This is a presentation of the IL PBIS Network. All rights reserved. Universal Screening for Behavior Jessica Swain-Bradway, IL PBIS Network With contributions

This is a presentation of the IL PBIS Network. All rights reserved.

Universal Screening for Behavior

Jessica Swain-Bradway, IL PBIS Network With contributions from :

Jennifer Rose, Illinois PBIS NetworkLynn Owens, Schaumburg CCSD 54

Agenda

What is Universal Screening?Rationale for identifying children through

universal screening for behavior Readiness checklistIllinois PBIS Network screening modelA review of several screenersExemplar discussion

Objectives

Briefly define Universal Screening to a co-workerBe able to explain the rationale for including

universal screening in your multi-tiered behavioral initiative: Benefits Concerns

Briefly describe a district example including outcomes

Identify a resource for more information on universal screening

Universal Screening Defined

“Universal screening is the systematic assessment of all children within a given class, grade, school building, or school district, on academic and/or social-emotional indicators that the school personnel and community have agreed are important.”

• Source: Ikeda, Neessen, & Witt, 2009

Purpose of Universal Screening for Behavior

Integral to the Response to Intervention (RtI) model

Set the stage for prevention Emphasis on prevention versus intervention

Use an evidence-based instrument to identify: Risk factors for emotional/behavioral

difficulties Social-emotional strengths and needs

Where are we? 2014!

We assert that MTSS is preventative A model of “reaction”:

Kids have problems, we react. This is SLOW. This means= kids fail / have problems / hate school /

disengage parents / teachers are stressed / etc. The louder the problem, the more quickly we

react. The ISSUE: all problems aren’t “loud”, if we can

“hear” it, it is already gaining momentum!

Rationale: Prevalence Rates• How prevalent are emotional disorders among

school-age children and youth?

Study Citation% of sample

with any impairment

% of sample with serious impairment

Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental

Disorders (MECA)

Shaffer et al., 1996(1,285 children

ages 9-17)

21% 5%

Great Smoky Mountains Study of

Youth

Burns et al., 1995(1,015 children ages 9, 11

and 13)

20% 11%

National Health & Nutrition Examination

Survey (NHANES)

Merikangas et al., 2010(3,042 children ages 8-

15)

13% 11%

Rationale: Student BenefitsA ‘window of opportunity’ ranging between

2-4 years when prevention is critical (Costello, et al, 1996)

U.S. Department of Education:“…compelling research sponsored by OSEP on emotional and behavioral difficulties indicating that children at risk for these difficulties could also be identified through universal screening and more significant disabilities prevented through classroom-based approaches involving positive discipline and classroom management.”

Rationale: Student Benefits

Universal screening for behavior is more effective than reliance on office discipline referrals (ODRs) for identifying students with risk factors for internalizing (e.g., depression, overly shy, withdrawn, anxiety) behaviors ODRs are typically measures of non-compliant, acting-

out behaviors Teachers tend to under-refer internalizers

• Sources: Walker, Cheney, Stage, & Blum, 2005; Walker et al., 2010

Rationale: Student BenefitsFlexibility of the brain:

Use positive learning experiences to: • Reshape neurological pathways • Build positive, adaptive behaviors (versus

maladaptive) (Weinberger, et al., 2005)

The sooner we see behaviors predictive of

increased risk, the sooner we can prevent problem

behaviors.

• “Untreated emotional problems have the potential to create barriers to learning that interfere with the mission of schools to educate all children.” (Adelman & Taylor, 2002)

• Youth who are the victims of bullying and who lack adequate peer supports are vulnerable to mood and anxiety disorders (Deater-Deckard, 2001; Hawker & Boulton, 2000)

• “Depressive disorders are consistently the most prevalent disorders among adolescent suicide victims (Gould, Greenberg, Velting, & Shaffer, 2003)

.

• “Without early intervention, children who routinely engage in aggressive, coercive actions, are likely to develop more serious anti-social patterns of behaviors that are resistant to intervention.” (Walker, Ramsey, & Gresham, 2004)

Rationale: Risks of Delaying ID

The longer children go without intervention, the

more negative their behaviors can be for

themselves and others.

Process Time

What are the risks of delaying identification and intervention?

What are the benefits to speeding up identification and intervention?

Tier 1/Universal School-Wide Assessment

School-Wide Prevention Systems

SIMEO Tools: HSC-T, SD-T, EI-T

Check-in Check-out (CICO)

Individualized Check-in Check-out (CICO), Groups, & Mentoring

Brief Functional Behavior Assessment/Behavior Intervention Plan (FBA/BIP)

Complex or Multiple-domain FBA/BIP

Wraparound/RENEW

ODRs, Attendance, Tardies, Grades, DIBELS, etc.

Daily Progress Report (DPR) (Behavior and Academic Goals)

Competing Behavior Pathway, Functional Assessment Interview, Scatter Plots, etc.

Social/Academic Instructional Groups (SAIG)

Multi-Tiered Systems of Support

Illinois PBIS Network, Revised April 2012Adapted from T. Scott, 2004

Tier 2/Secondary

Tier 3/Tertiary

Inte

rven

tio

nAssessm

en

t

We want to identify BEFORE big issues

interfere with school: Externalizers, Internalizers

Examples of Externalizing Behaviors:

• Physical aggression• Verbal aggression

(Arguing, threats, name calling, etc.)

• Being out of seat• Not complying with

teacher instructions or directives

Source: Walker and Severson, 1992

Examples of Internalizing Behaviors:

• Withdrawn: Not talking with other

children Has very few, or no

friends • Extreme shyness• Timid and/or unassertive• Avoiding or withdrawing

from social situations• Not standing up for one’s

self

Source: Walker and Severson, 1992

Illinois Universal Screening Model

Teachers Rank Order then Select Top 3 Students

on Each Dimension (Externalizing &

Internalizing)

Teachers Rate Top 3 Students in Each Dimension (Externalizing & Internalizing) using either SSBD,

BASC-2/BESS, or other evidence-based instrument

Gate 1

Gate 2

Pass Gate 1

Pass Gate 2Tier 2

Intervention.

(Multiple Gating Procedure Adapted from Walker & Severson, 1992)


‘Multi-gate’ process for implementing universal screening for behavior Efficient:

• Takes approximately one hour, maximum, per classroom to complete process

• Less expensive and more timely than special education referral process

Fair:• All students receive consideration for additional supports

(gate one)• Reduces bias by using evidence-based instrument containing

consistent, criteria to identify students (gate two)

Gate1: Teacher ranking formTeacher Rank Ordering for Universal Behavioral Screening: Externalizers

• Property destruction (e.g., damaging books, desks, other school property) • Repeatedly quarrels with peers/adults • Coercion of others (e.g., bullying behaviors includes physical actions and verbal threats) • Regularly does not follow school/classroom rules • Consistent refusal to follow teacher’s directions • Frequently blurts out/speaks in class without permission • Often moves around the classroom/hallways without permission • Spreads rumors with the intention to harm others • Stealing

Externalizers: Students regularly displaying at least ONE of the listed behaviors

Externalizers: Top three students regularly displaying at least ONE of the listed behaviors

ID # Race/ethnicity

STEP ONE STEP TWO

Gate 1: Teacher ranking formTeacher Rank Ordering for Universal Behavioral Screening: Internalizers

• Anxious, nervous (e.g., nailbiting, easily startled) • Introverted (e.g., often seen alone) • Rarely/doesn’t speaks to peers • Overly sensitive (e.g., cries easily, has difficulty standing up to others) • Bullied by other students

Adapted from Walker and Severson, 1992

Internalizers: Students regularly displaying at least ONE of the listed behaviors

Internalizers: Top three students Regularly displaying at least ONE Of the listed behaviors

ID# Race/ethnicity

STEP ONE STEP TWO

Gate 2: Examples of Screening Measures

Screener Pros ConsSystematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD; Walker & Severson, 1990)http://store.cambiumlearning.com

• Well-validated (Endorsed in 1990 by the Program Effectiveness Panel of the U.S. Department of Education)

• Efficient (Screening process can be completed within 45 minutes to 1 hour)

• Most effective instrument for identifying internalizers (Lane et al., 2009)

• Meets AERA/APA instrument selection criteria• Inexpensive (Manual= $ 134.49; includes

reproducible screening forms)

• Normed for grades 1-6 • Dated norms (normed in 1990)• Normative sample skewed to

western U.S. region

BASC-2/BESS (Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007)http://www.pearsonassessments.com

• Measures behaviors associated with internalizing and externalizing problem behaviors and academic competence

• Meets AERA/APA instrument selection criteria• Incorporates three validity measures to rule

out response bias• Utilizes large (N= 12,350 children & youth),

nationally-representative sample• Web-based screening capacity available via

AIMSewb

• Can be expensive for districts/schools that don’t have access to a scantron machine

• $26.25 for 25 hand-scored protocols• Online access via AIMSweb:

Additional $1.00 per student for subscribers and $4.00 per student for non-subscribers)

• Hand-scoring is time-consuming and reduces access to validity measures

• Computer software is expensive ($620)


Other relevant student information for students being screened: Student IDs Birthdate Race/ethnicity Special education/Section 504 status Grade level


Parents of nominated students, who meet the screening criteria, are contacted in writing to request permission for their child’s participation in a simple, secondary intervention (e.g., check-in/check-out)

Coordinator inform teachers of students who are participating in interventions

Teachers receive progress monitoring data

Illinois Universal Screening Model: Outcomes

Key outcomes from four years of implementation in Illinois schools: On average within PBIS schools less than 10%

of students, enrolled in grades screened, met criteria for needing additional supports

Over time, fewer students were identified via universal screening process

*Enrollment based on ISBE 2010 Fall Housing Report for grades screened

Externalizers Internalizers Total0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

5.6%

3.8%

9.4%

5.1%3.8%

8.9%

5.8%

3.8%

9.6%

3.5%

2.7%

6.3%

IL-PBIS Network Universal Screening Results: 2007-11

2007-08: N=18 schools 2008-09: N=30 schools2009-10: N=45 schools 2010-11: N=61 schools

% o

f stu

dent

s ide

ntifie

d in

gra

des s

cree

ned

Illinois Universal Screening Model: Outcomes

Universal Screening Resources:

Illinois PBIS Network: Search for “Universal Screening” http://

www.pbisillinois.org/trainings/universalscreening/presentations

Florida PBIS: http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu/ National PBIS Technical Assistance Center: www

.PBIS.orgRTI Action Network:

http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/research/universal-screening-within-a-rti-model

http://www.pbisillinois.org/trainings/universalscreening/presentations




http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu/



http://www.pbis.org/





Sample of SSBD Critical Events Form

Sample of SSBD CFI Form

Sample of BASC-2/BESS Form

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)

Sample SSIS Social Skills form

Sample SSIS Problem Behaviors form

Sample SSIS Academic Competence form

Systems Readiness for Screening

Universal screening readiness

Build a foundation Secure district and building-level administrative support for

universal screening Establish universal screening committee consisting of district and

building-level administrators, student support personnel, teachers, family and community representatives and assign roles

Clarify goals Identify purpose of universal screening (e.g., mental health, social

skills assessment) Determine desired outcomes


Identify resources and logistics Identify resources for supporting students identified via screening

(in-school and community-based) Create a timeline for executing screening process including

frequency of screening (e.g., once, or multiple times per year?) Develop budget for materials, staff, etc. Create administration materials (e.g., power point to share process

with staff, parents and community members, consent forms, teacher checklists)

Schedule dates for screening(s) and meetings to share school-wide results


Create a quick and easy for teachers, AND,Select an evidence-based screening

instrument for advanced screening (gate 2)Use The Standards for Educational and

Psychological Testing, or resources from other professional organization resources (e.g., National Association for School Psychologists; NASP), as guidelines for selecting an appropriate screener


Data Develop data collection and progress

monitoring systemDetermine systematic process for using results

to inform interventionsPlan for sharing screening and progress

monitoring results with staff and families

Illinois Example: Universal Screening at theElementary and Jr. High

Created by:Lynn Owens, MSW, MEd

Schaumburg CCSD 54District External Coach

District 54 Demographics 21 Elementary Buildings (K-6) 5 Jr. High Buildings (7-8) 1 Elementary & Jr. High Building (K-8) District Enrollment: 14, 318

Low Income: 18% IEP: 11.3% Bi-Lingual: 17.5% Ethnicity:

• White: 46.3%• African American: 6.5%• Hispanic: 22.5%• Asian: 20.0%• American Indian: 0.3%• Multi-Racial: 3.3%

District 54PBIS Implementation

26 Elementary and Jr. High Buildings Implementing all 3 Tiers of PBIS

Cohort model: Pull in cohorts of schools implementing / training

• Tiers• Specific components (universal screening, restorative justice, for

example)

Universal Screening:2010-13

2010-11 4 Buildings from Cohort 1 participated

• 2 Elementary (Kindergarten-Sixth Grade)• 2 Jr. High (Seventh-Eighth Grade)

2011-12 8 Buildings from Cohort 1 and 2 participated

• 4 Elementary (Kindergarten-Sixth Grade)• 4 Jr. High (Seventh-Eighth Grade)

2012-13 16 Buildings from Cohort 1-4 participated

• 11 Elementary• 5 Jr. High Buildings

Preparing for Screening: Year 1-Pilot

Screening Window: October – November 2010 District Admin and External Coach Responsibilities (Sept-Oct)

External Coaches attended Universal Screening Facilitator training by Jen Rose, IL PBIS Network

Tier 2 Coaches identified as Screening Facilitators Presented Universal Screening to Superintendent, Board Cabinet, District

Leadership Team, and Building Administrators Developed Parent Information/Consent Letter Prepared protocols for Facilitators

Identify and Train Screening Facilitators (Oct) Cohort 1 buildings for Pilot

• Implementing PBIS at least 2 years• CICO implemented with fidelity for 1 full year

Elementary Facilitator Training: • Time Lines for the year• SSBD Facilitator Training

Jr. High Facilitator Training:• Time Lines for the year• BASC-2/BESS Facilitator Training

Preparing for Screening Year 1-Pilot (con’t)

Facilitator Responsibilities (Oct-December) Review and follow timeline

• Facilitator timeline• Teacher timeline

CICO was up and running since mid-September• Increase in students participating as result of screener• Changes to support internalizing students identified via screener

– CICO Parent letter Scheduled screening dates with administrator

• 20-30 min. overview • 1.5 hr. administration • Wednesday Staff Development (Elementary & Jr. High)• Grade Level Meeting (Jr. High)

Presented screening overview and administration with External Coach• 1 building presented without External Coach

Prepared screening protocols for scoring• SSBD: Facilitators scored using excel spread sheet• BASC-2: IL PBIS personnel scored

Reviewed results with administrator and staff

Screening: Year 2

Screening Window: October – November 2011 District Admin and External Coach Responsibilities (Aug-Sept)

Notified Tier 2 Coaches about Screening Facilitator training Provided Facilitator training with IL PBIS Network Building Administrators informed of screening window Modified Parent Information/Consent Letter

• Informed consent• Screener part of support students receive at Tier 2

Identify and Train Screening Facilitators (Sept) Cohort 1 and 2 buildings conduct screening

• Implementing PBIS at least 2 years• CICO implemented with fidelity for 1 full year

Elementary Facilitator Training: • Time Lines• SSBD Facilitator Training

Jr. High Facilitator Training:• Time Lines • BASC-2/BESS Facilitator Training

Screening: Year 2 (con’t)

Facilitator Responsibilities (Sept-December) Review and follow timeline

• Facilitator and Teacher timeline• “Jump-start” Time Line

CICO up and running since mid-September• Increase in students participating as result of screener• Changes to support internalizing students identified via screener

– CICO Parent letter– DPR cards

Scheduled screening dates with administrator• 20-30 min. overview • 1-1.5 hr. administration

Presented overview and screening administration with External Coach to staff• 5 buildings presented without assistance from External Coach

Prepared screening protocols for use for staff and scoring• SSBD: Facilitators copied/labeled protocols and scored on-site• BASC-2: Facilitators labeled protocols and PBIS scored off-site

Reviewed results with administrator and staff

Universal Screening: Parent Letter

October 2011 Dear Parent/Guardian, As you know, ___________ school has been implementing Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) which is a proactive approach to establishing the behavioral supports and social culture needed for all students in a school to achieve social, emotional, and academic success.

Our school was selected to be a replication site by the Illinois PBIS organization, which provides us with training and support as we work to continually improve ways to support our children and families. As part of being a replication site this year, we will be utilizing an assessment tool for teachers that will help identify students who may be having minor challenges in school, such as following rules and expectations, or making friends. Our goal in using this teacher assessment tool is to identify which children may need some assistance before minor challenges become big problems.

Over the next few weeks, your child’s classroom teacher will review the class roster and identify students who currently may be having problems or difficulties in school. We will contact the parents of children who have been selected by their classroom teacher to participate in a simple intervention focused on supporting the child in a proactive and positive manner.

Please feel free to contact me at ________ if you have any questions.

Sincerely,Principal

Universal ScreeningElementary Facilitator “JumpStart” List

Universal Screener To Do Checklist (ELEMENTARY)Schedule Date with Administrator, External Coach, & PBIS TAC

__Staff Overview (following coordinator meeting with External Coach & PBIS TAC- 20 to 30 min during STAFF DEVELOPMENT__Screening Administration (Schedule no sooner than 2 weeks after Overview- 1 to 1.5 hours during STAFF DEVELOPMENT__Review and Mail Parent Letter (at least 2 weeks prior to screening date)

Prep for Overview___Copy Teacher timeline to be given at/during overview (1 per teacher)___Reserve meeting place with projector to view power point___Review power point

Prep for Screening Administration___Reserve meeting place with projector and place for teachers to complete protocol___Find place to keep protocols locked-up until input into excel spread sheet (keep protocols locked up until end of school year then shred) ___Extra Pens or Pencils (just in-case some teachers forget)___Prep protocols (Identifying information Label is attached to white copy to be sent by External Coach week of October 11)__Copy 3 of each per teacher (Green for Internalizers and Blue for Externalizers). ___Review power point

**CONTACT EXTERNAL COACH WITH ANY QUESTIONS! EXTERNAL COACH AND/OR PBIS TAC NEED TO BE PRESENT DURING ADMINISTRATION!!***

Screening Tools Selected

Elementary: Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD)

Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD; Walker and Severson, 1992) Used in Elementary Schools (Grades 1-6)

• Universal screening (similar to annual vision/hearing screenings)• Identifies behaviors that may impede academic and social functioning

Cost Effective • Used in multiple grades and buildings• Copying and labeling protocols on-site

Score protocols on-site• Scored using excel spreadsheet• No special skills required • Student information remains locked in building• Students receive support with-in 2 weeks of administration

SSBD: Background Information

The SSBD is NOT recommended as a diagnostic tool for eligibility for special education services

The SSBD screening WILL NOT replace the current procedures for special education evaluation or any other identification for support process

IL-PBIS Network, Sept 2010

SSBD: Staff Overview

Overview 1st-6th Staff attend a 20min presentation that includes rationale for screening

• District Support• Parent Letter

Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors Teacher timeline and ranking form

• Teachers given timeline for preparation and completion of screener• Teachers provided ranking forms for Internalizers and Externalizers with descriptors• Given 2 weeks to identify Top 10 Internalizers and Top 10 Externalizers from class roster

Review Administration• Supplies

– Pen/Pencil– Student roster with identifying information (DOB, Race/Ethnicity, ID, etc.)– Ranking forms with Top 3 Internalizers and Externalizers identified

• Expectations– Limit talking during administration to protect student information– Complete all forms (incomplete forms returned)– Come prepared – Ask questions prior to ensure the students who need support get it

SSBD: Administration

Administration Two weeks prior(following overview)

• Parent Letter mailed home • Staff attend overview• Facilitators prepare protocols

One week prior • Staff sent reminder email (no less than 2 days prior)• Facilitators and External Coaches make final arrangements

Day of Administration• Present brief overview of process• Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors• Review expectations • Facilitators collect and check forms for accuracy and completion• Facilitators lock completed forms in designated area until scoring date

SSBD Screening Results-ElementaryYear 1 (2 Schools)

Total Number of Students screened: 986 Total Number of Students identified: 89

• Total Number of Externalizers: 41• Total Number of Internalizers: 48

Year 2 (4 Schools) Total Number of Students screened: 1,475 Total Number of Students identified: 115


SSBD Screening Results-Elementary

Internalizers Externalizers Total

Year 1 0.0487 0.0416 0.0903

Year 2 0.0508 0.0271 0.0779

0.50%1.50%2.50%3.50%4.50%5.50%6.50%7.50%8.50%9.50%

Stud

ents

Iden

tified

as

% o

f Enr

ollm

ent

Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS): Jr. High School

Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS) (Kamphaus & Reynolds, 2007) (also called BASC-2) Used in Elementary and Jr. High Schools (Grades Pre K-8)

• Universal screening (similar to annual vision/hearing screenings)• Identifies eternalizing and internalizing behavioral strengths and

weaknesses Cost Effective

• Used in multiple grades and buildings• Only used for Jr. High buildings• Protocols provided by IL-PBIS Network years 1 and 2

Protocols Scored off-site• Scantron machine scores protocols • Student information remains locked in building until hand delivered to TAC

or PBIS office• Students receive support with-in 2-4 weeks of administration

BASC-2/BESS

• The BASC-2/BESS is NOT recommended as a diagnostic tool for eligibility for special education services

• The BASC-2/BESS screening WILL NOT replace the current procedures for special education evaluation or any other identification for support process


BASC-2/BESS

The BASC-2/BESS uses T-scores to communicate results relative to the average (mean=50)

Identifiers and percentile ranks are provided for ease of interpretation Normal risk level: T-score range 10-60 Elevated risk level: T-score range 61-70 Extremely Elevated risk level: T-score range ≥ 71


BASC-2/BESS: Staff Overview

Overview Jr. High Teaching Staff attend a 20min presentation that includes rationale for screening

• District Support• Parent Letter

Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors Teacher timeline and ranking form

• Teachers given timeline for preparation and completion of screener• Teachers provided ranking forms for Internalizers and Externalizers with descriptors• Given 2 weeks to identify Top 10 Internalizers and Top 10 Externalizers from class roster

Review Administration• Supplies

– #2 Pencil(s)– Student roster with identifying information (DOB, Race/Ethnicity, ID, etc.)– Ranking forms with Top 3 Internalizers and Externalizers identified

• Expectations– Limit talking during administration to protect student information– Complete all forms (incomplete forms returned)– Come prepared – Ask questions prior to ensure the students who need support get it

BASC-2/BESS: Administration

Administration Two weeks prior(following overview)

• Parent Letter mailed home • Staff attend overview• Facilitators label protocols• Facilitators attend grade level team meetings to provide support

One week prior • Staff sent reminder email (no less than 2 days prior)• Facilitators and External Coaches make final arrangements

Day of Administration• Present brief overview of process• Review externalizing and internalizing behaviors• Review expectations • Facilitators collect and check forms for accuracy and completion• Facilitators lock completed forms in designated area until picked up for scoring• External coaches make arrangements to deliver protocols to PBIS TAC

BASC-2/BESS Screening Data-Jr. High

Year 1 (2 Schools) Total Number of Students screened: 1,256 Total Number of Students identified: 106

• Total Number of Externalizers: 69 • Total Number of Internalizers: 37

Year 2 (4 Schools) Total Number of Students screened: 2, 441 Total Number of Students identified: 228


BASC-2/BESS Screening Data-Jr. High

Internalizers Externalizers Total

Year 1 0.0295 0.0549 0.0844

Year 2 0.025 0.0684 0.0934

0.50%

1.50%

2.50%

3.50%

4.50%

5.50%

6.50%

7.50%

8.50%

9.50%

Stud

ents

Iden

tified

as

% o

f Enr

ollm

ent

SD54 Tier 2 Interventions

CICO• DPR card same for all students• Check-In and Out with same staff member• Parents notified of participation through calls and/or letter

Social Academic Instructional Groups • Pro Social• Problem Solving• Academic

Check & Connect• Used when student may need more than generic check-in• Used when student needs change of check-in station or change of staff

FBA/BIP• Problem solving team identifies need for more support• Utilize SAIG groups to teach skills to support replacement behavior

Universal Screener Roadblocks (Year 1)

Scheduling screening window after start of school year Assessment schedule overlapping with other measures (fidelity for MTSS,

reading assessments, etc.) Staff Development schedule difficult to change Created scheduling conflicts for External Coaches

Delay in students receiving support once identified Building unprepared for increase in students participating in CICO Not enough staff to open new CICO stations More externalizers identified than internalizers

Delay in scoring and identifying students (Jr. High) Staff refusing to “bubble-in” identifying information on scantron Scoring done off-site

Staff support limited due to lack of knowledge about internalizers “I don’t have any students to screen” “Why are we calling out these students when they already have low self-

esteem”

Universal Screener Successes (Year 2)

Scheduling screening window earlier allowed for flexibility with External Coaches to support teams

Facilitators who participated Year 1 had the option conduct Screening Overview and Administration without outside support

Increased staff support due to knowledge and experience from Year1

Universal Screener Successes (Year 2)

In Year 2: Number of Students who were identified as internalizing / at risk for internalizing increased 25%: Elementary buildings Increased by 50%: Jr. High buildings

Year 2: Increased number of students receiving Tier 2 support Did NOT have to wait until they failed or had more

extreme behavioral problems! Truly PREVENTATIVE!

Review: District Readiness

Think Back: Objectives

Be able to explain an overview of Universal Screening to a co-worker

Be able to explain the rationale for including universal screening in your multi-tiered behavioral initiative: Benefits Concerns

Briefly describe a district example including outcomes Identify a resource for more information on universal

screening

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Universal Screening Resources:

Illinois PBIS Network: Search for “Universal Screening” http://

www.pbisillinois.org/trainings/universalscreening/presentations

Florida PBIS: http://flpbs.fmhi.usf.edu/ National PBIS Technical Assistance Center: www.PBIS.

orgRTI Action Network:


[email protected]













mailto:[email protected]

Additional Evidence-Based Screening Instruments

Screener Pros Cons

Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 2001)http://www.sdqinfo.org

• Measures internalizing/externalizing behaviors• Free• Option of completing pencil and paper, or online

version• Can be scored online• Technically sound: Large, representative

normative group

• Perceived length of administration time

• Items skewed toward externalizing behaviors

Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS; Drummond, 1993)

• Measures internalizing/externalizing behaviors• Free• Quick to administer (less than 5 minutes per

student; 15 minutes for entire class, depending upon number of students)

• Easy to understand and interpret score results• Technically-adequate

• Not as accurate as the SSBD regarding identification of internalizers

Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS; Gresham & Elliott, 2008)http://psychcorp.pearsonassessments.com/pai/ca/cahome.htm

• Measures problem behaviors, social and academic competence

• Computer and web-based (AIMSweb) administration and scoring available

• Expensive: Technical manual=$105.60; Rating forms= $43.75 for package of 25 hand-scored forms; scoring software= $270.00; Scanning software= $640

http://www.sdqinfo.org/

http://psychcorp.pearsonassessments.com/pai/ca/cahome.htm

http://psychcorp.pearsonassessments.com/pai/ca/cahome.htm

Documents

This is a presentation of the IL PBIS Network. All rights reserved. Universal Screening for Behavior Jessica Swain-Bradway, IL PBIS Network With contributions