rob horner university of oregon . current assumptions/research about coaching define the experience...

Rob HornerUniversity of Oregon

www.pbis.org

Current assumptions/research about coaching

Define the experience with coaching in SWPBS implementation

Implications for building TA capacity

Any skill development effort should be supplemented with active coaching:

To facilitate fidelity of implementationTo facilitate sustained implementation

Training Models for TAMaterials and procedures for training teamsMaterials and procedures for selecting, training, coaching coaches

Implications for District/State ImplementationInvest in a cadre of coachesRequire local investment in coaching as a pre-requisite to state supported training.

Coaching is the active and iterative delivery of: (a) prompts that increase successful behavior, and (b) corrections that decrease unsuccessful behavior.

Coaching is done by someone with credibility and experience with the target skill(s)Coaching is done on-site, in real time Coaching is done after initial trainingCoaching is done repeatedly (e.g. monthly)Coaching intensity is adjusted to need

Fluency with trained skillsAdaptation of trained concepts/skills to local contexts and challenges

And new challenges that ariseRapid redirection from miss-applicationsIncreased fidelity of overall implementationImproved sustainability

Most often due to ability to increase coaching intensity at critical points in time.

Training Outcomes Related to Training Components

Training Outcomes

Training Components Knowledge of Content

Skill Implementation ClassroomApplication

Presentation/ Lecture

PlusDemonstration

Plus Practice

Plus Coaching/ Admin SupportData Feedback

10% 5% 0%

30% 20% 0%

60% 60% 5%

95% 95% 95%

Joyce & Showers, 2002

Context:10,000 schools implementing SWPBS nationally

Defining the RoleInternal vs External

Selecting CoachesTraining and support for coachesAssessing Impact

Leadership Team

Funding

Visibility PoliticalSupport

Training Coaching Evaluation

Active Coordination

Local School and District Teams/Demonstrations

Behavioral Expertise

Policy

Schools Implementing School-wide Positive Behavior SupportSeptember 2009: 10,487

Maryland

Hawaii

Scott Spaulding, Claudia VincentPbis.org/evaluation/evaluation briefs

Delaware

Coaching vs. TrainingCoaching vs. Training

Coaching involves active collaboration and participation, but not group instruction.

Small groupBuild from local competenceSustainable

Internal vs ExternalInternal coaches are employed in the school where they provide supportExternal coaches are employed outside the schools where they provide support (e.g. by district, region, state).

Implementation DriversSelectionTrainingCoaching of coaches

© Fixsen & Blase, 2008

Performance Assessment (Fidelity)

Coaching

Training

Selection

Systems Intervention

Facilitative Administration

Decision Support Data System

Effective Coaching

Adaptive

Technical

Integrated & Compensatory

Com

pete

ncy

Driv

ers

Com

pete

ncy

Driv

ers O

rganization Drivers

Organization D

rivers

LeadershipLeadership

Steve GoodmanMargie McGlincheyKathy Schallmo

Coaching Competencies

Necessary Preferred

Participate in team training

Able to attend team meetings at least monthly

Effective working with adults

Knowledgeable about school operating systems

Professional Commitment

Knowledge about SWPBS

Knowledge about behavior support practices (targeted, individual)

Skilled in collection and use of data for decision-making.

What Coaches DoWhat Coaches DoWork with team during initial SWPBS trainingMeet with new teams monthly on-siteTelephone/email contact as needed“Positive” nag

Self-assessment (Self-Assessment Survey, Team Checklist, Benchmarks)Action planningActivity implementationOn-going evaluation

School self-evaluation effortsState-wide Initiative evaluation efforts (SET)

Build local awarenessPresent intro to SWPBS to local groups

Guide State-wide initiativeFeedback to Taskforce

What Coaches DoWhat Coaches Do

Dissemination of outcomes and effectsSWIS Facilitation

Implement and support use of data-based decision making.

Commitment of CoachesCommitment of CoachesTeam Support

First Year (1-2 teams) (participate in training and planning)

Second Year (Maintain initial teams, start 3-5 teams)

Future Years (10-15 teams total)FTE commitment

20-50%Roles/Background

Behavior Specialists, Special Education TeachersConsultants, AdministratorsSchool Psychologists, Counselors, Social Workers

Guiding Principles for Effective CoachingGuiding Principles for Effective Coaching

Build local capacity Become unnecessary…but remain available

Maximize current competenceNever change things that are already workingAlways make the smallest change that will have the biggest impact

Focus on valued outcomesTie all efforts to the benefits for children

Emphasize Accountability Measure and report; measure and report; measure and report.

Build credibility through: (a) consistency, (b) competence with behavioral principles/practices, (c) relationships, (d) time investment.

Pre-correct for success

Specific ExpectationsSpecific ExpectationsAttend and participate in team trainingMeet with your team(s) at least monthly

Provide technical assistance as needed

Monitor and report on team effortsTeam ChecklistEBS Survey/ SET/ ISSETAnnual Profile/Summary Data

Present on School-wide PBS at district, state, national forums.Assist district to build capacity for sustained implementation (re-define your role over time)Meetings with Coordinator and Taskforce for purposes of state-wide planning

Using Team-Checklist and Self-Assessment Survey data for Team Action Planning Using SET/ TIC data for evaluationUsing ODR/ Academic (ORF) data for assessment, planning and reporting.Keeping faculty involved through regular data reporting.

IllinoisNorth CarolinaMichigan

PBIS in Illinois

July 17, 2008Developing Local Systems of Care

for Children and Adolescents with Mental Health Needs and their Families

Training InstitutesNashville, TN

Lucille Eber Ed.D.IL PBIS Network

# IL PBIS Schools & # External Coaches

June 30, 2008

# IL PBIS Schools & # External Coaches

June 30, 2008

ISBECoordination

ChicagoCoordinators

NorthCoordinators

CentralCoordinators

SouthCoordinators

46 Coaches(10)

33 Schools

495 Coaches(84)

525 Schools

193 Coaches(20)

203 Schools

105 Coaches(29)

127 Schools

Demographic dataFidelity dataImpact data

N = 392SWPBS in 961 Schools

Illinois Elementary Schools

Illinois Middle Schools

Illinois High Schools

Iowa Checklist 01-05, PK-6 % Fully & Partially Implemented

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

05-A

ug-0

3

05-N

ov-0

3

23-F

eb-0

4

22-J

an-0

4

01-F

eb-0

5

02-J

un-0

5

12-A

ug-0

4

24-N

ov-0

4

01-M

ar-0

5

12-S

ep-0

2

31-O

ct-0

2

28-F

eb-0

3

21-A

pr-0

3

01-S

ep-0

3

05-N

ov-0

3

05-A

ug-0

3

11-S

ep-0

3

07-N

ov-0

3

06-F

eb-0

4

01-S

ep-0

3

01-N

ov-0

3

01-M

ar-0

4

03-A

ug-0

4

08-N

ov-0

4

08-M

ar-0

5

03-J

un-0

5

1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 7

Start Up Full Implementation Start Up Part Implementation

Iowa Elementary SchoolsTeam Checklists 02-04, % Items Fully & Partially Implemented

0

20

40

60

80

100

Aug

.N

ov.

Feb

.

Sep

.N

ov.

Mar

.A

pr.

May

Sep

.N

ov.

Mar

.O

ct.

Sep

.O

ct.

Feb

.A

pr.

Sep

.N

ov.

Feb

.O

ct.

Aug

.S

ep.

Nov

.F

eb.

Sep

.N

ov.

Mar

.

Nov

.F

eb.

Nov

.F

eb.

Sep

.N

ov.

Mar

.A

pr.

May

Sep

.N

ov.

Mar

.O

ct.

Sep

.N

ov.

Mar

.A

pr.

May

Sep

.N

ov.

Mar

.O

ct

Aug

.N

ov.

Feb

.

AdamsES-D

Douds ES * Iowa Valley ES* JacksonES-D

MLKES-D

MonroeES-D

ParkAve.ES-D

Prescott ES* Stockport ES-P* StoweES-D

Per

cen

t (%

) Im

ple

men

ted

% Imp. % Partially Imp.

A B C D E F G H I J

Commit Team Self-Assess Core Features Classroom Data Sec/Ter

Commit Team Self-Assess Core Features Classroom Data Sec/Ter

Commit Team Self-Assess Core Features Classroom Data Sec/Ter

Commit Team Self-Assess Core Features Classroom Data Sec/Ter

Stilwell Jr. High SchoolTeam Checklist 02-04

0

20

40

60

80

100

Commit Team Self-Assess Expect.Define

Expect.Teach

RewardsSystem

ViolationsSystem

Info. Function % ItemsImplemented

% TotalPoints

Sep. '02 Nov. '02 Feb. '03 Apr. '03 May '03 Sep. '03 Nov. '03

School A B C D E F G

February 2009

Heather R. ReynoldsNC Department of Public InstructionBob AlgozzineBehavior and Reading Improvement Center

http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/positivebehavior/

State PBS CoordinatorHeather R Reynolds

Dr. Bob Algozzine

Levels of behavior risk in schools implementing PBS were comparable to widely-accepted expectations and better than those in comparison schools not systematically implementing PBS.

Non-PBS Comparison

Dr. Bob Algozzine

Dr. Bob Algozzine

Schools with Low ODRs and High

Academic Outcomes

Office Discipline Referrals per 100 Students

Prop

ortio

n of

Stu

dent

s M

eetin

g St

ate

Acad

emic

Sta

ndar

d

Dr. Steve GoodmanDr. Margi McGlinchey

Dr. Kathy Schallmo

June 24, 2009

Participating Participating SchoolsSchools

2004 Schools (21)2005 Schools (31)

2006 Schools (50)

2000 Model Demonstration Schools (5)

2007 Schools (165)2008 Schools (95)2009 Schools (150*)

Total of 512 schools in collaboration with 45 of 57 ISDs (79%)

The Organization of Implementation Needed to

Change as Scale of Adoption Increased.

Percent of Students meeting DIBELS Spring Benchmarkfor Cohorts 1 - 4 (Combined Grades)

5,943 5,943 studentsstudentsassessedassessed

5,943 5,943 studentsstudentsassessedassessed

8,330 8,330 studentsstudentsassessedassessed

8,330 8,330 studentsstudentsassessedassessed

16,078 16,078 studentsstudentsassessedassessed

16,078 16,078 studentsstudentsassessedassessed

32,257 32,257 studentsstudentsassessedassessed

32,257 32,257 studentsstudentsassessedassessed

Spring ’09: 62,608 students Spring ’09: 62,608 students assessed in cohorts 1 - 4assessed in cohorts 1 - 4

Spring ’09: 62,608 students Spring ’09: 62,608 students assessed in cohorts 1 - 4assessed in cohorts 1 - 4

Percent of Students at DIBELS Intensive Level across year by Cohort

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

Perc

ent

of

stud

en

ts

School District

Began MiBLSi Implementation

Conducting Self-Assessment to identify needs

Providing support based on resultsCoach training 2 – 4 time per year

Coach manual

Coach website

Coach conference (March 13-14)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May

Avg. Refe

rrals

per

Day

05-06 06-07

Coach returns Coach returns from leavefrom leave

Coach goes Coach goes on leaveon leave

Data Review/Action planning with building leadership teamsPre-training coaches/principals in the data review contentProviding worksheets to guide data review process

Implementation cannot be faster than your school staff capacity to implement

Teams need to be taught how to analyze and use data

Emphasis on directing resources to need and removing competing activities

Build District Capacity for Sustained EffectsPolicy statement focused on social behaviorDeliver regular training on core content

Annual Fall orientationStaff development

Job Recruitment Content“knowledge and experience implementing school-wide positive behavior support systems”

Annual EvaluationDemonstrated effectiveness implementing school-wide pbs practices.

Board outcome measuresSchool Improvement Goal

SISEPBuilding the policy, funding and evaluation systems that promote effective education

Improving the PIP-PEP cyclePolicies focused on student outcomesPractice feedback easily, and repeatedly sent back to policy makers.

State Management

Group

District and School Level

Implementers

Policy Enabled Practice (PEP)

Prac

tice

Info

rmed

Po

licy

(PIP

)

Syst

em

Chan

ge

© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2008

Literacy

Wraparound

Math

Family Support

Behavior Support

ALIG

NM

ENT

Early Intervention

Resp

onse

to In

terv

entio

n/Pr

even

tion

Student Outcomes

Primary Prevention

Universal Screening

Multi-tiered Support

Early Intervention

Progress Monitoring

Systems to support

practices

Coaching is a core function for systems change

Coaching should be a capacity building function, supported locally by districts, but facilitated by state TA efforts.

Trainers should have the ability not only to establish effective teams, but the coaches to support those teams.

Given Content FociWhat is role of coaching in TA support structure?Use Blase et al., “Best Practices for Coaching”

How are coaches selected?How are coaches trained?What coaching support is provided to coaches?What data systems allow coaches to assess:

Fidelity of implementationImpact on student outcomes

What administrative and organizational supports exist to sustain coaching capacity?