Team driven tertiary process the prevent teach reinforce model
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 65

Team Driven Tertiary Process: The Prevent-Teach-Reinforce Model PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 78 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Team Driven Tertiary Process: The Prevent-Teach-Reinforce Model. Rose Iovannone, Ph.D. [email protected] Carie English, Ph.D. [email protected] University of South Florida. USF Don Kincaid Kathy Christiansen Sarah Donadio Glen Dunlap. UCD Kelly Wilson Patricia Oliver

Download Presentation

Team Driven Tertiary Process: The Prevent-Teach-Reinforce Model

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Team driven tertiary process the prevent teach reinforce model

Team Driven Tertiary Process: The Prevent-Teach-Reinforce Model

Rose Iovannone, Ph.D.

[email protected]

Carie English, Ph.D.

[email protected]

University of South Florida

Developed under grant H324P04003 from the Department of Education.


Acknowledgements

USF

Don Kincaid

Kathy Christiansen

Sarah Donadio

Glen Dunlap

UCD

Kelly Wilson

Patricia Oliver

Ted Bovey

Edy Purcell

Phil Strain

Acknowledgements


Objectives

Objectives

  • Participants will:

    • Describe an individual positive behavior support process for use in the classroom

    • List factors impacting the effectiveness of an individual behavior support process


Individualized pbs tertiary

For high-risk students:

History of severe problem behaviors

Demonstrated resistance to intervention

An intensive system of support is needed

Individualized PBS (Tertiary)

~5%

~15%

~ 80% of Students


Conceptualizing an array of pbs supports

Conceptualizing an Array of PBS Supports

Universal/Primary

School-Wide AssessmentSchool-Wide Prevention Systems

Classroom Interventions

  • Targeted/

    Secondary

  • Tertiary (Intensive)

Group Interventions

AnalyzeStudent Data

Assessment

Interviews, Questionnaires, etc.

Simple Student Interventions (ERASE)

Intervention

Observations and ABC Analysis

Complex Individualized Interventions (PTR)

Team-Based Wraparound Interventions

Multi-Disciplinary Assessment & Analysis

Scott, 2001


Tertiary supports in schools

Tertiary Supports in Schools

  • Traditional process:

    • Specialist/expert-driven

      • Complete an observation

      • Write a support plan

      • Call me if you have questions

  • Often contextual fit ignored

  • Limited support/follow-up/training provided


Prevent teach reinforce process

Prevent Teach Reinforce Process

  • Team driven process

    • Goals, assessment, intervention plan

  • Support provided by facilitator

    • Direct observation

    • Training and classroom implementation assistance

  • Contextual fit

    • Greater buy-in and likelihood of implementation


Prevent teach reinforce model

Prevent-Teach-Reinforce Model

  • Funded by US Dept. of Education/ Institute of Educational Sciences

  • Randomized control group design

  • Two sites—USF and UCD

    • Three school districts central Florida

    • Two school districts Colorado

  • Compare prescriptive, simple model to “business as usual”


Sample

Sample

  • 200 students

    • 100 treatment; 100 wait-list control

  • Any student in K-8 grades who exhibit problem behavior

  • Problem behavior criteria

    • Minimum 5 critical events indicated on Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD)

    • Behaviors disruptive, durable (6 months), chronic (at least 1 time a week)


Sample data measures

Sample Data Measures

  • Repeated measures at student level

    • Problem behaviors, social skills, academics

  • Mediator and moderators at multiple levels:

    • Student

    • Teacher/Classroom

    • System

*USF site only


Process

Process

  • Standardized approach

  • Five step process facilitated by PTR Consultant

    • Team Development

    • Goal Setting

    • Assessment

    • Intervention

      • Coaching—up to 12 hours

    • Evaluation

  • Manual including information and forms


Preliminary data results

Preliminary Data Results


Student demographics by ethnicity and gender

Student Demographics by Ethnicity and Gender


Student demographics by primary disability

Student Demographics by Primary Disability


Team driven tertiary process the prevent teach reinforce model

d = .57

Follow-up N 29/17

p < .000


Team driven tertiary process the prevent teach reinforce model

d = .48

p < .000


Nbrcc report 10 10 07

NBRCC Report 10-10-07

  • PTR Intervention more effective in:

    • Increasing social skills and decreasing problem behaviors with students having most severe behaviors (measured by SSBD Maladaptive Behavior Scale)

    • Increasing social skills and decreasing problem behaviors of males


Nbrcc report 10 10 071

NBRCC Report 10-10-07

  • Teachers participating in PTR indicated:

    • High social validity

      • 98% liked PTR

      • 91% felt PTR reasonable

    • High alliance (relationship) with consultant

      • Overall mean = 4.8 (SD = 0.45)

        • Consultant is approachable

        • Consultant and I trust one another

        • Overall, consultant has shown sincere desire to understand and improve the situation


Social validity comparison usf sample items

Social Validity Comparison USF—Sample Items


Fidelity

Fidelity

  • Most teams reaching 80% fidelity and maintaining into post-test

  • Quality scores lower than adherence scores

    • Part of the plan implemented although not entirely as plan written


The process a case study example

The Process: A Case Study Example


Step 1 team development

Step 1: Team Development

  • Members and roles identified

    • Teacher

    • Behavior specialist/school psychologist

    • Family members, paraprofessionals, special area teachers

  • Work styles inventory

  • Teaming survey


Case study step 1 team building

Case Study—Step 1: Team Building

  • Mike is a 9-year-old male in a self-contained autism classroom

  • Nonverbal—uses signs, Dynamite, and pictures to communicate

  • 1 teacher, 2 aides, and 6 students


Case study step 1 team building1

Case Study—Step 1: Team Building

  • Teacher-- Ms. Wonderful

  • Aides

    • Ms. Needs Help

    • Ms. Also Needs Help

  • Facilitator—PTR Consultant

  • Results of teaming information indicate a great team that meets regularly to brainstorm


Step 2 goal setting

Step 2: Goal Setting

  • Identify team consensus on:

    • Academic behavior

    • Social behavior

    • Problem behavior

    • Appropriate behavior

  • Develop and begin baseline data collection


Team driven tertiary process the prevent teach reinforce model

Social

Behavior

Academic

Broad

Decrease

Increase

Case Study—Step 2: Goal Setting


Case study operational definitions of problem and replacement behaviors

Case Study: Operational Definitions of Problem and Replacement Behaviors

  • Screaming—loud, high pitched noise heard outside the classroom

  • Hitting—anytime Mike touches peers or adults with an open hand, fist, foot, or object while screaming or protesting

  • Expressing Frustration—using Dynamite, pictures, or signs to ask for a break or attention

  • Transition to nonpreferred activities—moving to nonpreferred activity and engaging with appropriate verbal expression (screaming level)


Team driven tertiary process the prevent teach reinforce model

Case Study: Behavior Rating Scale With Anchors


Step 3 assessment

Step 3: Assessment

  • Checklist format:

    • Antecedents or Triggers (Prevent)

    • Function(s) of the problem behaviors (Teach)

    • Consequences following the problem behaviors (Reinforce)

  • Assists team to link function of behavior to intervention plan


Case study step 3 ptr assessment problem behavior

Case Study—Step 3: PTR AssessmentProblem Behavior

Screaming, Hitting


Case study step 3 ptr assessment appropriate behavior

Case Study—Step 3: PTR AssessmentAppropriate Behavior

Prosocial


Step 3 ptr assessment developing the hypothesis

Step 3: PTR Assessment—Developing the Hypothesis

  • Prevention data = antecedents or triggers

  • Teach data = replacement behavior and possible function

  • Reinforce data = function and reinforcers


Case study step 3 ptr assessment possible hypotheses

Case Study—Step 3: PTR Assessment Possible Hypotheses

Inappropriate

Appropriate


Case study tips on linking interventions to hypothesis

Case Study: Tips on Linking Interventions to Hypothesis

  • Prevention strategies must address:

    • Getting Mike attention more often

    • Changing non-preferred task

      • Particular student

      • How it is done (format)

    • Changing what happens when he makes a mistake

      • Do part of it (rather than all of it) over

      • Allow him to find what is wrong

      • Provide social story

    • Signaling end of preferred activity

  • Teach strategies must address:

    • How to get attention/assistance

    • How to get break/delay appropriately

  • Reinforce strategies must address:

    • Giving Mike attention/help

    • Giving Mike break/delay


Step 4 intervention

Step 4: Intervention

  • Team ranks top three intervention strategies in each of the PTR components

  • Multi-component intervention that teacher states s/he can implement

    • Prevent

    • Teach

    • Reinforce

  • Implementation plan


Case study tips on linking interventions to hypothesis1

Case Study: Tips on Linking Interventions to Hypothesis

  • Prevention strategies must address:

    • Giving Paris attention more often

    • Changing non-preferred task

      • Presentation (how it is given to Paris; how it looks)

      • Content (embedding preferences)

    • Changing environment surrounding independent work time

  • Teach strategies must address:

    • How to get attention appropriately

    • How to get a delay appropriately

    • How to access preferred item appropriately

  • Reinforce strategies must address:

    • Giving Paris attention/help

    • Giving Paris a delay

    • Giving Paris access to preferred activities


Case study step 4 ptr intervention

Case Study—Step 4: PTR Intervention


Coaching of interventions

Coaching of Interventions

  • Training of teacher

    • 1 to 2 hours

    • 80% accuracy on all strategies

  • Assistance in classroom

    • Up to 12 hours

  • Fidelity measures recorded

    • 80% implementation terminates assistance in classroom


Case study training

Case Study: Training


Case study fidelity

Case Study: Fidelity


Step 5 evaluation

Step 5: Evaluation

  • Data-based decision-making

    • Identifying what is working; what is not and WHY

  • Expanding into other routines

  • Generalization

  • Continuing team meetings

    • Planning time

    • Cohesiveness


Step 5 evaluation1

Step 5: Evaluation

1 is a lot of screaming, 5 is no screaming


Step 5 evaluation2

Step 5: Evaluation

1 is a lot of hitting, 5 is no hitting


Step 5 evaluation3

Step 5: Evaluation

1 is a little appropriate expression, 5 is a lot of appropriate expression


Step 5 evaluation4

Step 5: Evaluation

1 is inappropriate transition, 5 is super appropriate transition


Step 5 evaluation other outcome data

Step 5: Evaluation Other Outcome Data


Wrap up what we have learned

Wrap Up:What We Have Learned

  • PTR process may not be enough for all students

    • Some need wraparound

  • Not all students need PTR

    • 3-tiered model of individual support

  • Teachers report the coaching piece and collaborative process to be keys


How to make ptr work in your school

How to Make PTR Work in Your School

  • Steps are the key components not how your organize them

  • Must create a system that will work for your school or even each student

  • Things to consider

    • Tertiary team

    • Identification/Nomination process

    • Facilitator

    • Set-up of meetings for efficient results


Organizing the ptr process

Organizing the PTR Process

  • Is Team Building needed?

    • Small team, team works well together, no paraprofessional

  • If small team or no paraprofessional, skip and start with Goal Setting

  • If well functioning team, combine with Goal Setting


Organizing the ptr process1

Organizing the PTR Process

  • Few problem behaviors or all in same response class?

    • Same antecedents &/or function

    • Small team

  • Combine Assessment with Intervention Development

  • Condense the steps to meet the needs of your school


Final thoughts system changes

Final Thoughts: System Changes

  • Process may require more time up front but less time overall

    • Must provide assistance in the classroom until desired outcomes achieved

    • Will pay off in the end

  • Teams more likely to implement the plan

    • Ownership

    • Fits the class and the student

    • Continued contact


Questions

Questions?


  • Login