pbis evaluation for edtech 505

7/30/2019 PBIS Evaluation for EdTech 505

1/28

Use of PBIS Behavior Documentation and

Interventions and the Impact on Current 3rd

Grade Students(2009-2012)

Submitted to the PBIS Teamat Thomas Jefferson Elementary

Evaluated by: Jennifer HarrisFor: EdTech 505 Evaluation of Educational Technology

Fall 2012


2/28

Summary

The purpose of the PBIS program is to encourage school wide positive behaviors andchoices in the student population served. All staff members are expected to participate in thisprogram. The program includes a system of rewards for positive behaviors and a way todocument behavior issues. Teachers also have a defined set of major and minor behavior types

which include documentation forms. While the consequences of behavior issues vary byclassroom, all referrals are entered into the HEART system. This system allows users to look atvarious types of behaviors, identify behavior trends and provides teachers, PBIS team members,and interventionists, with names of students who might benefit from behavior interventions andbehavior intervention plans (BIPs). The PBIS team has a plan in place for making informeddecisions based on this data. The major goal of the PBIS program is decrease the number ofnegative behaviors accrued by students.

The purpose of this evaluation is to identify the use and impact of the PBIS referral andintervention system used by the faculty at Thomas Jefferson Elementary. The evaluationexplores both the use of the behavior system and the impact it has had on the negative behaviorsof current third graders in the school. The participants will be staff who have been part of the

district for 2009-2012 school years, and 3

rd

grade students who attended TJ from December 31st

,2009 through October 15th, 2012. School staff members have been surveyed to determine thelevels of participation in PBIS and how this may affect behaviors and evaluation data. Dataconcerning the behavior referrals has been collected to determine the impact the system has hadon the students.

Data from the last three years has already been compiled in a behavior data system, calledthe HEART system, and data from the current 2012-2013 school year is continually entered intothe system as it is compiled. The first major evaluation task was to determine if any school staffwere not district employees during the 2009-2012 school years, then to survey those that meetthat criteria. Also, data for students who do not fit the attendance criteria of the evaluation havebeen removed as well. Staff members were surveyed to document their participation in theprogram and data from the behavior system was compiled, noting the number of referrals writtenby each teacher. Next, students were coded according to total numbers of referrals in each schoolyear of attendance, and students with 6+ referrals in a given year were analyzed for behaviorinterventions and plans.

The evaluation found that about half of the survey participants use PBIS interventionsand referral forms as the behavior matrix indicates. About half of the participants indicated thatthey sometimes, rarely, or never use minor or major referral forms. Staff also indicated that theydo not use the data found in the referral reporting system to discuss and prioritize students withteam members. Despite these trends amongst staff, students who are considered habitualoffenders, those with 6 or more referrals in a given year, have displayed a decrease in problembehaviors between their kindergarten and 3rd grade years of school at Thomas JeffersonElementary.

Description of the Program Evaluated

The PBIS program at Thomas Jefferson Elementary (TJ) was intended to help encouragepositive behaviors and provide a way to document the inappropriate behaviors of the students inattendance. All staff members at TJ are expected to use the program as a means for improvingschool climate and providing all classes with a set of school wide expectations. TJs school wideexpectations are for all students to be respectful, responsible, and safe. Additionally, expectations

2


3/28

for the commons areas (lunchroom, playground, etc.) are taught by following a set of schoolwide lesson plans provided to staff at the beginning of the year. All classes are assigned differenttimes in the first two weeks of school where selected teachers will model expected andacceptable behaviors. The selected teachers are those who have a duty in that area and will beultimately responsible for following through with consequences. These plans are revised as

needed by the PBIS team each year. Individual lessons are re-taught during the year based ondata collected in the HEART system. The intent is for any staff member to be able to walk downthe hall, into the lunchroom, on the playground, or into any other classroom in the school andreward these expectations for being followed.

PBIS also provides staff with a way to address appropriate and inappropriate expectationsin a common way. Behavior problems are addressed using minor and major referral forms(Appendix B & C), while red pride and gold pride tickets are used to reinforce positivebehaviors. Examples of behaviors which fall under these referral types can be found in thebehavior matrix (Appendix A).Data from referrals are used to make informed decisions onlesson plans, behavior plans, and individual behavior interventions.

Other than pre-school opportunities, Thomas Jefferson is the first school experience for

many of the students it serves. Students are continually learning the behavior expectationsnecessary for appropriate school interactions. In this case, PBIS does not have a termination timeor date, because the school will continually experience an influx of new students and an intentfor promoted students to show growth in behavior choices. Teachers are expected to followthrough with PBIS expectations and guidelines, including the use of pride tickets and referralsthroughout the school year. The PBIS teams goal is 80% participation by the end of the 2013school year.

There are three steps in identifying and writing forms for inappropriate behaviors, minor,intervention, and major referrals. Please see Appendix A for the behavior referral matrix used bystaff.

Program ObjectivesThis evaluation looks to determine if the following objectives have been met regardingthe use of the behavior documentation and intervention system. The objectives were determinedthrough conversations with the PBIS facilitator and research from previous meetings.

Objective 1: A minimum of 80% of staff members will use the PBIS behavior documentationsystem.Objective 2: Staff will use behavior interventions and documentation according to the staffhandbook.Objective 3: Staff will use data to monitor and discuss individual student behaviors and groupsof students.

Objective 4: Staff will use minor and major referral forms to communicate with parents.Objective 5: The use of referral forms, interventions, and BIPs will decrease the number ofnegative behaviors in students.

Program Components

One important component of the PBIS program is the ways which negative behaviors areaddressed. Staff members are expected to fill out a tri carbon packet called a referral for negativebehaviors (Appendix B&C). One sheet stays with the homeroom teacher, a second goes home

3


4/28

for parents to sign, and a 3rd goes to the guidance counselor or school secretary for HEARTsystem filing. Minor referrals are signed by parents and returned which are also entered into adata system by the school guidance counselor. Major referrals are sent to the school principalwho then addresses the problem with the student and parents. The secretary is responsible forentering this data in the behavior database. All data is entered into the HEART system

(Appendix I), an online computer based system, provided by the Area Education Association(AEA). This data is used to make decisions concerning re-teaching, as well as in the meetingsnoted below.

A second component is the use of a behavior intervention team. Students with andwithout BIPs are subject to these interventionists when behaviors fit in specific areas of thebehavior matrix (Appendix A). When a student is exhibiting behaviors which cause a majordisruption to student learning or behaviors which may harm the student or others, a designatedbehavior interventionist is called to the area. This interventionist is trained in defusing situations,de-escalation, and, if necessary, restraining of the child. The interventionist often removes thechild from the situation and into a non-threatening area. These interventionists, and staffmembers, administration, and parents are also involved in the fourth component of PBIS which

is the identification of students for Behavior Intervention Plans (BIP). BIPs include a variety ofindividual interventions aimed at improving identified student behaviors. Sometimes the BIPmandates that the interventionist be called in the event ofany inappropriate behaviors.

A final component of the PBIS program at TJ is the use of a positive rewards system. Thepositive rewards used by staff at Thomas Jefferson Elementary include red and gold pridetickets, all school assembly recognition, weekly academic award winners, class awards, speciallunch seating, and more. Though it is an important part of the program, the focus of thisevaluation is not on the positive rewards aspect of PBIS.

Evaluation Method

Participants

In 2010, the Newton Community School District restructured. All Kindergarten, 1st

, 2nd

,and 3rd graders are now in two buildings, Thomas Jefferson Elementary (TJ) and Berg Elementary(BE), as opposed to five K-6 buildings. This resulted in TJ and BE restructuring their PBISprograms to tailor to the needs of younger students. Both schools have used these structures forthree years and as part of the current school year, indicating that now might be a good time toevaluate the effectiveness and impact on the teachers who use the program and the studentsserved by the program.

Staff members are participants in the evaluation process. As mentioned above, staffmembers participate in the use of PBIS to varying degrees. Part of determining the impact ofPBIS will be determining to what level staff members participated. Staff members have beenprovided with a survey concerning their use of the PBIS referral and intervention system

(Appendix F). Data is available on the HEART system which breaks down the number ofreferrals written by individual teachers according to year (Appendix D). Teachers, classifiedstaff (para-professionals, secretaries, AEA personnel), and administrators are responsible forwriting out the referrals which are the data of the HEART system. Para-professional use of thePBIS system was not evaluated because only three of the sixteen para-professional staffmembers have been part of the TJ team for more than 1 year.

In addition to general staff, several instructors and administrators play an even larger rolein the PBIS program. The PBIS team is made up of the school principal, guidance counselor,

4


5/28

special education team, and a representative from each grade level or team. The guidancecounselor and principal facilitate semi-annual meetings and keep records of communications andissues. The principal and special education team also take on the role of the behavior interventionteam discussed above.

ProceduresStaff members received initial training on the use of referrals and interventions, and

subsequent trainings as needed thereafter. At the beginning of each school year, the PBIS teamreviews the behavior matrix and lesson plans for the common areas with the teaching staff. Atmost of the monthly staff meetings, the guidance counselor reports out on behavior trends,identifying areas that require re-teaching. The PBIS committee members initially met on amonthly basis to discuss areas of concern and change. As time progressed, the team began tomeet on an as needed basis. The evaluation procedures included:

1. Determine which staff fit seniority criteria for survey (in district from 2009-2012, etc.)2. Survey staff to identify trends in the use of the referral and intervention system and the

use of data. (Appendix F)3. Use the HEART system to determine staff use of written forms. (Appendix D)4. Determine which students fit the attendance criteria according to Infinite Campus

(Appendix I):1. Attended NCSD from 2009-2010 (Kindergarten)2. Attended Thomas Jefferson from December 31st, 2009-October 15th, 20123. Did not attend another school during that timeframe

5. Identify students, according to the HEART system, who have: (Appendix J)1. 0 referrals in the time frame provided2. 2>referrals during their Kindergarten year and 0 in following years3. 6>referrals in any given year

4. 6+ referrals in a given year

1. Identify Students who have had a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) or have hadintervention or other services related to behavior

2. Chart trends in inappropriate behaviors in students with 6+ referrals in any given year.(Appendix K)

Data Sources

PBIS Behaviors Survey: APPENDIX F, provide data on staff use of the referral andintervention system. This survey was developed by the evaluator and the PBIS team leader.

Infinite Campus: APPENDIX I and APPENDIX J detail where students attended school ingrades K-3rd. This system was used to eliminate students who do not fit the evaluation criteriasuch as those students who did not attend school in the district during the 2009-2010 school year,and students who were retained for an extra year at TJ.

HEART System: APPENDIX D and APPENDIX I, HEART system screenshots, providedetailed data concerning:

5


6/28

1. Number of referrals written by teacher, grade, and team each year2. Total referrals in any year by grade3. Year (dates) of each referral occurrence for each student

Results

Staff Survey 20 of 35 staff members responded, or 57% of staff

Statement:

Responded

Often orAlmostAlways

Responded

Sometimes,Rarely, orNever

USE

I use minor referral forms for inappropriate behaviors 42% 58%

I use major referral forms for inappropriate behaviors. 47% 53%

I use minor and major referral forms according to the behavior matrixfound in the staff handbook.

89% 11%

INTERVENTION

I call an interventionist when a child is a disruption or causing asafety issue.

74% 26%

I call an interventionist prior to writing a major referral. 41% 59%I call an interventionist when behaviors fit the criteria found on thebehavior matrix located in the staff handbook.

58% 42%

DATA

I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors withmy team.

37% 63%

I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors withinterventionists.

53% 47%

I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors withappropriate individuals outside of my team (guidance counselor,specials teachers, etc.)

63% 37%

I contact PBIS team members to look at data on problem students forprior years.

16% 84%

My team uses referral data to prioritize students before suggestingbehavior intervention meetings and plans.

32% 68%

Communication

I call parents when a child receives a minor referral form. 16% 84%

I use another means to contact parents in addition to sending homereferral sheets.

42% 58%

I follow up with the return of parent signed referral forms. 68% 32%

I implement consequences after writing minor referrals. 89% 11%

I re-teach the lesson plans for expectations when the data shows it is

necessary.

68% 32%

I re-teach the lesson plans for expectations for the common areaswhen the data shows it is necessary.

68% 32%

Attitudes

I feel PBIS referrals and interventions have a positive effect ondecreasing the number of problem behaviors.

68% 32%

I feel PBIS referrals and interventions are an effective way todocument problem behaviors

74% 26%

6


7/28

HEART System Grade/Team Referral Data

Staff % Referrals Written 2010-2011

School Year

% Referrals Written 2011-2012

School Year

Kindergarten 22% 27%

1st

Grade 42% 13%2nd Grade 7% 9%

3rd Grade 4% 6%

Auxilary Staff(Specials, Title,Reading, etc.)

5% 11%

Intervention/SpEd 20% 34%

356 Total Referral 399 Total Referrals

View extensive data broken down by teacher, team/grade level, and year in APPENDIX E

Infinite Campus - Student Numbers

3rd Grade Population

Total (As of Oct. 15,

2012)

Did Not Attend

District 2009-2010

or TJ from 2010-

Oct. 15, 2012

Not promoted to

next grade between

2010-2012

Attended District

2009-2010 and TJ

from 2010-Oct. 15,

2012

100 Students 16 Students 2 Students 82 Students

The data of 82 students was used to determine habitual offenders, or those students with 6+referrals in a given year in the following graphs.

Heart Data System *Total Referrals for the 82Students who meet attendance criteria above(right side graph)

HEART Data System Student Data39% of the students included in datamining have never received a referral,and another 9% received less than 2referrals their kindergarten year then

never received another in subsequentyears. However, 22% of students had 6+referrals between 2009 and October 15th,2012. (Appendix J)

HEART Data System HabitualOffender Trends (students with 6+referrals in any year) The graphs on the

School Year Total

Referrals*2009-2010 193

2010-2011 169

2011-2012 98

Aug. 2012-Oct. 15, 2012 12

7


8/28

left (APPENDIX K) depict the referraltrends of students who had more than 6referrals in any year from 2009-October15th, 2012. Though not as significant, datafor the 2012-2013 school year was

included to show a change in behavior.Each graph shows a peak in referralnumbers in either the Kindergarten or firstgrade year for all students and decrease inthe student receiving referrals insubsequent years. Students A and B, whoshow no referrals in the 2011-2012 schoolyear, but referrals in the 2012-2013 schoolyear, both had teachers who diduse thereferral documentation system during thattime period.

Student % Decrease in Referrals

(K+1st)-(2nd+3rd)/Total

A 97%

B 66%

C 79%

D 45%

E 81%

F 63%

G 84%

H 74%

I 55%J 19%

K 47%

L 78%

M 71%

N 33%

Students without interventions or behavior plans averaged an 81% decrease in referrals betweentheir kindergarten-first grade years and second-current year. Students with a behavior planaveraged a 77% decrease between K-1 and 2-3 years, while students who had interventionswithout a BIP only experienced a 54% decrease in behaviors during those same timeframes.

DiscussionThe purpose of this evaluation is to determine if staff members are using the PBIS

referral documentation system, and if they are using it in a way that impacted the amount ofnegative behaviors in students. A staff survey and referral data were used to evaluate the former,while the referral data of current 3rd grade students was used to determine the latter.

Objective 1: 80% of staff members will use the PBIS behavior documentation system.Objective 4: Staff will use minor and major referral forms to communicate with parents.

8


9/28

Partially Met APPENDIX E, G, & H

79% of teaching staff surveyed used the PBIS behavior documentation system in the2010-2011 school year. An increase of 9% occurred in the usage of the behavior documentationsystem in the 2011-2012 school year, resulting in 88% usage. The PBIS teams 3 year goal of80% usage has been met by the teaching staff. The para-professional staff will need to evaluated

in subsequent years when enough data has been collected in the HEART system to confirm 80%usage by all staff. (Only 3 of 16 para-professionals have been staff members for more than oneyear.) Despite meeting the 80% mark for usage, the staff survey shows that more than half ofteachers who participated admit that their usage of minor and major referral slips fall under thecategory of sometimes, rarely, or never. This could explain why data shows a high usage amongkindergarten and first grade teachers and the lower usage among second, third, and auxiliaryteachers.

Recommendation: Meet with 2nd, 3rd, and auxiliary teams to determine why they are not writingas many referrals. Especially address the areas of student population, student maturity, parentalinvolvement, and the referral documentation method.

Objective 2: Staff will use behavior interventions and documentation according to the staffhandbook. -Not Met APPENDIX F, G, & H

There are several areas addressed in the handbook which apply to PBIS compliance instaff. More than half of participants say that they sometimes, rarely, or never use the minor andmajor referral forms, or call for an interventionist before writing a major referral. 89% of surveyparticipants indicated that they use the behavior matrix found in the staff handbook to determinethe severity and level of behaviors, but only 58% of participants say that they call for aninterventionist when behaviors fit that criteria. These areas are important to the programssuccess and should therefore be monitored for their efficiency and effectiveness.

Recommendation: Use the HEART data system information to meet with individual teacherswho have not adequately used the documentation system. Reinforce the idea of a joint teameffort in promoting appropriate behaviors. Re-teach the behavior matrix to staff and use thematrix to make clear to staff that they should call for intervention, even in cases where thebehavior is a first time problem such as profanity, lying, or theft. Use staff conversations todetermine why teachers do not call for intervention when severe behaviors fall underintervention in the matrix.

Objective 3: Staff will use data to monitor and discuss individual student behaviors, and groupsof students. -Not Met APPENDIX F

Only 16% of participants contact PBIS team members to look at data regarding problemstudents. Less than 40% of survey participants use referral documentation data to discussproblem students with grade level team or use data to prioritize students for behaviorinterventions and plans. While higher than those numbers, only about half of staff memberssurveyed use referral data to discuss problem students with interventionists and other relevantteachers (specials, guidance, etc.). 68% of staff surveyed say that they use data to inform theirdecisions regarding the re-teaching of building and commons area expectations for large groupsof students. This type of information is often presented by the guidance counselor at staffmeetings.

9


10/28

Recommendation: Provide staff with adequate access to data system. Either provide staff withtheir own username and password, or create a staff login. Provide training on the use of HEARTsystem and ways which data can be viewed and calculated (by student, month, behavior, etc.).

Objective 5: The use of referral forms, interventions, and BIPs will help decrease the number ofnegative behaviors in students. Met APPENDIX J & KThe most staggering statistics is that students with no interventions or behavior plans

averaged an 81% decrease in referrals between their kindergarten and first grade years andsecond and current year. Possible reasons for this decline could include parental intervention aswell as that, according to the staff survey, 89% of participants initiate consequences related tothe referrals given to students. 68% of staff survey participants say that they also follow up withthe signing of referrals by parents, resulting in better teacher-parent-student communication.Habitual offenders with a behavior plan averaged a 77% decrease between K-1 and 2-3 years,while the largest group of students, those who had interventions without a BIP, only experienceda 54% decrease in behaviors during those same timeframes.

In general, there was a 42% decrease in referrals between the 82 3

rd

grader participants1st and 2nd grade years. If this group of children maintains its current behavior referral trend, theyshould receive about 60 referrals during the entire 2012-2013 school year, a decrease of 39%between 2nd and 3rd grade, and a decrease of 64% between 1st and 3rd grades.

Recommendations: Increase current use of referral documentation and interventions in staffmembers. Identify more students who are habitual offenders and consider BIPs for thosestudents. Increase parent communication follow ups.

Proposed Budget

Personnel:

Evaluator: 25 days at $500/day $12,500$12,500 $12,500

Travel and per Diem:

70 mi/day for 4 days at $.55/mi $154Miscellaneous mileage: 250 miles at $.55/mi $137.50

$291.60 $291.50Communications:

Telephone and Internet ($120/month for 1 month) $120$120 $120

Supplies, Materials, and Photocopying

Photocopying $200Supplies and Materials $100

$300 $300TOTAL BUDGET $13,211.50

The evaluator will need to travel to the evaluation site at least three times during theevaluation to meet with stakeholders, and once to present. Miscellaneous mileage includes extratrips to the evaluation site, mileage for photocopying, purchasing supplies, and delivering thefinal evaluation report to the staff. Internet access is especially important given that the HEART

10


11/28

data system is fully online and the staff survey will also be presented online. Several copies ofthe evaluation reported will be provided to the PBIS team and staff members.

11


12/28

APPENDIX A: BEHAVIOR MATRIX

12


13/28

APPENDIX B: MINOR BEHAVIOR REFERRAL FORM (TRI-CARBON COPY)

13


14/28

APPENDIX C: MAJOR BEHAVIOR REFERRAL FORM (TRI-CARBON COPY)

14


15/28

APPENDIX D: HEART SYSTEM REFERRALS BY TEACHER SCREENSHOT

15


16/28

APPENDIX E: REFERRALS BY TEAM/GRADE LEVEL, TEACHER, AND YEAR

16


17/28

17


18/28

18


19/28

Staff % Referrals Written 2010-

2011 School Year

% Referrals Written 2011-2012

School Year

Kindergarten 22% 27%

1st Grade 42% 13%

2nd Grade 7% 9%

3rd

Grade 4% 6%Auxilary Staff (Specials,Title, Reading, etc.)

5% 11%

Intervention/SpEd 20% 34%

356 Total Referral 399 Total Referrals

19


20/28

APPENDIX F: STAFF SURVEY

PBIS Problem Behaviors SurveyThe live version of this survey can be found by going to:https://docs.google.com/a/u.boisestate.edu/spreadsheet/viewform?

formkey=dGV1QXBubC1BZW1vZzVBajVLaWpkTEE6MQ#gid=0

USE Never Rarely Sometimes Often AlmostAlways

I use minor referral forms for inappropriatebehaviors.

I use major referral forms for inappropriatebehaviors.

I use minor and major referral formsaccording to the behavior matrix found in the

staff handbook.

INTERVENTION Never RarelySometimes OftenAlmostAlways

I call an interventionist when a child is a disruption orcausing a safety issue.

I call an interventionist prior to writing a majorreferral.

I call an interventionist when behaviors fit the criteriafound on the behavior matrix located in the staff

handbook.

DATA Never RarelySometimes OftenAlmostAlways

I use minor/major referral data to discuss studentsbehaviors with my team.

I use minor/major referral data to discuss studentsbehaviors with interventionists.

I use minor/major referral data to discuss studentsbehaviors with parent(s).

I use minor/major referral data to discuss studentsbehaviors with appropriate individuals outside of myteam (guidance counselor, specials teachers, etc)

I contact PBIS team members to look at data onproblem students for prior years.

20
https://docs.google.com/a/u.boisestate.edu/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGV1QXBubC1BZW1vZzVBajVLaWpkTEE6MQ#gid=0https://docs.google.com/a/u.boisestate.edu/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGV1QXBubC1BZW1vZzVBajVLaWpkTEE6MQ#gid=0https://docs.google.com/a/u.boisestate.edu/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGV1QXBubC1BZW1vZzVBajVLaWpkTEE6MQ#gid=0https://docs.google.com/a/u.boisestate.edu/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGV1QXBubC1BZW1vZzVBajVLaWpkTEE6MQ#gid=0


21/28

DATA Never RarelySometimes OftenAlmostAlways

My team uses referral data to prioritize students beforesuggesting behavior intervention meetings and plans.

COMMUNICATION Never RarelySometimes OftenAlmostAlways

I call parents when a child receives a minor referralform.

I use another means to contact parents in addition tosending home referral sheets.

I follow up with the return of parent signed referralforms.

I implement consequences after writing minor

referrals.

RE-TEACHING Never RarelySometimes OftenAlmostAlways

I re-teach the lesson plans for expectations when thedata shows it is necessary.

I re-teach the lesson plans for expectations for thecommons areas the data shows it is necessary.

ATTITUDES Never RarelySometimes OftenAlmostAlways

I feel PBIS referrals and interventions have a positiveeffect on decreasing the number of problem behaviors.

I feel PBIS referrals and interventions are an effectiveway to document problem behaviors.

21


22/28

APPENDIX G: STAFF RESPONSES1. I use minor referral forms for inappropriate behaviors.2. I use major referral forms for inappropriate behaviors.3. I use minor and major referral forms according to the behavior matrix found in the staff handbook.4. I call an interventionist when a child is a disruption or causing a safety issue.5. I call an interventionist prior to writing a major referral.

6. I call an interventionist when behaviors fit the criteria found on the behavior matrix located in the staffhandbook.7. I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors with my team.8. I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors with interventionists.9. I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors with parent(s).10. I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors with appropriate individuals outside of my

team (guidance counselor, specials teachers, etc)11. I contact PBIS team members to look at data on problem students for prior years.12. My team uses referral data to prioritize students before suggesting behavior intervention meetings and

plans.13. I call parents when a child receives a minor referral form.14. I use another means to contact parents in addition to sending home referral sheets.15. I follow up with the return of parent signed referral forms.16. I implement consequences after writing minor referrals.17. I re-teach the lesson plans for expectations when the data shows it is necessary.

18. I re-teach the lesson plans for expectations for the commons areas when the data shows it is necessary.19. I feel PBIS referrals and interventions have a positive effect on decreasing the number of problem

behaviors20. I feel PBIS referrals and interventions are an effective way to document problem behaviors.

A: ALMOST ALWAYS O: OFTEN S: SOMETIMES R:RARELY N:NEVER

QUESTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Participant A S A A N R S N O N N A A N A S S O S O S

Participant B O O A O S A O S S S S S O O O O O O O A

Participant C R S R R N N N N N N N N N N R R R O S R

Participant D S A A S O O A O S O R O O A O O O S O AParticipant E O S S S S S O O R O S S R A S S O A A A

Participant F S S A S R O O O N R N R S A A O O O A S

Participant G R O S R N S S S N N N O A A R R S S S A

Participant H S S A O S S S S R R S R O O O O A A O O

Participant I A A A A O O A A A S N N A A A A A A A A

Participant J A A S S O O O O N O N N O O A A S S A S

Participant K S R A R N N N N N S N R A A A A A A A S

Participant L A A A A O O O O A A O A A A O O O O O A

Participant M O O A N R O O R N A S O A O R R O O A S

Participant N S A O O O O O O R S A A A A A A A A O O

Participant O O S S R R S O S R S N O S O S S S S A R

Participant P O R A O O O O O O A R S A A A A A A A A

Participant Q S S O O R S O R R R R A A A O O S O O O

Participant R S R A A S S S S R N N N O O O O S O A A

Participant S S S O S O O S O R S R R S R A O O A O S

22


23/28

APPENDIX H: STAFF SURVEY RESPONSES: OFTEN/ALMOST ALWAYS &

SOMETIMES/RARELY/NEVER

Staff Survey 20 of 35 staff members responded, or 57% of staff

Statement:

RespondedOften orAlmost

Always

RespondedSometimes,Rarely, or

NeverUSE

I use minor referral forms for inappropriate behaviors 42% 58%

I use major referral forms for inappropriate behaviors. 47% 53%

I use minor and major referral forms according to the behavior matrixfound in the staff handbook.

89% 11%

INTERVENTION

I call an interventionist when a child is a disruption or causing asafety issue.

74% 26%

I call an interventionist prior to writing a major referral. 41% 59%

I call an interventionist when behaviors fit the criteria found on the

behavior matrix located in the staff handbook.

58% 42%

DATA

I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors withmy team.

37% 63%

I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors withinterventionists.

53% 47%

I use minor/major referral data to discuss students behaviors withappropriate individuals outside of my team (guidance counselor,specials teachers, etc.)

63% 37%

I contact PBIS team members to look at data on problem students forprior years.

16% 84%

My team uses referral data to prioritize students before suggestingbehavior intervention meetings and plans.

32% 68%

Communication

I call parents when a child receives a minor referral form. 16% 84%

I use another means to contact parents in addition to sending homereferral sheets.

42% 58%

I follow up with the return of parent signed referral forms. 68% 32%

I implement consequences after writing minor referrals. 89% 11%

I re-teach the lesson plans for expectations when the data shows it isnecessary.

68% 32%

I re-teach the lesson plans for expectations for the common areas

when the data shows it is necessary.

68% 32%

Attitudes

I feel PBIS referrals and interventions have a positive effect ondecreasing the number of problem behaviors.

68% 32%

I feel PBIS referrals and interventions are an effective way todocument problem behaviors

74% 26%

23


24/28

APPENDIX I: STUDENT INFORMATION: INFINITE CAMPUS & HEART SYSTEM

SCREENSHOTS

24


25/28

APPENDIX J: Student Data

Infinite Campus - Student Numbers

3rd Grade Population

Total (As of Oct. 15,2012)

Did Not Attend

District 2009-2010

or TJ from 2010-Oct. 15, 2012

Not promoted to

next grade between2010-2012

Attended District

2009-2010 and TJ

from 2010-Oct. 15,2012

100 Students 16 Students 2 Students 82 Students

Total Referrals For 82 Students by YearSchool Year Total Referrals*

2009-2010 193

2010-2011 169

2011-2012 98

Aug. 2012-Oct. 15, 2012 12

Heart Data System *Total Referrals for the 82 Students who meet attendance criteria above

25


26/28

APPENDIX K: REFERRALS DATA FOR HABITUAL OFFENDERS

26


27/28

Student % Decrease in Referrals

(K+1st)-(2nd+3rd)/Total

A 97%

B 66%

C 79%

D 45%

E 81%

F 63%

G 84%

H 74%I 55%

J 19%

K 47%

L 78%

M 71%

N 33%

27


28/28

28

pbis evaluation for edtech 505

Documents