Behavior Mapping | Powerschool

We need to map fields used in Powerschool to our Rethink Platform. The chart below shows items used to make calculations (some the user won’t see) and also Mapping Points which the user will see and need to be part of the design. From a Data Analytics perspective, the first goal is to create calculations used to identify which Tier is recommended for the student in Attendance and Behavior. The current plan for attendance and behavior is to show the tier for each student for Tardies, absences, and incidents.

SIS Data Dictionary:: PowerSchool SIS Views (powerschool-docs.com)

See https://rethinkautism.atlassian.net/l/cp/Srp0UmLR

Mapping .TXT files

PM_Incident_Management_Discipline_original_export.txt

Behavior: PM_Incident_Management_Discipline_original_export.txt and file logic

PS Field Needed	Rethink Field Mapping Points	Logic for Rethink Set Up
INCIDENT Student_ID Values ( 5-6 digit unique student identifier) PM_Incident_Management_Discipline_original_export.txt file	Student ID- MTSS Dashboard Student View Open	For Belleville, this is the student identifier column
INCIDENT Date Values (Belleville: 4-digit year - 2 digit month-2-digit date example: 2022-12-20 ) PM_Incident_Management_Discipline_original_export.txt file	Date- MTSS dashboard Student View Open	Getting a count of the number of unique dates with an incident for each student as determined by the value of the student identifier column. For Belleville, the count of the number of unique dates will be based on the INCIDENT Date column for each student as determined by the INCIDENT Student_ID column.

Additional Fields Needed --10-12-23

Behavior Calculation Rules

Here are the instruction for assigning students to tiers for behavior based on the data.

Important note: Belleville’s data only includes students who had one or more recorded behavior incident. That is why the instructions below specify to record 0 behavior incidents for students who are missing from the behavior data. However, we recommend allowing for a missing data category when showing attendance tiers to allow for different ways that districts may keep track of student behavior in the data.

There are two sets of default mappings (see note below each set of mappings for defining at risk indicators when users change from the default mapping). Set 1 below is for customers who do not use RethinkEd’s behavior product. We believe that Belleville will be in this category, but it’s possible Belleville will switch to RethinkEd’s behavior product in the 2023-2024 academic year. Set 2 below is for customers who do use RethinkEd’s behavior product. The major distinction between the two types of customers is that customers who use RethinkEd’s behavior product will have quality data to distinguish between major and minor incidents whereas customers who do not will not. The rules take this difference into account.

1. For customers who do not use RethinkEd’s behavior product, we expect that customers will give us a behavior data file that includes fields/columns that give a student identifier and the date of the behavior incident(s), with one row per combination of incident and student. For Belleville, the behavior data is in the file named PM_Incident_Management_Discipline_original_export.txt, and the student identifier is Student_ID.

   1. Start by getting the count of incidents (i.e., the count of rows) within each value of the student identifier for the given academic year. For Belleville, you will count the number of rows for each value of Student_ID. Field/column requirements for count of incidents:

      1. Minimum: 0

      2. Maximum: 1000 (Note: There is no true maximum because in theory, kids could have an unlimited number of incidents in the academic year; Tara is choosing 1000 as a maximum because it is highly unlikely that any kid will reach that number.)

      3. Length (number of digits): 4

   2. With the counts for each student (for each value of the student identifier), you can apply the following set of rules:

      1. 0 to 1 incident for the academic year = tier 1

         1. 1 incident for the academic year = tier 1 with an at risk indicator (such as a down arrow)

      2. 2 to 5 incidents for the academic year = tier 2

         1. 5 incidents for the academic year = tier 2 with an at risk indicator (such as a down arrow)

      3. 6 or more incidents for the academic year = tier 3

      4. For tier 2 and tier 3, students' tier resets to tier 1 if they have gone 9 weeks without any incidents.

         1. Take the date of the most recent incident. When 9 weeks have passed since that date without any other incidents, the recommended tier for the student becomes tier 1 again.

         2. In this case, the date of the resetting to tier 1 (the date after 9 weeks without any incidents) would be the date from which the behavior incidents would get counted again, and the tiers above would apply only for the count of incidents from the date of the reset forward.

            1. For example, if the student had 2 incidents in the first month of the school year, with the second incident on September 30, and no incidents for 9 consecutive weeks after September 30 (by November 2), then the student would be “reset” to tier 1 on November 2.

            2. The count of incidents would “restart” on November 2, and if the student had two incidents, the recommended tier for the student would again be tier 2.

         3. This could potentially repeat, with students' tier getting reset again to tier 1 later in the academic year if they once again go 9 consecutive weeks without any incidents.

      5. Important note: When a user changes from the default mapping for tiers, the at risk indicator (such as a down arrow) will apply when the student has the maximum number of incidents for tier 1 or tier 2. There is no approaching indicator for behavior because counts of behavior incidents can only go up, not down, so students can only move to a more intensive (not less intensive) tier throughout the year according to the above rules.

   3. Note: So far based on a few districts' data, behavior data are set up such that students missing from the data will have 0 incidents. (They are only in the data if they have a behavior incident, so not being in the data suggests 0 incidents for those students.) It is important to have their count of incidents reflect that they have 0 incidents, meaning that you will have to fill in missing data with 0s. However, to allow for different behavior data formats, we recommend allowing for a missing data category for behavior tiers.

2.  For customers who do use RethinkEd’s behavior product:

   1. Within each value of the student identifier, count separately the number of major and minor incidents. This will be a count of rows within each student identifier that are marked “major” and a count of rows within each student identifier that are marked “minor”. Field/column requirements for count of major incidents and count of minor incidents:

      1. Minimum: 0

      2. Maximum: 1000 (Note: There is no true maximum because in theory, kids could have an unlimited number of incidents in the academic year; Tara is choosing 1000 as a maximum because it is highly unlikely that any kid will reach that number.)

      3. Length (number of digits): 4

   2. With the counts of major and minor incidents for each student, apply the following set of rules, where you always recommend the higher (more intensive, with a higher number) tier that applies:

      1. 0 to 1 major incidents or 0 to 3 minor incidents for the academic year = tier 1

         1. 1 major incident or 3 minor incidents for the academic year = tier 1 with an at risk indicator (such as a down arrow)

      2. 2 to 5 major incidents or 4 to 10 minor incidents for the academic year = tier 2

         1. 5 major incidents or 10 minor incidents for the academic year = tier 2 with an at risk indicator (such as a down arrow)

      3. 6 or more major incidents and 11 or more minor incidents for the academic year = tier 3

         1. Again, the higher tier applies, so if a student has 1 major incident (tier 1) but 10 minor incidents, we would recommend tier 2 for that student. Additionally, that student would have an at risk indicator (such as a down arrow).

         2. Similarly, if a student had 5 major incidents (tier 2) and 0 minor incidents (tier 1), we would recommend tier 2 for that student. Additionally, that student would have an at risk indicator (such as a down arrow).

         3. The at risk indicator only applies for the higher tier. So if a student has 1 major incident and 4 minor incidents, the recommended tier would be tier 2, and this student would not have an at risk indicator since the student is at the low end of the number of behavior incidents for tier 2.

      4. For tier 2 and tier 3, students' tier resets to tier 1 if they have gone 9 weeks without any incidents.

         1. Take the date of the most recent incident. When 9 weeks have passed since that date without any other incidents, the recommended tier for the student becomes tier 1 again.

         2. In this case, the date of the resetting to tier 1 (the date after 9 weeks without any incidents) would be the date from which the behavior incidents would get counted again, and the tiers above would apply only for the count of incidents from the date of the reset forward.

            1. For example, if the student had 2 major incidents in the first month of the school year, with the second incident on September 30, and no incidents for 9 consecutive weeks after September 30 (by November 2), then the student would be “reset” to tier 1 on November 2.

            2. The count of major and minor incidents would “restart” on November 2, and if the student had two major incidents, the recommended tier for the student would again be tier 2.

         3. This could potentially repeat, with students' tier getting reset again to tier 1 later in the academic year if they once again go 9 consecutive weeks without any incidents.

      5. Important note: When a user changes from the default mapping for tiers, the at risk indicator (such as a down arrow) will apply when the student has the maximum number of incidents for tier 1 or tier 2 for whichever type of incident count is the basis for the tier recommendation (major vs. minor incident count). For example, if based on major incidents, the student is recommended for tier 2 but based on minor incidents, the student is recommended for tier 1, tier 2 (the more intensive tier) would apply, and only the major incidents would be the basis for whether there should be an at risk indicator for the student. There is no approaching indicator for behavior because counts of behavior incidents can only go up, not down, so students can only move to a more intensive (not less intensive) tier throughout the year according to the above rules.

   3. Note: Students missing from the incident data will have 0 major and 0 minor incidents. (They are only in the data if they have a behavior incident, so not being in the data suggests 0 incidents for those students.) If they are missing data (or missing from the data) for major incidents, they have 0 major incidents. If they are missing data (or missing from the data) for minor incidents, they have 0 minor incidents. It is important to have their count of major and minor incidents reflect that they have 0 incidents, meaning that you will have to fill in missing data with 0s.