Jill Koenitzer, Technical Assistance Coordinator, WI RTI Center Michelle Polzin, Technical Assistance Coordinator, WI PBIS Network Mandi Spiegelberg, High School teacher, Wittenberg-Birnamwood School District

Screening, Intervening & Progress Monitoring in High School

Early Warning Systems

The Wisconsin RtI Center/Wisconsin PBIS Network (CFDA #84.027) acknowledges the support of the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction in the development of this PowerPoint and for the continued support of this federally-funded grant program. There are no copyright restrictions on this document; however, please credit the Wisconsin DPI and support of federal funds when copying all or part of this material

Agenda

• Introduce Early Warning Systems (EWS)• Establish purpose for implementing Early Warning

Systems (EWS)• The Early Warning System Process• Wittenberg-Birnamwood High School EWS

experiences and lessons learned

Wisconsin’s Vision in detail...Early Warning Systems (EWS)

Early Warning Systems

Early warning systems (EWS) rely on readily available existing data housed at the school to:

• Predict which students are at-risk for dropping out of high school or not moving to next level

• Target resources to support off-track students while they are still in school, before they drop out

• Examine patterns and identify school climate issues

Existing Data Considerations

How do we identify students who are not college and career ready?

How do we identify students who are not likely to graduate?

Attendance• Attendance/tardies• Chronic absenteeism

• Mobility• Engagement• Participation

BehaviorSocial-Emotional

• Office referrals• Suspensions• Behavioral screening• Internalizing behaviors

• Developmental assets• At-risk support• Behavioral plan• Family stressors

Coursework• Academic screening• Common assessments• Standardized testing• Grades

• Retention• Accelerated learning• Interventions, Title I• Head Start, Summer School

Risk Indicators—Use your ABCs

*See handouts : Predictors of Post Secondary Success and Risk Indicators for Not Graduating

Establishing Purpose for Implementing EWS

Show of Hands or

Percent of Americans with a high school diploma

85%

Percent of students who repeat 9th grade that graduate

15%

Percent of crimes in U.S. committed by a high school dropout

75%

Percent of black dropouts that have spent time in prison

60%

Percent of Hispanic dropouts that were due to pregnancy

41%

Percent of U.S. jobs a high school dropout is NOT eligible for

90%

Which group has a higher dropout rate:

Black Hispanic

93%

35%

53%

90%

25%

75%

9.6% 17.6%

Salary & Unemployment Rates

www.statisticbrain.com

Higher Education Means…increased employment opportunities

What if we don’t change?

http://carnegie.org

Agenda 2017: Wisconsin DPI

State level District level School Level Grade Level

What valued knowledge, skills,

and dispositions do our students need for

success?State level District

levelSchool Level Grade Level

Early Warning Systems fit in a Culturally Responsive Multi-Level System of

Support

Universal ScreeningA process in which data from multiple measures are analyzed to determine whether each student is likely to meet, not meet, or exceed academic benchmarks or behavioral expectations.

This screening process is also used to gauge the effectiveness of our universal level of instruction and support.

Source: Wisconsin RtI Center glossary

1-5% Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions• Individual students• Assessment-based• Intense, durable procedures

5-15% Tier 2/Secondary Interventions• Some students (at-risk)• High efficiency• Rapid response• Small group interventions• Some individualizing

80-90% Tier 1/Universal Interventions• All settings, all students• Preventive, proactive

Let’s Talk PercentagesAcademic & Behavioral Systems

Illinois PBIS Network, Revised May 15, 2008. Adapted from “What is school-wide PBS?” OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Accessed at http://pbis.org/schoolwide.htm

Do you know how your students are responding to instruction and climate?

What do your percentages look like?

For grades K-4Use existing data and administer standardized screeners multiple times per year

Above 4th grade Use existing data to screen students multiple times per year

Fuchs, D. Smart RtI: A Next Generation Approach to Multi-Level Prevention

Research-based practice

Promising practice

Recommended Practices

Dropout Early Warning System

Wisconsin DPI:

DPI DEWS: Purpose

Considered part of an RtI system

A data-based report done early enough to effectively intervene

Identifies students who may be at risk for dropout or late graduation

Used, along with other data, in local educational decisions for support services and interventions

DPI DEWS: Access your reports

• DEWS Action Guidehttp://wise.dpi.wi.gov/wise_dashdews

• Access student reports, rosters and risk scores pages 6-9 of guide

DPI DEWS: InterpretationDEWS provides a score from 0-100 for current MS and HS students

Score = rate at which students similar to current student in previous cohorts in WISCONSIN graduated

Score of 75 = 75% of prior students with similar characteristics graduated on time

DPI DEWS: How it Works

DPI DEWS: How scores are determinedDEWS score calculated using a combination of demographic and student outcome measures

to improve accuracyAttendance, disciplinary events, assessment scores, and student mobility

Student risk is calculated individually for each student

Students are classified as at risk if their score crosses a threshold set by DPI

• Used, along with other data, in local educational decisions for support services and interventions

• Used, along with other data, in local educational decisions for support services and interventions

DEWS…

NHSC Early Warning Systems

• MS and HS level tools• Screen multiple times per year• Aid in diagnostic process• Monitor student progress• Valid and reliable thresholds established• National High School Center

• www.betterhighschools.org

• Early Warning Systems in Educationwww.earlywarningsystems.org

Getting Started with Early Warning Systems

DownloadTheGuides

http://www.betterhighschools.org/documents/EWSHSImplementationguide.pdf

Follow7-StepProcess

Establish Roles and

ResponsibilitiesSTEP 1

• Can be a new or pre-existing team• Team must receive PD to use tool effectively

• Early identification of students at risk• Assign interventions & monitor progress

• Meet at regular intervals• within first 20 days of school • after every grading period (i.e.: 8x/year)

Download and Use the EWS ToolSTEP 2

• http://www.betterhighschools.org/ews.asp• Set up thresholds for flagging students• Download available student data• Ensure data is entered at regularly scheduled

intervals• Reports available and accessible to all EWS

team members

Risk Indicators in the EWS Tool v2.0Indicato

rTime Frame Benchmark (red

flag)Incoming risk*

Prior to the start of school Exhibited locally validated indicators of risk

Attendance First 20 or 30 days, each grading period (e.g., semester), end of year (annual)

Missed 10% or more of instructional time (absences)

Course failures

Each grading period, end of year

Failed one or more semester courses (any subject)

Grade point average

Each grading period, end of year

Earned 2.0 or lower (on a 4-point scale)

CCSR End of Year (On-Track Indicator)

End of year Failed two or more semester core courses, or accumulated fewer credits than the number required for promotion to the next grade

*Indicators must be locally validated

Update with Wittenberg’s tool settings

Localize Risk Indicators in the Tool Settings

Localize Risk Indicators in the Tool Settings

Review the EWS DataSTEP 3

• Understand patterns in student engagement and academic performance

• Identify students at-risk for dropout• Organize and sort students into groups based

on risk factors• Consider allocation of resources for flagged

students (needs vs. available interventions)

Find, Organize and Sort Students

Interpret EWS DataSTEP 4

• Dig deeper into complex causes of student disengagement and academic failure

• Examine additional information not included in EWS tool• Additional teacher input• Additional assessments• Student & parent interviews

Why?

Assign & Provide InterventionsSTEP 5

• Map interventions from school, district and community

• Organize interventions into tiered levels of support and determine entry/exit decision rules

• Match students to interventions based on need

Tier 1/Universal School-Wide Assessment

School-Wide Prevention Systems

Check-in/ Check-out (CICO)

Group Intervention w. Individualized Feature (e.g., Check and Connect and Mentoring)

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

Complex or Multiple-domain FBA/BIP

Wraparound

Social/Academic Instructional Groups (S/AIG) Academic Seminar

Create a continuum of support (ordered by intensity of intervention & effort needed to implement)

Adapted from Illinois PBIS Network, & T. Scott

Tier 2/Secondary

Tier 3/Tertiary

Academic Seminar

Drop-in Tutoring

Formal Tutoring

Read 180

Small Group Comm. Arts or Math Interventions

Lunch & Learn

Intervention List & Descriptions

Monitor Student ProgressSTEP 6

• Monitor students who are participating in interventions

• Determine effectiveness of intervention overall for groups of students

• Identify student needs that are not being met• Identify new interventions to meet student needs• Communicate with and engage family members

High School Data Room

Example SWIS-CICO report

Evaluate and Refine EWS

ProcessSTEP 7

• Team evaluates EWS process on annual basis • Evaluate risk indicators & thresholds• Evaluate decision rules & interventions• Evaluate impact with student outcome data• Reflect on strengths and challenges• Make recommendations for improving the

process

Example Multi-Year Data

Example Multi-Year Triangle Data

Step 1 Establish Roles

and Responsibilities

Step 3Review the EWS

Data

Step 4 Interpret the

EWS Data

Step 5 Assign & Provide

Interventions

Step 6 Monitor Students

Step 7Evaluate & Refine EWS

Process

Step 2Use the EWS

Tool

Early Warning System• National High School Center

• www.betterhighschools.org

• Early Warning Systems in Education• www.earlywarningsystems.org

• YouTube Channel webinars: NHSCenterMedia

Wittenberg-Birnamwood High School

Early Warning Systems Implementation

WBHS Demographics

• Wittenberg & Birnamwood are rural communities in central Wisconsin.

• WBHS enrollment has been declining over the past five years. Current enrollment = 376

• 88% White, 5% American Indian, 3% Hispanic

• 35% Low SES

• 15% Students with disabilities

WBHS History• We had a lot of data but didn’t use it effectively

• Learned that we had to schedule collaboration and not assume that staff knew how to do this

• Having a decision making model has helped us to focus rather than jumping from initiative to initiative

• Sixth year of PBIS. Has become part of the culture of our school.

District Goals•All students will improve literacy skills in reading and writing across the K-12 curriculum in alignment with the common core standards

•All students will improve math literacy skills through the study of and alignment with the common core standards

•The District will improve student learning with aligned curriculum, assessment, and instruction.

•The District will ensure that students have a safe, welcoming and productive learning environment.

EWS Connection to District Decision Making Model

WBHS Goals & EWS

The use of the EWS High School Tool supports the WBHS goals by providing a resource

framework to identify students who are off track for graduation, so that staff-designed, evidence-based programs and practices, based on data,

can be put into place early and systematically in order to prevent student failure.

TeamsTeams were chosen with the intent to represent all departments.

• 9th Grade Team: Principal, School Counselor, Math Teachers, ELA Teacher, Science Teacher, Health/PE Teacher, Social Studies Teacher, Special Education Teacher, School Psychologist

• 10th Grade Team: Principal, School Counselor, PE Teacher, Math Teacher, Social Studies Teacher, Science Teacher, ELA Teacher, Business Ed Teacher, Special Education Teacher, School Psychologist

STEP 1

Teams

• Norms: Stay on task, Start and end on time, Everyone contributes, Non-judgmental conversations, Comments are solutions-based

• Roles: Principal facilitates meetings, but all participate.

• When: Teams meet monthly during the school day for two class periods each. Substitute teachers cover classes.

• Where: Teams meet in the data room.

STEP 1

STEP 2 Using the EWS Tool• Data is downloaded into the EWS tool prior to

every team meeting by Dean of Students• Data sheets are handed out on confidential data

sheets at each team meeting• Data is also visually represented on data wall in

locked data room

Student Flags

STEP 3

Reviewing the Data

STEP 3 Reviewing the Data

Regularly Review & Update:

MAP scores

WKCE scores

DEWS scores

Attendance

Behavioral referrals

Grades Connection survey

STEP 3 Reviewing the DataInformation on student

data cards:Special EducationELLBooster/Intervention

ClassesAttendance RiskBehavioral RiskGrade/Credit RiskDEWS Risk

STEP 3Who is at risk?Team looks for patterns. First we look at whole group and small group

concernsNext we look at individual student concernsTeam focuses on MAP scores after current

benchmark datesTeam focuses on grades/attendance/behavior in-

between benchmark assessments

Reviewing the Data

STEP 4

• Team discusses individual and/or groups of students who are at risk. Staff share any additional information that may help with decision making.

• Parents are often contacted when discussing risk of individual students.

• School counselor or school psychologist may interview the student to problem solve.

Interpreting the Data

STEP 4Examples:• Team dug deeper into MAP scores of students near

the benchmark. The team found a pattern that almost all of those students struggled most with the strand “Informational Text”.

• Team hypothesized that some students might not be trying their best on the MAP test and therefore scores may be inaccurate of true skills.

• Team hypothesized that individual students are struggling with mental health issues, relationships, connections at school, AODA issues, skill deficits, etc.

Interpreting the Data

STEP 5Tier 1:

Core curriculum District RtI Team WBHS PBIS Team Daily Shout Outs

Tiers 2 & 3:CICO Individual & Small Group CounselingMentoringAcademic Booster/Intervention ClassesRtI/PBIS Tier 2&3 Meetings

Assign & Provide Interventions

STEP 5Entry/Exit Decision Rules:

Booster Classes (?)CICO (SWIS Data and Attendance)Counseling (Parent, Teacher or Self Referral)Mentoring (EWS and Tier 2/3 Teams assign based

on data)Do we have enough available interventions to meet all student needs?

Would like to do more mentoring Would like to do more small group counseling Shortage of mental health resources in the

community

Assign & Provide Interventions

STEP 6

• Data is collected throughout the year.

• We need to work on adding progress monitoring tools for interventions (both for progress of individuals as well as the intervention as a whole)

• Decision rules/rubric for booster classes

• Need decision rules for other interventions

Monitor Student Progress

STEP 7

• Team evaluates EWS process on annual basis • Evaluate risk indicators & thresholds• Evaluate decision rules & interventions• Evaluate impact with student outcome data• Reflect on strengths and challenges

Evaluate & Refine Process

What are our teachers saying?

There is still never enough time

We need to include all staff somehow

Would like to focus more on groups of students rather than individuals

We will have more data as we move forward about effectiveness of EWS

What are our teachers saying?

Staff feel more ownership

Systems approach is more effective

Better awareness of student needs due to data and collaboration

Problem solving is positive

Outcomes

• Systems change: systems such as our MAP testing, have been refined and defined to better meet student learning outcomes

• The collaboration as a staff is “awesome!”• Awareness of each student and their needs (both

academic and behavioral) has increased tremendously• A sense of ownership has developed in staff• A sense of shared responsibility has resulted• Targeted interventions have been used to increase

scores

The culture of our school - what’s changing?

• - Awareness• - Ownership• - Accountability• - Conversations • - Responses• - Action

Next Steps

• Implement an E/I time 8th period • Increase instructional time: move meetings to after school, investigate

alternative scheduling options (block, modified block, etc.)• Continue to work toward core plus more for ALL students below grade

level• Refine the art and science of teaching through deeper investigation of

the GRRM• Learn - attend institutes, conferences, read, collaborate (EE)• Reflect - evaluate ourselves and identify weaknesses so that we can

continue to improve professionally (EE)• Expand EWS so that all grade levels meet and review data (Request

from staff to add 11th grade meetings for 2014-15)

Early Warning Systems Wittenberg-Birnamwood High School

• Jill Koenitzer, koenitzerj@wisconsinrticenter.org• Michelle Polzin, polzinm@wisconsinpbisnetwork.org• Mandi Spiegelberg, mspiegelberg@wittbirn.k12.wi.us