Welcome!
Aligning RtI and PBIS: Potholes and
Potential for an Integrated MTSS
Brian Gaunt, Ph.D.
Inter-Project Coordinator
Florida Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports (FLPBIS)
Florida Problem-Solving and Response to Intervention (FL PS/RtI)
• Ongoing effort in Florida
• Challenges & Benefits to merging RtI and
PBIS
• Why are you bringing these two initiatives
together? (Benefits)
• What stands in your way? (Obstacles)
• Top-down vs. Bottom-up views of implementing MTSS
• What some schools are doing to integrate the two and the challenges they have to overcome.
2
1
+
Florida MTSS Mission
“The collaborative vision of the Florida Problem-Solving/Response to
Intervention (FL PS/RtI) and the Florida Positive Behavior
Support/Response to Intervention for Behavior (FLPBS/RtI:B) Projects
is to:
___________________________________________
_
=
• Enhance the capacity of all Florida school districts to successfully
implement and sustain a multi-tiered system of student supports with
fidelity in every school;
FLORIDA BACKGROUND
AND CONTEXT
• Accelerate and maximize student academic and social-emotional
outcomes through the application of collaborative data-based problem
solving utilized by effective leadership at all levels of the educational
system;
3
• Inform the development, implementation, and ongoing evaluation of an
integrated, aligned, and sustainable system of service delivery that
prepares all students for post-secondary education and/or successful
employment within our global society.”
4
1
Model of Integrated RtI & PBIS:
MTSS Components
MTSS as a Framework
•Without a Framework
What we do to help students
improve their educational
outcomes.
(Student supports and
decision-making)
•With a Framework
What we do to
implement & sustain a
tiered service delivery
model & problem
solving process
(Implementation
supports and decisionmaking)
Continuum of Instruction
& Intervention (Tiers)
Leadership
Data-based ProblemSolving Process
Data Evaluation
Building
Capacity &
Infrastructure
Communication &
Collaboration
6
5
Trends in MTSS Perspectives
Brief Florida History in Ed (post-IDEIA 2004 - RtI)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2004-2008: RtI introduced to state (formally)
2008: Financial crisis in U.S.
2009: ARRA - Race to the Top Funding (Tchr eval and SIG)
2009: Differentiated Accountability
2009: Florida Assessment of Instruction in Reading
2010: FLPBIS and FL PS/RtI Start Formal Collaboration
2010: Revisions to state test - FCAT 2.0
2011: First…and only statewide MTSS conference
2011: New Governor of Florida
2011 to 2013: 4 changes to Education Commissioner
2011: New Bureau Chief for special ed
2011-2013: Implementation of new teacher appraisal systems
2012 to present: Common core implementation
2014: FSA - new state test aligned to Florida Standards.
Like hitting a
wall at top
speed…been
recovering ever
since…
7
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MTSS as (Org Capacity, RtI+PBIS, School Reform)
“Creative funding”, State Visibility, Common Vision/Lang.
Culture & Knowledge for Systems Change/Implementation
Building Capacity for EBPs
District & School Improvement Context;
Comprehensive Data Systems and Problem Solving
Tiered Service Model Use (student to district)
PD Pedagogy - give ‘em fish or teach ’em to fish
Systems Coaching (Teaming) & Performance Feedback
“Add-On” vs. Initiative Alignment and Integration
Merging Classroom Practices for “engagement”
8
2
Facilitators and Barriers to
Integrating RtI and PBIS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Facilitators
Strong state & district visibility/priority
Common language & understanding for MTSS
Proactive/visionary leadership
Shared funding & Grant mgmt
Shared mission/vision
Shared implementation model
Shared evaluation model
Collaborative focus on building system capacity
School Improvement using MTSS
Priority on Tier 1
ESE as ”specially designed instruction”
Integrated data systems
Strong coaching network/capacity
Common problem solving model
Shared knowledge of organizational change
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
New Questions
Barriers
Limited or no state/district visibility or priority
Variability in understanding MTSS/PBIS/RtI
Reactive leadership
Separate funding streams; different grant mgmt
Vague or misaligned vision/mission
Different implementation models
Different evaluation methods/tools
Siloed technical assistance delivery; no capacity build
Competing initiatives
No priority on Tier 1
ESE as a “place” or “category”; MTSS as a “process”
Rigid vs. Fluid district entry/Tech Assist
No/limited coaching capacity
Different data-based decision-making models
Turf and Politics
Leadership turnover (State/District/Bldg)
9
Changes to assessment systems in schools
Are we trying to integrate RtI and PBIS
for the sake of integrating?
What would “integration” look like if we
approached it from an outcome driven
perspective?
Do we need to define what
“integration” is?
10
One Size “way of work”? What if…
•
•
•
•
DEFINING INTEGRATION
Every district is organized differently
Different priorities and readiness
District size and complexity influences entry and capacity
Fluctuations in political climate
• Consider functional degrees of integration to match local
contextual capacity
11
12
3
Defining Integration
Specialization vs. Merger
• Many definitions focus on:
–
–
–
–
–
–
“While homogenization & fusing of components of a
system together to the point that they are no longer
distinctive can be viewed as reflecting the ultimate in
integration, this may not be optimal in an
organization setting because such an extreme
integration eliminates the much needed
differentiated and complimentary skills and expertise
that comes with specialization.”
Coordination of activities or practices,
Coordination of information,
“Material flow”
Alignment of policy
Merging of resources
Interconnectedness of subsystem elements
• Conceptual roots of “integration” in Business:
– Fayol (1949) – Notions of cooperation and coordination.
– Lawrence & Lorsch (1969) “…process of achieving unity of effort among
the various subsystems in the accomplishment of the organization’s task…”p.
34.
Model of “Organizational Integration”
13
• Independent;
• Different goals
or mission
• Distinctive &
specialized
• Unresponsive
• Different
resources,
procedures &
ways of work.
Parallel
• Independent;
• Shared goals or
mission
• Distinctive &
Specialized
• Mostly
unresponsive
• Different
resources,
procedures,&
ways of work
Aligned
• Some
Dependence
• Shared goals &
mission
• Distinctive &
specialized
• Greater
responsiveness
• Some shared
resources,
procedures &
ways of work
14
Calibrating Collaboration
“Integration” as Degrees of Interdependence
Silos
Barki & Pinsonneault, 2005, pg. 166
• What can we learn from innovative schools
about integrating RtI and PBIS practices?
Braided
Merge
• More Dependent
• Shared goals &
mission
• Distinctive &
specialized
• Sufficiently
responsive
• Complementary
• Greater sharing of
resources,
procedures & ways
of work
• Highly Dependent
• Shared goals &
mission
• Little to no
distinctiveness or
specialization
• Highly responsive and
dependent to each
other
• All resources,
procedures & ways of
work are common
15
• Can that information be used to guide district
and regional “integration” efforts? (need-based
PD and TA?)
• What implications exist for state or project level
collaboration?
16
4
Identifying “exemplary practices”
•
•
•
•
•
LEARNING ABOUT SCHOOL EFFORTS
TO INTEGRATE ACADEMICS AND
BEHAVIOR
NOT A RESEARCH STUDY!; part of our TA support
Staff nominations of exemplary RtI and PBIS districts
Districts organized by “size” for comparison and sampling
Seeking all school types and regions; 1st cohort of 8 districts
3 phases:
1. School selection and identification of MTSS practices
2. School observations and staff interviews
3. Development of state “model” site for integrated MTSS
18
17
A*Few*Themes…
Participating*Districts*to*Date
Completed District and School Interviews
• 6 of 8 districts
• Total of 11 schools
• Districts
–
–
–
–
–
St. Lucie School District
Santa Rosa School District
Levy School District
Baker School District
Broward School District
• District size range from:
– 6 to 310 schools
– 4,600+ to 260,000+ students
Completed School Site Visits - 8 schools
1. St. Lucie Schools - (2 nominations)
– K-8 school and Middle School
2. Santa Rosa Schools - (3 nominations)
– Primary School, Middle School, Elem
School
3. Levy Schools (1 nomination)
– Elementary school
4. Baker Schools (2 nominations)
– Elementary school and PK-K Center
19
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
District role/support is critical
Access to and capacity to improve a comprehensive data management system
Strong, resolute vision/mission and priority for MTSS.
Leadership, leadership, leadership…as a “team”
On-site coaching capacity and distributed leadership or systems coaching
PBIS as a foundation for RtI/MTSS academics
Buy-in is not a one-time event and you don’t need 80% to get started
Focus on teacher supports and professional learning
You don’t need 1 team to do everything…but,…
Very important to have a common data-use process (Problem solving approach).
The goal/purpose of MTSS is NOT special education - but differentiated education
Include all of your content experts and give them a voice
Effective teaching practices are useful for both academics and behavior
Build/Implement from the classroom on out and treat as a marathon, not a sprint
20
5
Overview: Opportunities for
Integrated MTSS
• Classroom Level
– Classroom Management Practices + Universal Design for Learning +
Standards-based Lesson Design + PLC Lesson Study
• School level
– Establishing Buy-in for MTSS among staff
– School improvement planning
– Problem solving teaming practices
CLASSROOM-LEVEL
“INTEGRATION” OPPORTUNITIES
• District level
– Building school-level capacity to implement MTSS
– Organizational Problem solving and MTSS implementation
22
21
Integrated MTSS: Classroom
Instruction/Intervention
1
Lesson
Study
Classroom
Climate
Standardsbased
Instruction
UDL +
Differentiated
Instruction
Standards-Driven Instruction
• Standards drive all goal setting across
tiers.
• Instruction is flexible to needs of
population - but aligned to standards
• Curriculum choices based on student
needs and aligned to standards
• Include implicit social skills for
engagement
Unpacking The Standards
The unpacking process allows teachers and administrators
to determine what matters most (i.e. pacing, assessment,
critical focus areas)
•Clarity
•Alignment
•Continuity
•Integration
Santa Rosa: Benett Russell
Elementary
“Intentional Planning”
Described by teacher focus
group when asked about
how they consider student
behavior needs when
planning standards-driven
instructional lessons.
•Baseline
6
Integrated MTSS: Classroom
Instruction/Intervention
Unpacking Steps
Step 1
Select a standard or a set of standards.
Step 2
Circle the verbs and action phrases (skills-Do).
Record.
Step 3
Underline the nouns and noun phrases (knowledge
and understanding-K and U). Record.
Step 4
Determine pre-requisite skills implied within the
standard. Record.
Step 5
Determine instructional implications of the
standard. Record.
Here is where teachers
can reflect on the
“Engagement” or
”academic behaviors”
students need to
participate in activities
and gain the most from
the lessons.
Implications for preteaching social skills or
group process; IEP or
Tiered alignment, etc.
Lesson Study
• Collaborative data-based planning
• Integrated lessons - academic &
behavior.
• Analysis of student engagement
• Lesson evaluation
• Problem solving
• Instructional effectiveness analysis
• Culturally relevant instruction
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Classroom Climate
(SEL/MH/Behavior)
Classroom Management
Behavior Management
Social Skills Instruct.
Character Ed
Trauma Informed Care
Restorative Justice
Problem Solving
Integrated Classroom Supports:
Building Capacity
Leading Team Culture
and Ways of Work
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lesson
Study
3
Classroom
Climate
Standardsbased
Instruction
UDL +
Differentiated
Instruction
Standards-Driven Instruction
• Standards drive all goal setting across
tiers.
• Instruction is flexible to needs of
population - but aligned to standards
• Curriculum choices based on student
needs and aligned to standards
• Include implicit social skills for
engagement
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
UDL +
Diff. Instruction
Flexible presentation
Flexible expression
Differentiated learning supports
Options for engagement
Assistive Technology
“Universal” teaching practices
Merging? Academic and Social Skills Instruction
Check out: Common Core and PBIS
Leadership
Teaming & Data
“System”
Common PS language
Data Storage and Access
Data-use only as good as
effective teaming.
System is more than
computers
Coordinate assessment
options
1
4
Lesson
Study
Standards-based
Instruction
Effective
Teaming
Coaching
Classroom
PBIS
UDL +
Differentiated
Instruction
•
•
•
•
•
Reciprocal
Leadership-Coaching
Leaders as coaches as
leaders.
Distributed Leadership
Peer Coaching
Modeling and
implementing EBPs
Data-driven culture
Evaluation of impacts
•https://www.pbis.org/Common/Cms/files/Forum14_Presentations/E8_PBIS_Gaunt
_Minch_Final.pdf
•
Identifying implicit social skill needs in academic lesson plan design.
Check out: FLPBIS Classroom Coaching
http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu/resources_classroom.cfm
•
Analysis of academic variables influencing social behaviors.
Data Systems
Check out: Lesson Study
Coaching for
Data Literacy Among Staff
http://www.floridarti.usf.edu/resources/newsletters/pk12/2016/pk12newsletter2.pdf
•
Analysis of instructional effectiveness and student engagement
7
School-level MTSS Implementation
SCHOOL-LEVEL
“INTEGRATION” OPPORTUNITIES
Strategies for establishing ”buy-in”
• Leadership setting professional culture - “growth mindset”
• Leaders as coaches - get into the trenches
• Ensure ample staff support and PD options
• Leverage success of PBIS to implement MTSS
• Build on variables directly suited for teacher need
• Provide clear guidance, forms, procedures
• Focus on relationships when talking about data
• Use teacher-friendly language
• Make it relevant to teacher evaluation criteria
• Keep coming back to the data, over and over again; Lead data chats
30
29
MTSS Alignment in School
Improvement
• Florida’s Continuous Improvement Monitoring System (CIMS)
https://www.floridacims.org/downloads
Systems Coaching for RtI and PBIS
• Southport Middle School - St. Lucie
County
• School-based Leadership team
coaching grade level teams & PS
teams.
• Peer-Coaching framework
• Coaching for Coaches
• Phases:
•
•
•
Leadership team;
School teaming & infrastructures;
Staff skills & knowledge capacity
SBLT
Core
Team
Shared
Membership
PBIS
Team
Grade Level
“Collaborative
Teams” (Tier 1
Focus)
School PS Team
(Tier 2 & 3
Focus)
PS Teams
(Teachers;
Tier 2 Focus)
8
Aligning PBIS and RtI
“Reflective v. Deflective” Teams
• Southport Middle • Coaching Teams for Data-based decision-making.
• “whole is greater than sum of parts”
• Need for:
•
•
•
•
Transparency and openness to data (Growth Mindset)
Communication & process for structured problem solving
Norms, roles, agendas, and procedures
Team culture that promote collaboration over competitiveness
–
Deflective vs. Reflective.
• Hobbs Middle School - Santa Rosa County
•
PBIS Implementation as Foundation for MTSS buy-in and staff
involvement.
• Gateway High School - Osceola County
•
School improvement provides overarching structure for organizing RtI and
PBIS.
• Bennett Russel Elementary - Santa Rosa County
•
•
Implementing RtI from the “inside - out”
PBIS necessary foundation for making standards-based instruction a priority.
• Staff manuals - specific to grade and content area; simplify “MTSS” for
teachers.
Team Alignment for Problem Solving
Integrated Problem Solving
• Bronson Elementary - Levy County, FL
• Baker Pk-K Center - Baker County, FL
• Westside Elementary - Baker County, FL
• Student-focused Problem Solving
• 4 step process
• Guiding Tools for Instructional Problem
Solving
• http://www.florida-rti.org/gtips/index.html
9
Blended District Teaming
DISTRICT-LEVEL
“INTEGRATION” OPPORTUNITIES
• Hendry County, FL
• Small-Rural District
• Two towns - total of 10
schools
• Reduce OSS Rates federal & state concern
• Priority on Secondary
Schools
District
Leadership
Team
District MTSS
Coordinator
District OSS
Task Force
Reforming District
Code of Conduct
and Discipline Matrix
PBIS TA &
RtI TA
School Equity
Training
Problem Solving to
analyze sources of
inequity:
Secondary
School ELA and
Math Training
Academic focus
includes behavioral
engagement in
lesson planning
37
District level - Merging/Blending Supports for
District Readiness & Building Capacity
• DAPPS - Florida
•
http://www.pbis.org/common/cms/files/Forum12/A9_Kincaid_PeshakGeorge.pdf
• Self-Assessment of MTSS - Florida MTSS/PBIS
•
•
http://www.floridarti.usf.edu/resources/program_evaluation/sam/sam_ta_manual2016.pdf
http://www.floridarti.usf.edu/resources/program_evaluation/sam/sam.pdf
• District Capacity Assessment (MTSS) - (Michigan)
•
https://miblsi.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Evaluation/Capacity/DCA%206.2%20%20Final%20Print%207.30.15%20MI%
20Insert.pdf
• MTSS District Systems Self assessment (Colorado)
•
https://www.cde.state.co.us/mtss/dssa
(FL) DAPPS: 5 Phases of District Consultation
• Phase 1: District application, readiness and
preparation for planning.
• Phase 2: District analysis of need - detailed
process starting with academic and behavior
student data.
• Phase 3: District Planning
• Phase 4: District Plan implementation coordination with outside agency assistance
• Phase 5: Evaluation and Continuous
Improvement
Baker County - Uses DAPPS
Process with co-faciltiation by
both RtI and PBIS project
representatives.
Uses DAPPS to identify gaps
in district supports to schools
and develop plans to improve
those supports.
E.g., PBIS Boosters; PS
training; Coaching capacity;
Updates in Procedures or
communications
10
(FL) DAPPS Phase 2:
Analysis of Need
Organizational*Problem*Solving
• Work with District “where they are at”.
Determination of
Goals in Relation to
Current Conditions
• Analysis of both behavior and academic data
+ infrastructure.
Evaluation of Plan
Impact on
Attainment of Goals
• Hypotheses for lack of outcomes focused on
district organizational factors.
Problems
with
Problem
Implementing
Solve
Barriers
Plan are
to
Identified
• Phase ends with District Team consensus
about organizational changes needed to
address student outcome concern.
Development,
implementation,
and evaluation of
a district
“strategic plan”
Assessment of
Relevant Variables
to Reaching Goals
Development of
“Strategic Plan”
Plan Implementation
Engage in Org.
Problem
Solving
(SGP&PS)
Problem
Barriers
Solve Barriers
Removed:
Plan
Reestablished
42
In*Closing…
Please*Follow*Us*on*Social*Media
• Potential benefits out-way obstacles to integrating RtI/PBIS
• Who said it was “easy”?
– This is a marathon; an evolving organizational change process
• Don’t treat MTSS as a “thing”, but as a framework
– http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu/
– To organize all existing practices and unify them toward student outcome evaluation.
– Email: [email protected]
• Don’t get in the way of innovation, promote it…and scale-up what works.
– Also don’t make policy decisions based on a few “bad” schools.
– Facebook: flpbis
• Prepare for future generations of educators and families;
– Establish comprehensive professional learning systems driven by need/data
– Twitter: @flpbis
• Make systems change relevant for parents, teachers, and students as your
primary stakeholders.
Brian Gaunt
[email protected]
– Get rid of jargon and acronyms; focus on classrooms and differentiated service delivery
44
43
11