergency Safety Plans

• School-Wide Behavior Planning/Code of Conduct

• Character Education Programs

• Parent/Family Resources

• Health Screenings/Protocols

• School Nurse/Assistant Services

• Essential Guidance Curriculum

• School Counseling Services

• School Psychology Services

• School Social Work Services

• Pupil Personnel Services

• Residency/Attendance Officer Services

Targeted Interventions

• Project Attend• Pupil Personnel

Home Visits• Parent/Guardian Trainings• School Resource Officer

Program• D.A.R.E./ S.A.D.D.

Programs• Student Assistance Programs• Wellness Centers/Mental

Health Expansion

• Health Action Plans/Appraisals

• Alternative Schools/Programs

• Peer Helper/Mediation• Bullying Prevention• Social Skills, Anger

Management, Conflict Resolution Trainings

• Interagency Partnerships• Community Partnerships

Targeted Interventions

• Student Support Teams• Instructional Support Teams• Bilingual Resource Teams • Infant & Toddlers/Child Find Teams• Student Case Management• Curriculum-Based Assessments• Behavioral Assessments• Student Support Plans• Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBA)• Behavior Intervention Plans (BIP)• Individual Student 504 Plans

Intensive Interventions

• Parent/Guardian Services• Homeless Program• Abuse Neglect Reporting

Program (CPS Liaisons)• Spot Light On Schools/

Probation Officers• Court/Institutional Liaisons• Traumatic Loss Teams• Functional Behavioral

Assessments (FBA)• Behavior Intervention

Plans (BIP)

• Psychological Assessments• Psychosocial Assessments• Social Histories • Individualized Education

Programs (IEP)• Threat Assessments• Social Skills, Anger

Management, Conflict Resolution Interventions

• Individual/Group Therapeutic Counseling

• Crisis Response

Intensive Interventions

• Bridge School/Regional Team• Evening High Schools• Saturday High Schools• Afternoon Middle School Group Learning Centers• Alternative Middle and High Schools• Home Teaching• Home Hospital Instruction/Therapeutic Services• Maryland’s Tomorrow Program• Interagency Partnerships• Community Partnerships

Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports in Baltimore County

Universal Interventions• All schools are encouraged to use the BCPS Positive

Behavior Planning Guide to develop a Code of Conduct

• BCPS Schools– 169 Schools, Centers, and Programs– 103 Elementary Schools– 27 Middle Schools– 24 High Schools– 4 Special Education Schools– 9 Centers– 2 Programs


Targeted Interventions• Selected schools are invited to participate in PBIS

Training• Schools selected by suspension rates/behavior issues• Schools self-select based on their School

Improvement Plan• 63 PBIS Schools (37% of 169 BCPS Settings)

– 38 Elementary Schools– 17 Middle Schools – 7 High Schools– 1 Evening High School


Intensive Interventions• Selected schools face greater challenges

– implementation of PBIS features• changes in school staff • changes in administration• changes in community and student population

– focus on data-based problem solving not blame• Schools benefit from centralized support

– on-site visits from PBIS coaches/resource staff– faculty/staff trainings on specific topics like social skills trainings or hallway behavior– redevelopment of PBIS action plans based on review of school data

History of PBIS in Maryland and Schools Trained in PBIS

• 1998 Collaboration:

MSDE and Sheppard Pratt Health System

• 1999 Tough Kids Tough Times Forum

• 14 schools trained statewide

• Maryland Summer Institute

• in 2000, 20 schools trained

• in 2001, 30 schools trained

History of PBIS in Maryland and Schools Trained in PBIS

• Project Target and Johns Hopkins University join the collaboration with MSDE and SEPH, 2002

• Maryland Summer Institute• in 2002, 54 schools trained• in 2003, 60 schools trained• in 2004, 85 schools trained• in 2005, 94 schools trained• in 2006, 118 schools trained

PBIS Schools Trained in Maryland

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

(14) (20) (30) (54) (60) (85) (94) (118)

Basic Concepts of PBIS

School Teams are trained at the

Summer Institute sponsored by

Maryland State Department of Education,

Sheppard Pratt Health System,

and the Johns Hopkins University

The following training materials are adapted from the PBIS model as developed by

George Sugai, University of Connecticut, and Rob Horner, University of Oregon

Key Elements of PBISSchool-wide behavior planning is based on a balance

of four key elements:

SYSTEMS that support staff buy-in and sustained use of effective practices

Evidence-based PRACTICES and interventions that are effective for staff and students

DATA gathered by the school to make decisions about improving behavior and learning

Clearly specified OUTCOMES that are related to behavior and student achievement

SYST

EMS

PRACTICES

DATA

SupportingStaff

Behavior

SupportingDecisionMaking

SupportingStudent Behavior

Process for Supporting Social Competence and Academic Achievement

OUTCOMES

School-wideClassroomNon-classroomIndividual

Define behavior expectationsSpecify routinesTeachAcknowledgeCorrectFollow up and feedbackReinforcementGeneralization

Office Discipline ReferralsStaff InputAcademic ProgressAttendance

PBIS School-wide InterventionsOverview

1. Establish commitment and maintain team

2. Establish school-wide expectations

3. Establish an on-going system of rewards

4. Establish a system for responding to behavioral violations

5. Establish a data system to monitor progress and aid in decision making

6. Arrange for consistent implementation and utilize district level support

1. Establish commitment and maintain team

• Establish PBIS Leadership Team– Strong, administrative support– School-wide representation on PBIS Team

• Secure school-wide agreements and supports– Strive for “full” (>80%) faculty participation– Prioritize resources (time, materials, cost)– Plan on a 3 – 5 year commitment

• Establish a data-based action plan– Use the PBIS Staff Survey results– Use behavioral incident data (office referrals, etc.)

2. Establish school-wide expectations• Develop rules of behavior

– 3 to 5 positively stated rules– Easy to remember– Apply to all students, settings, and staff

• Develop a matrix of expected behavior in target contexts– Contexts include: classrooms, hallways, gym, cafeteria,

common areas, bus loading zone, etc.

• Teach the expected behaviors using an instructional approach– Directly teach (tell/explain, model/show, practice, give

reminders and pre-corrections)– Actively supervise– Positively reinforce

Develop Rules of Behavior• High 5’s

– Be respectful

– Be responsible

– Be there, be ready

– Follow directions

– Hands/feet to self

• The Respect School– Respect others

– Respect property

– Respect yourself

• Formula 4 Success– Respect

– Responsibility

– Ready-to-learn

– Re-thinking

• The 5 Be’s– Be kind– Be safe– Be cooperative– Be respectful– Be peaceful

• Code of Conduct– I am respectful– I am responsible– I am safe– I am prepared

• Respect + Responsibility = Pride– Show respect– Show responsibility

Develop Rules of Behavior

• Viking Code of Conduct– Be respectful

– Be responsible

– Be ready

• Eagle PRIDE– P reparation

– R esponsibility

– I ntegrity

– D iligence

– E arn Respect

• RAMS Rules– R esponsibility and

Respect

– A cademic Achievement

– M otivation

– S uccess

• Tenets of Kenwood Pride– B e there and prepared

– L ive responsibly

– U phold integrity

– E arn and give respect

Matrix of Expected Behavior

3. Establish an on-going system of rewards

• Acknowledge expected behavior

• Use tangible rewards and acknowledgements– High Five’s, coupons, gotchas, etc.

• Use social recognition– Assemblies, bulletin boards, names over the intercom

• Use guidelines– Fade tangibles– Schedule strategically

• Maintain 6-8:1 positive to correction ratio

4. Establish a system for responding to behavioral violations

• Develop an agreement about which behaviors are handled in the classroom and which are managed in the office

• Use verbal redirection, teacher consequence, and/or office referral

• Use pre-correction and restatement of expected behaviors

5. Establish a data system to monitor progress and aid in decision making

• Utilize a data management system, e.g., SWIS

• Develop procedures for ongoing monitoring and evaluation

• Meet regularly to review data and implement interventions

6. Arrange for consistent implementation and utilize district

level support• Develop targeted interventions for groups of

at-risk students• Build capacity for function-based support in

order to develop individualized plans for specific students (FBA/BIPs)

• Connect PBIS Team with School Improvement Team and Student Support Team

• Utilize district level support and other leadership resources

How Baltimore County supports its PBIS schools

• Levels of PBIS support include:

– School-based team• Strong, administrative leadership is encouraged• School-wide representation on PBIS team

– PBIS coach assigned to school team• Provides expertise on the PBIS process, behavior

analysis, and data interpretation

– MSDE/BCPS Leadership Teams• Provides consultation and support

Phases in the BCPS Model of PBIS Training as a Support to the

Summer Institute Training• Phase 1—Administrator Commitment

• Spring Forum arranged and Coach Facilitator consults with administrator

• Phase 2—Training the PBIS School Team• Coach assigned to each school

• Phase 3—Implementing PBIS within the School• Coach, Coach Facilitator, and BCPS

Leadership Team assists

Phase 1—Administrator Commitment

• Administrators of identified schools attend a Spring Forum to learn about PBIS

• Follow-up meeting with the Coach Facilitator to share sample information such as:

– School rules – Matrix of expected behaviors– Classroom managed vs. office managed behaviors– Flowchart of the disciplinary process– Gotcha and recognition tickets

Phase 1—Administrator Commitment(continued)

• School completes a Staff Survey to document areas of concern

• The new school is encouraged to send faculty members to visit exemplar PBIS schools within Baltimore County

Phase 2—Training the PBIS School Team

• PBIS school team members attend the Summer Institute hosted by MSDE-SPHS-JHU

• School teams begin to plan their implementation of PBIS

• They attend a poster session of exemplar schools and dialogue with those schools’ representatives

• BCPS Coach Facilitator follows up with new school teams throughout the summer to provide guidance

Phase 2—Training the PBIS School Team(Continued)

• School teams develop their products and plan for teacher training the first week of school

• Each school is assigned a coach who works with that school during the planning as well as implementation phases

• Schools are encouraged to review and adapt the work of experienced PBIS schools– Lesson plans – Teacher training models – Incentive programs for students and staff– Acknowledgement assemblies– Motivational strategies for students and staff

Phase 3—Implementing PBIS within the School

• PBIS team trains faculty about PBIS concepts– Works best with multiple leaders training small groups– Encourage discussion and questions

• Faculty is given samples of all products and trained in their use– Gotchas– Minor incident reports (for teacher managed behavior)– Office referrals

• Rules are posted in all classrooms, hallways, and throughout the building

Phase 3—Implementing PBIS within the School (continued)

• Gotchas are collected and reinforcement systems are implemented

• Students are acknowledged for appropriate behavior

• Staff are acknowledged for their support of the program

• Office referrals are entered in the SWIS system and are analyzed

Phase 3—Implementing PBIS within the School (continued)

• PBIS Team meets at least monthly to coordinate on-going implementation, analyze data, and develop new interventions

• Schools are encouraged to maintain a binder with all their school products, team notes, and other information for reference

• A coach works with every school team to provide additional support, PBIS knowledge, and behavioral expertise

• Schools are encouraged to attend state level and county level PBIS meetings for new ideas and support

Baltimore County Schools Trained in PBIS

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

(1) (4) (11) (9) (6) (16) (15) (1)

Baltimore County Schools Trained in PBIS

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Elementary (38) Middle Schools (17) High Schools (8)

Percentage of Baltimore County PBIS Schools and Length of Time Implementing PBIS

15 schools16 schools 6 schools 9 schools11 schools 6 schools

1st Year

24%

2nd Year

25%3rd Year

10%

4th Year

14%

5th+ Year

17%

6th+ Year

10%

How Well are Schools Implementing the Concepts of PBIS?

• Team Implementation Checklist (Form A) – School self-report – Completed monthly for new schools, quarterly for returning

schools– Measures the number of critical features in place

• School-wide Evaluation Tool (SET)– Observational data from independent assessor– Completed annually– Measures the 7 features of school-wide implementation

• Implementation Phases Inventory (IPI)– Completed semi-annually– Measures 4 levels of implementation– Measures 36 critical elements

Self-Report Data from Returning Elementary Schools

Form A—Percentage of features in place

0

20

40

60

80

100

n = 28 returning schools

Self-Report Data from New Elementary Schools


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

A B C D E F G H I J

n = 10 new schools

Self-Report Data from Form A– Mean Percentage of Features in Place

Reported by Elementary Schools

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Returning ES New ES All ES

n = 28 schools n = 10 schools n = 38 schools

Self-Report Data from Returning Middle Schools


010

20

30

40

50

60

7080

90

100

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N


Self-Report Data from New Middle Schools


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

A B Cn = 3 new schools


Reported by Middle Schools

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Returning MS New MS All MS


Self-Report Data from High SchoolsForm A—Percentage of features in place

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

A B C D E F


Self-Report Data from New High Schools


010

2030

405060

708090

100

A Bn = 2 new schools


Reported by High Schools

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Returning HS New HS All HS


Self-Report Data from Form A—Mean Percentage of Features in Place for

PBIS Schools

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Elementary Middle High


School-Wide Evaluation Tool (SET)

• Research quality tool for assessing Universal/School-wide PBIS

• External person spends 2 hours at school reviewing documents, interviewing staff, and interviewing students

• PBIS is “in place” with a score of at least 80% total

• Measures 7 critical features of PBIS

Seven Critical Features of SET

Seven critical features of PBIS listed, defined, and scored within SET:

– Behavioral Expectations Defined– Behavioral Expectations Taught– On-Going System for Rewarding Behavioral

Expectations– System for Responding to Behavioral

Violations– Monitoring and Decision-Making– Management– District-Level Support

Mean SET Scores for Elementary Schools by Year of Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Baseline 1st Yr 2nd Yr 3rd Yr 4th Yr 5th Yr 6th Yr(10) (2)(4)(9) (12)(14)(26)

Note: Not all schools received a SET each year

Mean SET Scores in May 2006 for Elementary Schools by Year of Training

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

TrainedSummer

2005

TrainedSummer

2004

TrainedSummer

2003

TrainedSummer

2002

TrainedSummer

2001<

(4)(14) (7)(3)(0)

Mean SET Scores for Middle Schools by Year of Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Baseline 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year(3) (2)(6)(8)(14) (10)

Note: Not all schools received a SET each year

Mean SET Scores in May 2006 for Middle Schools by Year of Training

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

TrainedSummer

2005

TrainedSummer

2004

TrainedSummer

2003

TrainedSummer

2002

TrainedSummer

2001

(2)(2) (4)(2)(4)

Mean SET Scores for High Schools by Year of Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Baseline 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year

(3) (6) (6) (4)

Mean SET Scores in May 2006 for High Schools by Year of Training

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Trained Summer2005

Trained Summer2004

Trained Summer2003

(4)(0) (2)

Mean SET Scores for PBIS Schools by Year of Implementation

010

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Baseline 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th Year

Elementary Middle High

Implementation Phases Inventory (IPI)

• Features of PBIS listed, defined, and scored to obtain scores in the following categories:– Preparation Phase– Initiation Phase – Implementation Phase– Maintenance Phase

• Percentage of the 36 Critical Elements also obtained

Percentage of Baltimore County PBIS Schools and their Implementation Phases

Preparation

Initiation

Implementation

Maintenance

63 schools represented

56%35 Schools

35%22 Schools

3%2 Schools

6%4 Schools Schools)

Implementation Phases Inventory—Percentage of Schools in each Phase

by Year of Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1st Yr 2nd Yr 3rd Yr 4th Yr 5th Yr 6th+ Yr

Preparation Initiation Implementation Maintenance

(16)(15) (9) (11) (6)(6)

Implementation Phases Inventory—Percentage of Schools in each Phase

by Elementary, Middle, and High

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

PreparationInitiationImplementationMaintanence

Elementary Schools(38)

Middle Schools(17)

High Schools(8)

Implementation Phases Inventory—Percentage of Critical Features in Place

by Year of Implementation

0

1020

30

40

5060

70

80

90100

1st Yr 2nd Yr 3rd Yr 4th Yr 5th Yr 6th+ Yr

(16) (6) (9) (11) (6)(15)

Implementation Phases Inventory—Percentage of Critical Features in Place

by Elementary, Middle, and High

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Elementary Middle High(38) (8)(17)

Discipline Data:Suspensions & Expulsions

and Office Discipline Referrals

• Elementary School

• Middle School

• High School

Elementary Schools:Suspensions & Expulsions by Year of Implementation

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140


Baseline (14)

1st Yr (14)

2nd Yr (14)

3rd Yr (14)

4th Yr ( 11)

5th Yr+ ( 4)

n = 1-14 of 28 schoolsData through June 2006

Elementary Schools:Suspensions & Expulsions by Year of Implementation

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB

Baseline (14)

1st Yr (14)

n = 15-28 of 28 schoolsData through June 2006

PBIS Elementary Schools:Mean Number of Suspensions &

Expulsions by Year of Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PBIS Elementary Schools

Baseline (28)

1st Yr (28)

2nd Yr (14)

3rd Yr (14)

4th Yr (11)

5th Yr+ ( 4)

Data through June 2006

PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2001:Mean Number of Suspensions &

Expulsions by School Year

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PBIS Elementary Schools Trained in 2001 (N=2)

Baseline SY00-01

1st Yr SY01-02

2nd Yr SY02-03

3rd Yr SY03-04

4th Yr SY04-05

5th Yr SY05-06




0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Baseline SY01-02

1st Yr SY02-03

2nd Yr SY03-04

3rd Yr SY04-05

4th Yr SY05-06




0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Baseline SY02-03

1st Yr SY03-04

2nd Yr SY04-05

3rd Yr SY05-06




0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Baseline SY04-05

1st Yr SY05-06


Examples of Elementary SchoolReduction in Suspensions by Year

010203040

Base Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3

32% Reduction

0

20

40

Base Yr 1 Yr 2

63% Reduction

0

50

100

Base Yr 2 Yr 4

72% Reduction

0

100

200

Base Yr 1 Yr 2

66% Reduction

Examples of Elementary SchoolReduction in Office Discipline Referrals

by Year

0

200

400

Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4

68% Reduction

0

500

1000

Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4

63% Reduction

0

200

Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3

58% Reduction

0

1000

2000

Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3

36% Reduction

PBIS Middle Schools:Suspensions & Expulsions by Year of Implementation

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000


Baseline (14)1st Yr (14)2nd Yr (12)3rd Yr ( 8)4th Yr ( 6)5th Yr ( 2)

n = 14 schoolsData through June 2006

PBIS Middle Schools:Mean Number of Suspensions &


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

PBIS Middle Schools

Baseline (14)1st Yr (14)2nd Yr (12)3rd Yr ( 8)4th Yr ( 6)5th Yr ( 2)


PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2001:Mean Number of Suspensions &


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

PBIS Middle Schools Trained in 2001 (N=2)

Baseline SY00-01

1st Yr SY01-02

2nd Yr SY02-03

3rd Yr SY03-04

4th Yr SY04-05

5th Yr SY05-06




0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700


Baseline SY01-02

1st Yr SY02-03

2nd Yr SY03-04

3rd Yr SY04-05

4th Yr SY05-06




0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700


Baseline SY02-03

1st Yr SY03-04

2nd Yr SY04-05

3rd Yr SY05-06




0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700


Baseline SY03-04

1st Yr SY04-05

2nd Yr SY05-06




0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700


Baseline SY04-05

1st Yr SY05-06


PBIS High Schools:Suspensions & Expulsions by Year of Implementation

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

A B C D E F

Baseline ( 6)1st Yr ( 6)2nd Yr ( 6)3rd Yr ( 4)

n = 6 schoolsData through June 2006

PBIS High Schools:Mean Number of Suspensions &


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

PBIS High Schools

Baseline ( 6)1st Yr ( 6)2nd Yr ( 6)3rd Yr ( 4)


PBIS High Schools Trained in 2003:Mean Number of Suspensions &


-50

50

150

250

350

450

550

650

750

850

PBIS High Schools Trained in 2003 (N=4)

Baseline SY02-03

1st Yr SY03-04

2nd Yr SY04-05

3rd Yr SY05-06


PBIS High Schools Trained in 2004:Mean Number of Suspensions &


-50

50

150

250

350

450

550

650

750

850

PBIS High Schools Trained in 2004 (N=2)

Baseline SY03-04

1st Yr SY04-05

2nd Yr SY05-06


Examples of Secondary SchoolReduction in Suspensions by Year

0

5001000

1500

Base Yr 1 Yr 2

56% Reduction

0

1000

2000

Base Yr 1

57% Reduction

0

500

1000

Base Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3

32% Reduction

0

200

400

Base Yr 1

35% Reduction

Examples of Secondary SchoolReduction in Office Discipline Referrals

by Year

0

1000

2000

Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4

20% Reduction

0

2000

4000

Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3

39% Reduction

0

1000

2000

Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3

27% Reduction

Attendance Data


• Middle School

• High School

PBIS Elementary School Attendance Rates by Year of Implementation

0102030405060708090

100

A C E G I K M O Q S U W Y AA

Baseline (28) 1st Yr (28) 2nd Yr (14) 3rd Yr (14)4th Yr (11) 5th Yr ( 4) 6th Yr ( 2) 7th Yr ( 1)

Mean % of Attendance Rates for PBIS Elementary Schools by Year of

Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Base Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7

(28) (14) (11) (4) (2) (1)(28) (14)

PBIS Middle School Attendance Rates by Year of Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Baseline (14)1st Yr (14)2nd Yr (12)3rd Yr ( 8)4th Yr ( 6)5th Yr (2)

n = 12 schools

Mean % of Attendance Rates for PBIS Middle Schools by Year of

Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Base Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6

(14) (8) (6) (3)(14) (12) (2)

PBIS High School Attendance Rates by Year of Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

A B C D E F

Baseline (6)1st Yr (6)2nd Yr (6)3rd Yr (4)

n = 6 schools

Mean % of Attendance Rates for PBIS High Schools by Year of

Implementation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

(6) (6) (4)(6)

PBIS Supports Academic Achievement:PBIS Schools and Results of the

Maryland School Assessments (MSA)


• Middle School

% of Third Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

A B C D E F G H I J K L M NMSA Year 2003 MSA Year 2004MSA Year 2005 MSA Year 2006

n = 14 schools; schools were trained in July 2003 or before

Mean % of Third Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006

37 % Increase in Third Grade Reading Scores

% of Third Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90



Mean % of Third Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006

27% Increase in Third Grade Math Scores

% of Fifth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90



Mean % of Fifth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006

17 % Increase in Fifth Grade Reading Scores

% of Fifth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90



Mean % of Fifth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006

41 % Increase in Fifth Grade Math Scores

% of Eighth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

A B C D E F G H I J K LMSA Year 2003 MSA Year 2004MSA Year 2005 MSA Year 2006


Mean % of Eighth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Reading MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006

23 % Increase in 8th Grade Reading Scores

% of Eighth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

A B C D E F G H I J K LMSA Year 2003 MSA Year 2004MSA Year 2005 MSA Year 2006


Mean % of Eighth Grade Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Math MSAs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Yr 2003 Yr 2004 Yr 2005 Yr 2006

69 % Increase in 8th Grade Math Scores

Summary of MSA Results from 2003-2006 for PBIS Schools

Reading Math

3rd Grade 37 % Increase(29% for all BCPS Schools)

27 % Increase(17% for all BCPS Schools)

5th Grade 17 % Increase(14% for all BCPS Schools)


8th Grade 23 % Increase(17% for all BCPS Schools)


Percent Change in MSA Scores from 2003-2006

for PBIS Schools vs. all BCPS Schools

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

3rdReading

3rd Math

5thReading

5th Math

8thReading

8th Math

MSA Scores for PBIS Schools MSA Scores for all BCPS Schools

How Does Behavior Support Academics?

• Improved behavior decreases office referrals and suspensions and increases instructional minutes

• Improved behavior makes instructional minutes more effective

• Improved behavior creates a climate that is calm and conducive to learning

For additional information please contact:

Office of Psychological ServicesBaltimore County Public Schools

410-887-0303

Joan Ledvina Parr [email protected]

Margaret Grady Kidder [email protected]

Susan Barrett [email protected]

Maryland’s PBIS website www.pbismaryland.org

Building Success in

SchoolsBaltimore Co

Timeat aOne Step

Thank you for your support

as we continue to

REACH FOR THE STARS

and help students believe in

themselves and achieve in

Baltimore County Schools

Positive Behavioral Interventions and

Supports in Baltimore County

Schools

behavior supports academics: three-tiered model in relation to discipline and achievement joan...

Documents

pbis schools

student support servicesdr

pbis contactcoordinatordr

special education schools

students169 schools

tiered model

school psychologist

executive director