Schools Link Assessment to Behavior Intervention
Figures, Glossary, and References
|
Figure 1 |
|
The Schoolwide Information System (SWIS)
The Schoolwide Information System (SWIS) is a subscription database program available via Internet. Information is password-protected to maintain confidentiality. In adopting SWIS for use within a particular school, staff develop a referral form that records information about behavior incidents occurring in the school setting:
- Student’s name
- Date of incident
- Time of incident
- Student’s grade level
- Referring staff
- Location of incident
- Problem behavior
- Others involved
- Consequence provided
- Possible motivation for the incident
This information is used to identify patterns of problem behavior. With SWIS, information can be quickly and easily compiled in charts depicting these data in various ways (e.g., types of behavior leading to referral, time or setting of referrals).
SWIS can address questions at a range of levels: whole school; specific settings or situations within the school (e.g., playground, classroom); or the individual student level. Staff use data differently based on their roles within the school. The principal and school improvement team look at whole-school data, such as office discipline referrals (ODR), in order to make program modifications. For example, when more than 20 percent of students receive one or more ODRs per year, educators can look at ODR patterns to design appropriate schoolwide interventions (Sugai, Sprague, Horner, & Walker, 2000). One team examined the pattern of their ODRs and discovered that a large number of referrals came from the hallways. As a result, they taught students appropriate hallway behavior and provided more monitoring and support in hallways, rather than intervening with students on a case-by-case basis.
SWIS can also provide clues about behavioral needs of individual students or groups of students. Again, ODR data provide an example. Most students within a school experience very few ODRs (0 to 1). The next most frequent group receives a few ODRs (3 to 5). Using the SWIS database, educators can easily identify this group and target selected interventions or risk reduction strategies. Further assessment of the students and/or the settings from which referrals are made can then guide appropriate problem-solving efforts. Finally, the typically small group of students who receive a significantly higher number of ODRs may need individualized interventions by student assistance teams. SWIS can easily identify each of these groups of students.
Return to Text |
|
Figure 2 |
|
Functional Assessment (FA)
Functional Assessment (FA) is a process that examines potential environmental influences on the problem behavior, identifying the events preceding and following the problem behavior. This information is then used to develop behavior intervention plans. If certain situations consistently trigger behavioral difficulties, a PBS plan may aim to reduce those triggers. Similarly, if problem behaviors consistently reward the student (give attention, release student from a disliked activity), staff might teach the student alternative ways to have that need met. For example, PBS might show the student positive ways to get attention or cope with a disliked activity.
There is no single, best method to conduct a functional assessment, and educators should not do the same thing every time one does the functional assessment. Instead, educators should develop their functional assessment based on what they know about the student and the difficulties that the student is displaying. A team meeting using a tool such as the 25-Minute Problem-Solving Framework (Sprick, 1999) might be sufficient in some cases, whereas others may require more systematic collection of additional information using behavioral observations and other techniques.
Return to Text |
| Glossary |
|
Contextual factors—the circumstances or events that form the environment within which something exists or takes place.
Source: Encarta® World English Dictionary © 1999 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Multiple-gating—the process by which less time-consuming and less expensive assessments are administered first, followed by more time-consuming methods
Source: Charmaine K. Higa, Eric L. Daleiden, and Bruce F. Chorpita. Multiple Gating for Child Diagnosis: Clinical Judgments Based on Computer Assessments, Questionnaires, and Structured Interviews (abstract). Retrieved November 1, 2003 from University of Tulsa, College of Arts & Sciences Web site:
http://www.personal.utulsa.edu/~eric-daleiden/recent%20projects.htm#Multiple%20Gating.
Triangulation—a technical term used in surveying and navigation to describe a technique whereby two known or visible points are used to plot the location of a third point. Triangulation in education decision-making means using multiple sources of data, three or more, to get a more complete understanding of a student’s behavior and achievement. This tool can also be used to analyze behavior or achievement at the classroom, school, and district levels.
Source: Quality Assurance Review Mentoring Guide 2003-04. Michigan Department of Education.
Return to Text |
References
Kameenui, E. J. & Carnine, D. W. (2002). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Martin, G. & Pear, J. (2003). Behavior modification: What it is and how to do it. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Repp, A.C., Felce, D., & Barton, L.E. (1988). “Basing the treatment of stereotypic and self-injurious behaviors on hypotheses of their causes.” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21: 281-289.
Sarason, S. B. (1982). The culture of school and problem of change. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Sugai, G., Sprague, J. R., Horner, R. H., & Walker, H. M. (2000). “Preventing school violence: The use of office discipline referrals to assess and monitor school-wide discipline interventions.” Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, 94-101.
Return to Text |
For More Information on Data-Based Decision Making and Evaluation
in the Problem-Solving Process
Browder, D. M., & West, B. J. (1991). “Assessment of social skills and interfering behavior.” In Assessment of individuals with severe disabilities: An applied behavior approach to life skills assessment. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
DuPaul, G. J., Eckert, T. L., & McGoey, K. E. (1997). “Interventions for students with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: One size does not fit all.” School Psychology Review, 26, 369-381.
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Todd, A. W. (2001). “‘Data’ need not be a four-letter word: Using data to improve schoolwide discipline.” Beyond Behavior: A Magazine for Exploring Behavior in Our Schools 11 (1), 20-26.
Hunter, L. (2003). School psychology: A public health framework III. “Managing disruptive behavior in schools: The value of a public health and evidence-based perspective.” Journal of School Psychology, 41, 39-59.
Kavale, K. A. & Forness, S. R. (1999). “Effectiveness of special education.” In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The Handbook of School Psychology (3rd ed) (pp. 984-1024). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Lewis-Palmer, T., Sugai, G., & Larson, S. (1999). “Using data to guide decisions about program implementation and effectiveness.” Effective School Practices, 17(4), 47-53.
MacMann, G. M. & Barnett, D. W. “Diagnostic decision-making in school psychology: Coping with uncertainty.” In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The Handbook of School Psychology (3rd ed) (pp. 519 – 548). New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1999.
Shapiro, E. S. & Elliot, S. N. (1999). “Curriculum-based assessment and other performance-based assessment strategies.” In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The Handbook of School Psychology (3rd ed.) (pp. 383 - 408). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Sprick, R. (1999) 25-minutes to better behavior: A teacher-to-teacher problem solving process. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
Stoner, G. & Green, S. K. (1992). “Reconsidering the scientist-practitioner model for school psychology practice.” School Psychology Review, 21, 155-166. |
TOP of Page
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel
November 2006 |
|
Transition
September 2008
June 2008
October 2007
March 2006
September 2005
|
|
|
|
FOCUS Home Page
Subscription Information
State Board of Education
Kathleen N. Straus, President
John C. Austin, Vice President
Carolyn L. Curtin, Secretary
Marianne Yared McGuire, Treasurer
Nancy Danhof, NASBE Delegate
Elizabeth W. Bauer
Reginald M. Turner
Casandra E. Ulbrich
Ex-Officio
Jennifer M. Granholm, Governor
Michael P. Flanagan, Superintendent of Public Instruction
Direct
all editorial inquiries to:
Annette Gorden
Communications Specialist
CEN
Eaton ISD
1790 East Packard Highway
Charlotte, MI 48813
(800) 593-9146 ext. 18
(517) 321-6101 ext. 18
agorden@eaton.k12.mi.us
Accessibility and Compliance Information
|
|
|
Copyright© 2003-2005 Center for Educational Networking 
