Aligning RtI and PBIS: Potholes and Potential for an Integrated MTSS Brian Gaunt, Ph.D. Inter-Project Coordinator Florida Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports (FLPBIS) Florida Problem-Solving and Response to Intervention (FL PS/RtI) 1
Welcome! • Ongoing effort in Florida • Challenges & Benefits to merging RtI and PBIS • Why are you bringing these two initiatives together? (Benefits) • What stands in your way? (Obstacles) • Top-down vs. Bottom-up views of implementing MTSS What some schools are doing to integrate the two and the challenges they have to overcome. • 2
F LORIDA B ACKGROUND AND C ONTEXT 3
+ Florida MTSS Mission “The collaborative vision of the Florida Problem-Solving/Response to ___________________________________________ _ Intervention (FL PS/RtI) and the Florida Positive Behavior = Support/Response to Intervention for Behavior (FLPBS/RtI:B) Projects is to: • Enhance the capacity of all Florida school districts to successfully implement and sustain a multi-tiered system of student supports with fidelity in every school; • Accelerate and maximize student academic and social-emotional outcomes through the application of collaborative data-based problem solving utilized by effective leadership at all levels of the educational system; • Inform the development, implementation, and ongoing evaluation of an integrated, aligned , and sustainable system of service delivery that prepares all students for post-secondary education and/or successful employment within our global society.” 4
MTSS as a Framework • Without a Framework • With a Framework 5
Model of Integrated RtI & PBIS: MTSS Components What we do to help students improve their educational outcomes. Continuum of Instruction Data-based Problem- (Student supports and & Intervention (Tiers) Solving Process decision-making) What we do to implement & sustain a Leadership tiered service delivery Data Evaluation model & problem solving process Building (Implementation Communication & Capacity & Collaboration supports and decision- Infrastructure making) 6
Brief Florida History in Ed (post-IDEIA 2004 - RtI) 2004-2008: Rt RtI in introduced to state (formally) • • 2008: Financial crisis in U.S. • 2009: ARRA - Race to the Top Funding (Tchr eval and SIG) • 2009: Differentiated Accountability • 2009: Florida Assessment of Instruction in Reading • 2010: FL FLPB PBIS S and and FL PS/Rt RtI St Start Fo Formal Collaboration 2010: Revisions to state test - FCAT 2.0 • Like hitting a 2011: First…and only statewide MTSS conference • wall at top 2011: New Governor of Florida • speed…been • 2011 to 2013: 4 changes to Education Commissioner • 2011: New Bureau Chief for special ed recovering ever • 2011-2013: Implementation of new teacher appraisal systems since… 2012 to present: Common core implementation • 2014: FSA - new state test aligned to Florida Standards. • 7
Trends in MTSS Perspectives • MTSS as (Org Capacity, RtI+PBIS, School Reform) • “Creative funding”, State Visibility, Common Vision/Lang. • Culture & Knowledge for Systems Change/Implementation • Building Capacity for EBPs • District & School Improvement Context; • Comprehensive Data Systems and Problem Solving • Tiered Service Model Use (student to district) • PD Pedagogy - give ‘em fish or teach ’em to fish • Systems Coaching (Teaming) & Performance Feedback • “Add-On” vs. Initiative Alignment and Integration • Merging Classroom Practices for “engagement” 8
Facilitators and Barriers to Integrating RtI and PBIS Barriers Ba Fa Faci cilitators rs • Strong state & district visibility/priority • Limited or no state/district visibility or priority • Common language & understanding for MTSS • Variability in understanding MTSS/PBIS/RtI • Proactive/visionary leadership • Reactive leadership • Shared funding & Grant mgmt • Separate funding streams; different grant mgmt • Shared mission/vision • Vague or misaligned vision/mission Shared implementation model • Different implementation models • Shared evaluation model • Different evaluation methods/tools • Collaborative focus on building system capacity • Siloed technical assistance delivery; no capacity build • • School Improvement using MTSS • Competing initiatives • Priority on Tier 1 • No priority on Tier 1 • ESE as ”specially designed instruction” • ESE as a “place” or “category”; MTSS as a “process” • Integrated data systems • Rigid vs. Fluid district entry/Tech Assist • Strong coaching network/capacity • No/limited coaching capacity • Common problem solving model • Different data-based decision-making models Shared knowledge of organizational change • Turf and Politics • • Leadership turnover (State/District/Bldg) • Changes to assessment systems in schools 9
New Questions Are we trying to integrate RtI and PBIS for the sake of integrating? What would “integration” look like if we approached it from an outcome driven perspective? Do we need to define what “integration” is? 10
D EFINING I NTEGRATION 11
One Size “way of work”? What if… • Every district is organized differently • Different priorities and readiness • District size and complexity influences entry and capacity • Fluctuations in political climate • Consider functional degrees of integration to match local contextual capacity 12
Defining Integration • Many definitions focus on: – Coordination of activities or practices, – Coordination of information, – “Material flow” – Alignment of policy – Merging of resources – Interconnectedness of subsystem elements • Conceptual roots of “integration” in Business: – Fayol (1949) – Notions of cooperation and coordination. – Lawrence & Lorsch (1969) “…process of achieving unity of effort among the various subsystems in the accomplishment of the organization’s task…” p. 34. 13
Specialization vs. Merger “While homogenization & fusing of components of a system together to the point that they are no longer distinctive can be viewed as reflecting the ultimate in integration, this may not be optimal in an organization setting because such an extreme integration eliminates the much needed differentiated and complimentary skills and expertise that comes with specialization.” Model of “ Organizational Integration” Barki & Pinsonneault, 2005, pg. 166 14
“Integration” as Degrees of Interdependence Silos Si Aligned Ali Br Braided Merge Mer Pa Para ralle llel • Independent; • Some • More Dependent • Highly Dependent • Independent; • Different goals Dependence • Shared goals & • Shared goals & • Shared goals or or mission • Shared goals & mission mission mission • Distinctive & mission • Distinctive & • Little to no • Distinctive & specialized • Distinctive & specialized distinctiveness or Specialized • Unresponsive specialized • Sufficiently specialization • Mostly • Different • Greater responsive • Highly responsive and unresponsive resources, responsiveness • Complementary dependent to each • Different procedures & • Some shared • Greater sharing of other resources, ways of work. resources, resources, • All resources, procedures,& procedures & procedures & ways procedures & ways of ways of work ways of work of work work are common 15
Calibrating Collaboration • What can we learn from innovative schools about integrating RtI and PBIS practices? • Can that information be used to guide district and regional “integration” efforts? (need-based PD and TA?) • What implications exist for state or project level collaboration? 16
L EARNING ABOUT S CHOOL E FFORTS TO I NTEGRATE A CADEMICS AND B EHAVIOR 17
Identifying “exemplary practices” • NOT A RESEARCH STUDY!; part of our TA support • Staff nominations of exemplary RtI and PBIS districts • Districts organized by “size” for comparison and sampling • Seeking all school types and regions; 1 st cohort of 8 districts • 3 phases: 1. School selection and identification of MTSS practices 2. School observations and staff interviews 3. Development of state “model” site for integrated MTSS 18
Participating*Districts*to*Date Co Completed ed School Site e Vi Visi sits s - 8 sch chools ls Comple Co pleted Di District ct and Sch chool l Interviews • 6 of 8 districts 1. St. Lucie Schools - (2 nominations) • Total of 11 schools – K-8 school and Middle School • Districts 2. Santa Rosa Schools - (3 nominations) – St. Lucie School District – Primary School, Middle School, Elem – Santa Rosa School District School – Levy School District 3. Levy Schools (1 nomination) – Baker School District – Broward School District – Elementary school • District size range from: 4. Baker Schools (2 nominations) – 6 to 310 schools – Elementary school and PK-K Center – 4,600+ to 260,000+ students 19
Recommend
More recommend
