SCALING UP, ACROSS AND

BEYOND

2012 OSEP Project Directors ConferenceWashington, DCJuly 23-25, 2012

Session Description

We’ve all heard the term “scaling up”, and perhaps also heard the term “scaling across”, and have been encouraged to utilize these strategies. But, what do they mean in practice? And exactly how does one decide to scale up...and where do you start?

Learner Outcomes

1. Articulate “scaling up, across, and beyond”. 2. Understand the importance of having criteria

for going to scale.3. Understand first steps to consider in a

scaling up/across effort. 4. Understand effective strategies that are

common to each level of scale up. 5. Understand similarities and differences for

scaling up initiatives at the national, state, and project level.

6. Identify incentives and barriers for scaling up initiatives.

Going to scale: Panel organization

Moderator: Donna Sobel, University of Colorado Denver

Presenters: Susan Bailey Anderson Kathy McNulty George Sugai Donna Sobel

OSEP Planning Committee: Jennifer Coffey Linda Krantz Veronica McDonald Bill Sharpton

Scaling-up at project, SEA/State, multiple states & national levels

• Donna Sobel is the project director of the OSEP 325T Project, Achieving Special Education Equity through Diversity and the Acting Director of CU Denver’s Center for Faculty Development. She teaches in the Urban Community Teacher Education program and has lead reform initiatives resulting in inclusive, culturally responsive pedagogy being taught across the general education teacher training program.

Donna Sobel, Ph.D., Associate Professor in the School of Education & Human Development’s Special Education program at the University of Colorado Denver

• Susan Bailey-Anderson has been the Montana SPDG Director for 15 years. Susan has worked for Montana’s Office of Public Instruction for 26 years. She is currently the Unit Manger for Professional Development in the Division of Special Education. Susan is a Montana native has extensive experience as a special educator in Montana public schools and holds a BS and MA from Montana State University-Billings.

Susan Bailey Anderson, Coordinator for the Montana Behavioral Initiative(MBI), Montana’s PBIS initiative

• Kathy McNulty has worked in the field of deaf-blindness since 1987. During this time she has helped to coordinate and deliver technical assistance to individual  state deaf-blind projects, SEAs, LEAs and families in promoting appropriate interventions for children who are deaf-blind. Her current responsibilities on NCDB include oversight of NCDB’s Early identification and Family Engagement  Initiatives.

Kathy McNulty, Associate Project Director ,National Consortium on Deaf-Blindness Helen Keller National Center for Deaf-Blind Youths and Adults (HKNC) • George Sugai has been a classroom teacher, program

director, personnel preparer, and applied researcher. His research and practice interests include school-wide positive behavior support, behavioral disorders, applied behavior analysis, classroom and behavior management, and school discipline. Currently he is the co-director of the OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports and director of the UConn Center on Behavioral Education and Research. He also is co-investigator on the OSEP Center on State Implementation and Scaling of Evidence-based Practices.

George Sugai, Ph.D., Professor and Carole J. Neag Endowed Chair in the Neag School of Education at the University of Connecticut.

Scaling up, across and beyond is the capacity to planfully endure

Realities that impact scaling-up, across and beyond……….

Declining resources

Competing needs and priorities

Accountability at local, state and national levels

Personnel expertise and changes

Our journey of “going to scale”This work is messy, tension-filled, complex, and emotional as it calls into question long-held beliefs about what we’ve “always done” and realization of our own limitations as we travel our personal paths while trying to support others (educators, policy makers, families, communities) in their work.

This work is NOT linear and it is never finished– it requires ongoing systems and structures for dialogue, collaboration, and fine-grained alignment.

Engaging in this work calls for a commitment to the “science of implementation”.

University of Colorado Denver

URBAN COMMUNITY TEACHER EDUCATION

Research Intensive Urban University

Graduate (85%) & Undergraduate (15%) Elementary (K-6) Secondary (7-12) SPED (K-12) 350-400 teacher candidates

Integrated/Merged approach to preparing general & special educators

Professional Development School clinical model with co-teaching as a foundational approach

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

325-T Grant: Achieving Special Education Equity through Diversity: ASEED

Thoughtful , explicitly connected learning

opportunities

Internship Experience

sCourses

Maximizing a social justice framework

focusing on the unique

knowledge, skills and dispositions

of highly effective urban

teachers.

Initial steps for consideration: Ensuring this work lives far beyond any one person

Everything we know about

collaborative relationships holds true and impacts

sustainability.

ASEED Leadership Team Associate Dean for Teacher &

Learning Associate Dean for Research Director of Urban Community

Teacher Education Executive Director of the

Center for Advancing Practice

Collaborative Council Site Professors and Site

Coordinators from 25 PDSs

Scaling-up strategies at the project level

PLANNING FOR GENERALIZATION

Across people

Across settings

Across varied skills

INCLUSIVE EDUCATION CONTENT: LEARNING PROGRESSION

Drawing upon a literature review, recommendations from local experts, and a review of pre-existing syllabi, a detailed matrix was developed to guide faculty in understanding essential skills needed by all teachers to work with students with disabilities and to identify how these content would be explicitly and strategically embedded in the program.

Categories were used to cluster skills: 1) Special education in context--perspectives,

concepts and people; 2) A study of individuals with special needs--

learning characteristics and issues of diversity; 3) Promising practices that foster inclusive

education; 4) Innovations mandated by legislation

Scaling up the ASEED project: Incentives and barriers

Building capacity [genuine expertise] across an entire preparation program around social justice, equity and inclusive practices.

Vision and leadership at high levels to stay committed to this work (resources, time, infrastructure).

Developmental shift of inclusive, culturally responsive pedagogy from a surface level to a developed and deepened understanding.

Authentic roles for the community to be meaningfully engaged as a true partner with IHEs and schools in this work.

Translating and drawing the connections of this work to the currency of today’s accountability and teacher effectiveness contexts.

A State StoryMontana’s Scaling

Up Process

• DI

• Flexible Grouping

• Peer Tutorin

g

• Family and

Community

• Interest Based

Learning• Multiple

Abilities Tasks

• Activity-Based

Instruction• Learner –

Center Practices

Scaling Up, Across and Beyond

Belonging for ALL

Practices Data

Montana’s Tri-lateral Framework

Establish a Framework

Partnership

Policy Research

Systems

Installation Stage Action Planning GuideSISEP Center

Identify practice, program, or initiative Identify level of change (statewide, regional, local) Identify Primary Focus. Identify Secondary Focus

Montana SPDGPractice- Implement MTSSLevel of Change- Building, District, StatePrimary Focus- Building level Principals, Teachers, Para’s,

and ParentsSecondary Focus- State level innovators

First Steps to Consider

Participation, Recruitment and SelectionRecruiting the right people (7 teams with strong leadership and expertise

in either MBI or RtI) Preparation and TrainingApplication, needs assessment, on-going training support Coaching, Consultation or MentoringProviding quality and adequate Consultation, Coaching and Mentoring

(REAL, on-site meetings, trainings and on-line workgroups.) Participant and Program EvaluationProduct and Process Evaluation (multiple data sources from RtI, MBI, PBIS) Internal SupportsStrong leadership (OPI Leadership from multiple departments and support

expertise from national resources) (RtI CoP) External SupportsSchool Administrators of MT, CoP’s, MT Association of School PsychologistsCommon Core

Use of SISEP Drivers

Leadership and process that supports Knowledge of Evidence Based Practices Understand and apply the science of best

practices Utilization of an improvement cycle Understand organizational change Build on-going relationships with innovators Provide purposeful multi-level communication

to promote problem solving Develop capacity to create, regenerate and

renew.

In Summary

Scaling-up Efforts to Identify Infants and Toddlers who are Deaf-Blind

National Consortium on Deaf-Blindness (NCDB)Kathy McNulty

Scaling Up Across the DB Network A Work in Progress

First Considerations:Why Early Identification?

Significant under-identification

Lack of a cohesive systemic approach across the DB Network

Availability of research (TRACE Project )

NCDB

EI Syste

ms

State DB

Projects

What is the Innovation?

A framework to increase early identification & referrals that includes:

▪ data-based decision making

▪ analysis of possible causes

▪ implementation of evidence-based strategies

What strategies were used at each level of scale up?

Exploration Analysis of the NCDB Child Count data EI Workgroup Focus Groups, Surveys , Review of Literature &

Research Installation

TA Tool Box of resources Review by state projects TA Support Team

Initial Implementation Pilot with 8 states Feedback, analysis & action planning

What were the incentives for scaling up?

Shared understanding of the importance to find the children early

High interest to receive TA on how to effectively collaborate with EI systems

Positive state examples

No reinventing the wheel

What were the challenges to scaling up?

52 projects that navigate different EI systems

Feasibility of all 52 projects having a staff person with expertise in EI

Part C’s non-categorical child count

Inconsistent exchange of information

Reluctance of families to hear the term deaf-blindness

Scaling-up Evidence-based Practices & Systems OSEP Project Directors’ ConferenceJuly 23 2012Washington DC

George SugaiUniversity of ConnecticutCenter on Positive Behavior Interventions & Supportswww.pbis.org www.scalingup.org

# Schools Implementing SWPBS since 2000

16,232

# of School Implementing SWPBIS by State

12 states >500 schools

4 states >1000 schools

OSEP PBIS Center Aug 2011

Proportion of Schools Implementing SWPBIS by State3 states > 60% schools

9 states > 40% schools

16 states >30% schools

OSEP PBIS Center Aug 2011

Algozzine, B., Wang, C., & Violette, A. S. (2011). Reexamining the relationship between academic achievement and social behavior. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 13, 3-16.

Burke, M. D., Hagan-Burke, S., & Sugai, G. (2003). The efficacy of function-based interventions for students with learning disabilities who exhibit escape-maintained problem behavior: Preliminary results from a single case study. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 26, 15-25.

McIntosh, K., Chard, D. J., Boland, J. B., & Horner, R. H. (2006). Demonstration of combined efforts in school-wide academic and behavioral systems and incidence of reading and behavior challenges in early elementary grades. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 8, 146-154.

McIntosh, K., Horner, R. H., Chard, D. J., Dickey, C. R., and Braun, D. H. (2008). Reading skills and function of problem behavior in typical school settings. Journal of Special Education, 42, 131-147.

Nelson, J. R., Johnson, A., & Marchand-Martella, N. (1996). Effects of direct instruction, cooperative learning, and independent learning practices on the classroom behavior of students with behavioral disorders: A comparative analysis. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 53-62.

Wang, C., & Algozzine, B. (2011). Rethinking the relationship between reading and behavior in early elementary school. Journal of Educational Research, 104, 100-109.

Academic-Behavior Connection

Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C. W., Thornton, L. A., & Leaf, P. J. (2009). Altering school climate through school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10(2), 100-115

Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Bevans, K. B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462-473.

Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133-148.

Bradshaw, C. P., Reinke, W. M., Brown, L. D., Bevans, K. B., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). Implementation of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in elementary schools: Observations from a randomized trial. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 1-26.

Horner, R., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A., & Esperanza, J., (2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133-145.

Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality, 42(8), 1-14.

Waasdorp, T. E., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (in press). The impact of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS) on bullying and peer rejection: A randomized controlled effectiveness trial. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.

RCT & Group Design PBIS Studies

• Reduced major disciplinary infractions

• Improvements in academic achievement

• Enhanced perception of organizational health & safety

• Improved school climate• Reductions in teacher reported bullying behavior & peer

rejection

Scaling Basic

IMPLEMENTATION

Effective Not Effective

PRACTICE

Effective

Not Effectiv

e

Maximum Student Benefits

Fixsen & Blase, 2009

Data-based Decision Making

DATA used to….. 1. Specify/define need

2. Select right evidence-based solution

3. Monitor implementation fidelity

4. Monitor progress

5. Improve implementationRULE: Start w/ socially

important questions.

Funding Visibility PolicyPoliticalSupport

Training CoachingBehavioral Expertise

Evaluation

LEADERSHIP TEAM(Coordination)

Local School/District Implementation Demonstrations

SWPBS Implementation Blueprint

www.pbis.org

Where are you in implementation process?Adapted from Fixsen & Blase, 2005

EXPLORATION & ADOPTION

• We think we know what we need, so we ordered 3 month free trial (evidence-based)

INSTALLATION

• Let’s make sure we’re ready to implement (capacity infrastructure)

INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION• Let’s give it a try & evaluate

(demonstration)

FULL IMPLEMENTATION• That worked, let’s do it for

real (investment)

SUSTAINABILITY & CONTINUOUS

REGENERATION

• Let’s make it our way of doing business (institutionalized use)

“Multi-Tiered Systems of Support”….

Whole-school, data-driven,

prevention-based framework

for improving learning

outcomes for all students

through layered continuum

of evidence-based practices

& systems

MTSSUniversal Screening, Continuous Progress Monitoring,

Continuum of Evidence-based Support, Implementation Fidelity, Team-Based Implementation, Data-based Decision

Making, Outcome Oriented

BehaviorSWPBS/PBIS

School-wide Discipline & Climate, Classroom

Management, Function-based Support,

AcademicsInstruction & Curriculum

Literacy, Numeracy, Social Studies, Physical Sciences, History, Physical Education,

Art, etc.

OtherFamily Engagement,

Community Participation, School

Mental Health

Basic“Logic”

SYST

EMS

PRACTICES

DATATraining

+Coaching

+Evaluation

Cultural/Context Considerations

Improve “Fit”

Start w/ effective, efficient, relevant, & doable

Prepare & support implementation

ImplementationFidelity

MaximumStudent

Outcomes

CommonVision/Values

Common Language &

Behaviors

Common Experience

Effective Organizations

QualityLeadership

SCALING UP, ACROSS AND BEYOND

Commonalities across

our work