Koontz Executive Summary

7/28/2019 Koontz Executive Summary

1/16

A Review of the Tier Two

Behavior Support Program at

Highland Springs Elementary

Check-in / Check-out

Executive Summary by Joe Koont

Virginia Commonwealth Universit


2/16

Table of Contents

1. Background and Context.....p. 3

2. Evaluation Design.....p. 5

3. Findings.....p. 8

4. Implications and Recommendations.....p. 11

5. Conclusion and References.....p.16


3/16

! From 2008 - 2010, Highland SpringsElementary failed to earn Virginia Department

of Education (VDOE) academic accreditation.

Schools that failed to earn state accreditation

were required to implement a specific school

improvement plan model. There were many

academic improvement plans, as well as plans

to reduce discipline. Disruptive behaviors

lower overall student achievement because

they impede the learning of all students and

monopolize a significant portion of teachers

and administrators time. (Anderson, 2009)

! In 2009, Highland Springs Elementaryimplemented a school-wide discipline

program. This program is based on a system

developed by VDOEs Training and Technical

Assistance Center (TTAC). This school-wide

program is designed to create a universal set

of expectations and consequences for

students behavior. In September 2010,

Highland Springs Elementary implemented

phase II of TTACs program. This second

phase consisted of a positive behavior support

system for students who needed individualized

help beyond the school-wide discipline plan.

! Positive behavior support is a proactiveway of dealing with student behavior.

Traditional methods of discipline, such as

suspension, time outs, and loss of privileges

are reactive. Positive behavior support is

intended to reduce the exclusionary practices

of traditional discipline in favor of proactive

behavior management. (Luiselli, Putnam,

Handler, & Feinberg, 2005)

! Highland Springs Elementary realizedthat student behavior was taking up a large

portion of teachers and administrators time.

By reducing discipline, Highland Springs

Elementary hopes to increase the time

students are on task and learning. Their

school-wide discipline program and the CICO

portion of that program are part of the larger

school improvement plan aimed at raising

overall student achievement. Highland

Springs Elementary is starting the third year of

the CICO program and is ready to evaluate the

program to determine if the time and

resources invested are helping toward their

goal of increased student achievement.

Background and Context


4/16

!! The ultimate goal of CICO is to prevent disruptive behavior in students who need supportbeyond the effective school-wide discipline program. The program is designed for students to

check-in with an adult in the morning, carry an individualized behavior plan throughout the day, and

check-out with the same adult at the end of the day. The check-in is intended to be a positive start

to the day. The adult conferences with the student and together they talk about the expectations for

the day and set behavior goals. The student then takes a behavior chart with him or her that

teachers use to record

their behavior at

different intervals

throughout the day. The

intervals are designed to

be short time periods

with specific behavior

expectations. These

behavior expectations

are written in simple

terms with a rating scale

that has only three

indicators for the

teacher to circle or

mark. The individualized behavior charts are designed to be easy for the student to understand

and the teacher to document. At the end of the day, the students again conference with the same

adult and they chart their individual progress toward goals they set with their adult mentor. The

effective school-wide discipline program is beneficial for the majority of students who attend

Highland Springs Elementary. For those students who need more personalized attention, the CICO

system helps minimize their negative behavior.


5/16

Evaluation Design

! When this study was first conceptualized,it was originally a quantitative study looking at

the effectiveness of the CICO program in terms

of the discipline data such as office referrals and

suspensions. After an initial conversation with

the client, it was clear that this evaluation would

be much more qualitative in nature. The client

has a clear understanding of the quantitativedata. She knows that this program is effective

in reducing the number of office referrals and

suspensions. She was more interested in the

perceptions of the program and the efficiency of

the daily process. For this reason, the

evaluation became a responsive evaluation

using a mixed method approach. The

evaluation used a mix of interviews, focus

groups, and surveys to gather information from

various focus groups. In between each data

collection cycle, the client was consulted for

understanding and clarification. The flow chart

on the following page shows the order in which

the evaluation occurred. A linear data collection

model was used to allow the evaluator to gainnew understanding before the next data

collection cycle.

Interviews...

allow for the evaluator to get an in-depth

personal perspective from a key stakeholder.

Focus Groups...are important tool for evaluators because

they get multiple perspectives in a single

meeting. They also allow the evaluator to

gather non-verbal observations from cross-

talk and body language.

Surveys...

can reach a wide audience quickly and they

allow the evaluator to quantify the opinions

of stakeholders. The anonymous nature of

surveys also lets stakeholder be honest

without the fear of repercussions.


6/16

Program Evaluation Implementation

!The initial interviews were extremely

helpful in shaping the focus group and survey

process. One of the first discussions centered on

how to survey the students. The principal did not

want to have to get permission from parents for

the evaluator to conduct a focus group. The

evaluator and the client decided that someone

from within the school would administer a brief

survey to the students. This would be someone

the students were comfortable with. A simple,

three-question survey was developed and

administered to the students in the program.

While this was not ideal, it was a compromise ththe client was comfortable with.

! The teacher survey was sent out usingGoogle Docs. The survey provided data that

helped shape the focus group questions. After

discussing the results with the client, it was

decided to add additional questions about the Ti

One, school-wide behavior support program. Th

research indicated that having a strong Tier One

program was important for the success of a Tier

Two program. The evaluator wanted to make

sure there was some data collected about the Ti

One program.


7/16

! There was also a compromise made onthe teacher focus groups. Initially, the plan

called for separate focus groups for teachers

who had students in the CICO program and

teachers who did not have students in the

program. This was initially set up, but weather

cancelations forced the groups to be

rescheduled. With the short notice, the focus

groups had to be a mix of teachers. While this

was not the original plan, it ended up enriching

the discussion. The evaluator relied on the

client to set up the focus groups. If these were

conducted again, it would have been helpful

for the evaluator to have a list of the

participants and to be able to touch base with

them ahead of time. It should also be noted

that during one of the focus groups, the power

went out. There was a window in the room, so

the blinds were opened and the focus group

continued. The participants indicated that they

did not mind and this event did not seem to

interfere with the data collection.

! Given more time, a follow up surveyand focus group would have been helpful.

Time and logistics did not allow for this, but

further questions about the students/teacher

interaction during the day would have been

helpful.


8/16

Findings - Teacher Survey

! 29 teachers responded to the survey. The survey identified the teachers in one of threegroups. The first group is teachers who currently have students in the CICO program. The next

group is teachers who do not currently have students in the CICO program, but have in the past. The

final group of teachers have never had a student in the CICO program. The teachers were asked to

rate the following ten statements on a scale from 1 to 5, where a score of 1 means they Strongly

Disagreeagree and a 5 means they Strongly Agreewith the statement.

1.I have a thorough understanding of the Check-in/Check-out program at my school.

2.The students in this program show improvement in their behavior.

3.The students behavior chart is easy for the

classroom teacher to complete.


teacher to understand.


student to understand.

6.I feel the level of parent communication in the

Check-in/Check-out program is sufficient.

7.I understand the selection criteria for students in

the Check-in/Check-out program.

8.The Check-in/Check-out program is a worthwhile time investment by the school administration.

9.The level of communication between the Check-in/Check-out program administrator and the

classroom teacher is sufficient.

10.The Check-in/Check-out program does not significantly take away from my instructional time.


9/16

2.00$

2.50$

3.00$

3.50$

4.00$

4.50$

5.00$

Q1$

Q2$

Q3$

Q4$

Q5$

Q6$

Q&$

Q8$

Q9$

Q10$

Teachers$With$Current/$

Former$Students$in$

CICO$

Teachers$Without$

Students$in$CICO$

There was a clear difference between the teachers who have or had a students in the CICO program

and those who do not.

Average Rating by Teacher Group

Average Respo se by eacher Groups from C CO Su vey

Teacher

Group Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10

Currently

Using CICO 4.00 3.43 4.07 4.29 4.14 2.93 3.43 4.07 3.36 3.93

Used CICO in

the Past 4.25 3.38 3.63 3.75 3.75 3.13 3.38 3.50 3.25 3.50

No CICO

Experience 3.57 3.71 3.14 3.57 3.43 3.14 3.14 3.86 3.14 3.29


10/16

Findings - Student Survey

! The student survey only had threequestions. The first question asked, What do

you like about the Check-in/Check-out

program? Six of the 13 students indicated they

like the candy or prizes. Three students

indicated they like that the program helped them

control their behavior and the final four students

responded with various other answers. 12 of the

13 students were able to articulate that they

behaved better because they were in the CICO

program.

I"behave"be(er"because"I"am"in"the""

Check3in/Check3out"Program."

Yes$

No$

I'm$not$sure?$

What%do%you%like%about%the%%

CICO%Program?%

Candy/Prizes-

Behavior-Related-

Other-


11/16

! Time and communication wereoverarching themes that surfaced among all

stakeholders in this evaluation. The CICO

program at Highland Springs Elementary is

constrained by the hours in the school day and

the available resources. The program is also

influenced by external factors such as home

environment and parental involvement that are

beyond the control of the school. There are

areas where time and resources could be used

more efficiently and there are channels of

communication that could be more productive.

Implications and Recommendations

Improving Perception

! Highland Springs elementary may wantto consider additional training and information

sessions about the CICO program. As new

teachers come on, they will need to be trained,

even if they do not have students in the

program. You may also want to consider

having teachers sit in on the Effective School-

wide Discipline (ESD) meetings on a rotating

basis. Through the interviews and focus

groups, there seems to be a perception that the

ESD group had substantial input regarding the

CICO program. Having teachers participate in

those meetings would let them feel like they are

a part of the process and it may also help them

understand the limited resources the school

administration is dealing with.

! Parent involvement and communicationwas also a recurring theme. Having the

parents more involved in the CICO program

may also increase the positive perception by

the teachers. The teachers understand that the

students have difficult home lives and they

want the parents to be aware of their

challenging behavior and be part of the

solution, if possible.

! Overall communication transparencymay also help with the perception of the

program. Letting teachers know more about

the selection process and why certain students

get in the program and why certain students

leave the program are important. The teachers

had varied understandings of the program and

misinformation can lead to misunderstanding.

That was clear from the survey results and the

discrepancy between the teachers who had

students in the program and those that did not.


12/16

!The teachers and CICO administrators

all indicated that there was not enough time to

counsel the students as much as they would

like. While it is not realistic to have the

students leave class earlier than they already

do, perhaps there could be an extended check-

out period once per week. The additional time

could be for the whole group or on a rotating

basis with individual students. That extended

block does not necessarily have to be at the

end of the day. It could be during lunch or

some other consistent time. The purpose of

this extended block would not be to go over

that days behavior chart, but instead go over a

weeks worth of data or spend extra time

talking about the students behavior goals for

the future. It will take some planning and

organization by the school administration, but

an extended time period would be a helpful

modification to the CICO program.

The school administration will want to look

closely at the time this program takes for

teachers who have more that one student inthe program. In both focus groups, the

teachers who had more than one student in

CICO indicated that keeping up with multiple

student charts was difficult. One student and

one chart seemed to be manageable. Theschool administration will want to further

investigate alternative reporting methods for

teachers with multiple students in the program.

During the check-out process, there is a limited

amount of time. The students have to catch

the bus or day care van and the CICO

administrator may have an afternoon duty. The

more students

the CICO

administrator

has, the less

individual

attention the

administrator can

provide. The

school administration may want to consider

identifying more staff to serve as CICO

administrators. This could be any staff

member that is not a classroom teacher. By

reducing the number of students in each group,

it creates more time to work with each student

at the end of the day. This would take morecoordination and oversight, but it could have a

positive effect and help alleviate some of the

time constraints at the end of the day.

Time Considerations


13/16

! There are several areas wherecommunication methods and processes can be

improved throughout the CICO program. The

two major areas for potential improvement are

parent communication and staff communication.

There seems to be a misunderstanding and

some inconsistencies regarding parent

communication. The CICO behavior sheet has a

place for a parent signature. One CICO

administrator does not send home the behavior

sheets and the other CICO administrator send

them home once per week. The teachers in the

focus group definitely had a misunderstanding

about how to communicate with parents through

this program. One teacher stated in a focus

group, see Ive been writing notes all yearthinking parents were seeing the notes at least

on Fridays but I guess theyre not. The other

participants also seemed unsure about wheathe

or not their parents saw the CICO behavior

sheets. This could be easily fixed with a clear

policy about the level of parent communication.

The teachers also indicated a desire for the

parents to more involved in the process. There

were several suggestions such as having the

parents come in for an orientation to the

program. When a child enters this program,

they have been a consistent behavior problem

and most likely have been suspended. The

parents should be motivated to come in and

learn about the program if it will keep their child

from being suspended. This could also build

some good will between the school and the

parent because they will see the time and

personal attention that the school is committing

to their son or daughter.

!

Communication

Ive been writing notes

all year thinking

parents were seeing

the notes at least on

Fridays but I guesstheyre not.

-Focus Group Participant


14/16

! There also could be more consistentcommunication between the teacher and the

CICO administrator. The CICO administrator

plays a significant role in the students

education. The teachers indicated a desire for

more consistent communication to provide

some connection to the behavior sheets. The

numbers on the behavior sheets often do not

tell the whole story about the students

behavior. Also, the teacher or the CICO

administrator may find things out about the

students personal life that they would not put

on the chart, but would want the other person

to know. Along those same lines, there needs

to be consistency in the teachers reporting on

the sheet. The numbers on the sheet are the

main way the teacher communicates the

behavior. Having the teachers using the CICO

program participate in a norming exercise may

be helpful. The teachers could be presented

with a scenario and they could discuss how

they would score that on the behavior sheets.

This would help them be more consistent. It

may also be helpful to create a forum for the

teachers in the CICO program. These

teachers all have students who have been

identified as needing Tier Two behavior

intervention. Creating a forum for these

teachers to share ideas and have a support

network may also be helpful. This could be in

the form of a quarterly meeting or some other

digital communication forum.


15/16

! The school administration may want toconsider several modifications to the CICO

program. One of the ideas that surfaced

through the focus groups was having a different

model for the younger students and the older

students. The teachers seemed to think that the

program and the behavior chart was better

suited for the older students. Further studies

will need to be conducted to

see if there is an alternative

behavior sheet or check-out

model for the students in

the younger grades.

! The behavior chartitself can be a trigger for

students. The whole point

of the CICO program is to

reduce negative behavior,

but the chart can be a

trigger at the end of the day

for students who did not get

the score they wanted. For

certain students, the CICO administrators may

want to consider an alternative communication

method to prevent the chart from becoming a

trigger for negative behavior.

! An area where the teachers had a greatdeal of cognitive dissonance revolved around

focusing so much energy on the most disruptive

students and rewarding them for normal

behavior. The teachers also wanted to

recognize the students who consistently exhibit

positive behavior. The teachers stated a desire

to recognize these students more than every

nine weeks. The school administration may

want to involve the teachers in coming up with

ways to recognize the

most well behaved

students as well.

! A finalrecommendation that

bridges the gap

between Tier One and

Tier Two behavior

support is the need for

more classroom

guidance. One

teacher stated, We

need more [guidance

lessons]. With as

many issues and when I look at my class, I have

twenty-six students, more than half of my

students have anger management issues. The

teachers agreed that some type of weekly

guidance lesson that was consistent would be

helpful.

Potential Program Modifications

I think were setting some of

them up for a really harsh

reality check for when they get

out to real world kind of things

and theres not a cop with a

fanny pack full of lollipops,

because theyre expecting toget some type of reward for

doing every little thing.

- Teacher


16/16

References

!The findings from this study will be helpful to the school administrators at Highland

Springs Elementary or to a school administration looking to implement a Tier Two behavior

support program such as Check-in Check-out. This type of program relies on relationships

that are formed between adults and students. Relationships take time and are difficult, if not

impossible to quantify. The current research and the findings from this study both confirm the

need for teachers and staff that are dedicated to students and willing to follow a program.

Even if the program is not implemented with complete consistency and fidelity, the relationship

are what make the difference in childrens lives.

Conclusion

Report Prepared by Joe Koontz Virginia Commonwealth University koontzjd@vcu edu

Anderson, E. (2009). The effectiveness of a proactive school-wide discipline plan on office

! discipline referrals at the elementary school level. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).! Liberty University, Virginia.

Luiselli, J., Putnam, R., Handler, M., & Feinberg, A. (2005). Whole-school positive behavior

! supports: Effects on student discipline problems and academic performance. Educational! Psychology, 25(April-June), 183-198.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

Documents

Koontz Executive Summary