Universal School-wide Screening to Identify Students at Risk of

School Failure

2008 National Forum for Implementers of School-Wide PBS

October 31, 2008

Doug Cheney, Ph.D., Washington PBIS Coordinator,University of Washington, Seattle dcheney@u.washington.edu

Kimberli Breen, Technical Assistance Director,Jenn Rose, XX Position

IL-PBIS Network: kimbreen@rcn.com

Session Agenda

• Background and Context for using Screening

• Some evidence from Washington schools using SSBD

• Application of using SSBD

• Further Ideas for Students at risk

Risk Factors

Individual

Family

Community

Personal Adjustment & Life SuccessSchool

Universal Screening

• Reliable Tools available for past 20 years

• Universal screening offers opportunity for prevention, yet….

• Schools reluctant to conduct behavioral screening:– Fear of “stigmatizing kids”– Concerns regarding efficient/effective

methods of supporting identified youth

Source: Walker, Cheney, Stage, Blum (2005)

Universal (school-wide) behavioral screening :

• Addresses prevalence of emotional/behavior problems among school-age children ranges between 9%-13% (Tier 2 & 3 Students)

• Provides a valid and reliable approach for identifying student behavioral issues– Externalizing and Internalizing students are identified

• Highlights schools as an ideal environment for addressing mental health-related issues– “Less stigmatizing” than clinics– Potential to reach large groups of youth and families– Successfully identify kids with internalizing behaviors

Universal Screening• Behavioral screening viewed as normative,

e.g., Vision, Hearing, Literacy • Good fit with RTI behavior model• Links to prevention programs & reduces

need for more intensive services later– Untreated emotional/behavioral issues

correlate with negative outcomes• Poor grades & personal relationships• High school dropout & Unemployment• Incarceration, Substance abuse, Suicide

Screening History (SSBD)

• Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD)

• Research in the 1980s on predictors• Gating procedures following mental

health model• Published in 1992, Walker & Severson• Evidence for efficiency, effectiveness, &

cost benefits

Multiple Gating Procedure (Severson et al. 2007)

Teachers Rank Order 3 Ext. & 3 Int. Students

Teachers Rate Top 3 Students on Critical Events, Adaptive & Maladaptive Scales

Gate 1

Gate 2

Pass Gate 1

Classroom & Playground

Observations

Gate 3Pass Gate 2 Tier 2,3

Intervention

Tier 3 Intervention or Special Ed. Referral

SSBD History in Washington

• Used in research over the past 10 years– 10 districts statewide

• School psychs review & adopt for district• Teachers informed & process reviewed in

staff meeting• Screening takes 1-2 hours per teacher to

complete• Tier 2 Students identified

Cheney, Stage, Hawken, Lynass, Mielenz, & Waugh (in review)

• 119 Tier 2 CCE Intervention, 86 Comparison Students in 18 schools

• 73/119 students (61%) graduate within 2 yrs

• SSBD & Behavioral Measures differentiate graduates, comparisons, nongraduates.

• Graduates lower problem behaviors & increase social skills in growth curve model.

SSBD Differentiates Grads , Non-grads, Comparisons

Graduates Non-Graduates Comparison

SSBD Critical

Events

5.9 (2.8) 5.4 (3.0) 5.2 (2.8)

SSBD

Maladaptive

31.2 (10.5) a 37.2 (5.7) b 32.2 (7.8) a

SSBD Adaptive 32.3 (8.0) a 28.0 (4.8) b 30.6 (6.8) a

Decrease in Prob Behavior, SSRS

What to do with at-risk students?

• Relationship matters

• School-home communication

• In school structure & supervision

• More frequent monitoring & feedback

• Increased reinforcement/acknowledgement

• Behavioral engagement in work

What to do?

• Behavioral contracts & cards

• Prompt, cue, precorrect, direct

• Learn to self-manage

• English Proficiency

• Social Skill Instruction & Problem Solving

Assignment #3

• Case Study and Behavior Planning