How does your team use data to make decisions on campus? Hopper has special concerns when it comes to assessing data. Several things factor into reviewing data. When students improve they are mainstreamed back into their home school. On the other side, new students are constantly entering and this causes special concerns due to the extreme behavior problems these students have upon arrival. These transitions can change the entire climate of the school. Data is scrutinized very carefully to factor in these special concerns. The team looks at trends and brainstorms what factors may be involved in causing these trends. Frequent flyers are identified, time and place is considered and adjustments are made. Some examples of changes that have been made as a result of reviewing data include criteria for after school clubs, student behavior leveling now includes unexcused absences, various schedule changes, additional incentives and a school-wide mentoring program. Student behaviors are graphed and a notebook is kept on every student. Students are leveled based on a point system and each level includes additional privileges.

How do you share information with the rest of your faculty (e.g., emails, newsletters, meetings, etc.)?  How often do you share this information? The PBS plan is reviewed with the entire faculty at the beginning of every school year. Data is shared after each nine weeks. The team discusses new directions for PBS with the faculty and asks for input regarding these changes. Behavior information and updates are sent through emails, monthly newsletters and the school calendar.

In what areas of PBS does your team excel (e.g., rewarding students/staff, teaching expectations, data-based decision-making, etc.)?  Please provide details below. The team excels in all three areas but the #1 area that stands out is the rewarding of students with a variety of incentives. Every teacher has an incentive program in their classroom. There are several school wide incentive opportunities and the principal also has a reward system. Another strength is the addition of the mentoring program last year. Every student is mentored twice a week by an adult at the school. Data based decision making has greatly improved over the 4 years of implementation. Data is scrutinized more effectively and interventions are recognized more frequently.

Discuss the changes you have seen on campus since PBS implementation (e.g., data, climate, morale, etc.). Faculty and student morale has greatly improved. The principal noted that she witnesses faculty leaving for the day much happier and positive as opposed to angry and frustrated in the past. Students demonstrate a healthier work attitude because of the expanded incentive program. It is obvious that they feel more productive and successful. Overall data has improved over the 4 years. Individual student behaviors have improved from the time they enter the school to several months later. The staff behaviors have improved also. The staff used to be much more punitive than they are now. Faculty often has to be physically involved with the student due to extreme behaviors. It is recognized by the team that this has decreased over time. The skill level of the faculty in verbal diffusion, staying out of power struggles and arguments with the students has increased since PBS began. The overall climate has improved. Visitors are impressed with the good things that go on at Hopper and share that opinion. Students know the expectations and rules and classroom climates are more positive as a result. New student disruptions are less severe and last a shorter period of time because existing students are conditioned not to participate in negative responses. Understand there are still many behavior issues at the school due to the severity of behaviors students have but the management of these behaviors is more positive and students’ response time is shorter.

What are some obstacles that your team has had to overcome?  Please explain the process for overcoming these hurdles below. The team was disjointed at the beginning of the project. Individual concerns were more of a priority than the team process. The team lacked direction and meetings were unproductive. After the first year or so, the team has completely turned around. As explained above, the members now demonstrate effective teaming and the project has enhanced as a result. The addition of a strong team leader made a considerable difference in the overall performance of the team. Bonding as a team which always takes time has enhanced the functioning of the team and therefore positively had an impact on SWPBS. A second obstacle was changing the faculty’s perception of the PBS team. This obstacle was overcome by involving the faculty in the decision making process. Team members made a special effort to make positive comments to staff when appropriate and this helped to make them feel an equal part of the process. Over time the faculty witnessed positive changes and has learned to trust the team to serve the best interest of the students as well as the best interest of the staff. A third obstacle was maintaining consistency and following through on interventions put into place. This was improved by constantly reviewing policy and making changes to existing rules or lack of rule and enforcing that everyone follow through with the recommended changes.