the schoolwide applications model (sam) an rti-driven approach to school reform wayne sailor...
Post on 17-Dec-2015
219 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
The Schoolwide Applications Model (SAM)
An RtI-Driven Approach to School Reform
Wayne SailorUniversity of Kansas
For Professional Development Conference
Rochester, New YorkMarch 15, 2007
SAM
choolwide
pplications
odel
SAM
choolwide
pplications
odel
SAMSAM
choolwide
pplications
odel
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Above proficiency in math 29.4% 66% 47.8% 66.7% 90% 100%
Above proficiency in reading 41.6% 53.7% 64.7% 67.4% 87.5% 87.5%
Unsatisfactory in math 32.4% 14.9% 20.5% 9.5% 0% 0%
Unsatisfactory in reading 27.1% 22% 12.5% 8.7% 3.1% 2.4
Math and Reading Performance at WC
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Academic Year
Above proficiency in math Above proficiency in reading
Unsatisfactory in math Unsatisfactory in reading
Tertiary Level Support Must Include Response to Intervention
Student study teams Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support
Three levels School-Based Mental Health Services
Prevention Wraparound
School-wide Data-Based Decision Making Teams Site Leadership Teams Grade-Level Teams SWPBS Teams (initially)
Six Guiding Principles of SAM
All instruction is guided by General Education All school resources are configured to benefit all
students School Proactively addresses social development and
citizenship School is data-based learning organization School has open boundaries in relation to its families
and its community School enjoys district support for undertaking the
extensive systems-change activities required to implement SAM S
AM
choolwide
pplications
odel
SAM
choolwide
pplications
odel
SAMSAM
choolwide
pplications
odel
Critical Features of SAM (1-5) School serves all students. All students at school are considered general
education students. General education teachers assume responsibility for
all students at the school. School is inclusive of all students for all classroom
and school functions. School is organized to provide all specialized
supports, adaptations and accommodations to students in such a way as to maximize the number of students who will benefit.
Critical Features of SAM (6-10) All students are taught in accordance with the general
curriculum. The school has an active, schoolwide Positive Behavior
Support (SWPBS) program operating at all 3 levels. The school is a data-driven, collaborative decision-making,
learning organization with all major functions guided by team process.
School effectively utilizes general education students in instruction of students in need of supports in all instructional environments.
All personnel at the school participate in the teacher/learning processes and are valued for their respective contributions to pupil academic and social outcomes.
Critical Features of SAM (11-15) School personnel use a uniform, non-categorical
lexicon to describe both personnel and teaching/learning functions.
School has established a Site Leadership Team (SLT) empowered by the school and the district to implement SAM at the school.
School has working partnership with families of students who attend the school.
School has working partnership with its community businesses and service providers.
SAM implementation at the school site is fully recognized and supported by the district.
Ravenswood School District School A Demographics
Student Enrollment in Grades 5-8 by Race/Ethnicity
7%
82%
8% 3%
Pacific Islander
Latino
African-American
Other
Enrollment in 5th-8th Grades= 346
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Expectationsdefined
Behavioralexpectations
taught
Ongoingsystem forrewardingbehavioral
expectations
System forresponding to
behavioralviolations
Monitoring andevaluation
Leadership District levelsupport
Total meanscore
Fall 02
Spring 03
Fall 03
Spring 04
Fall 04
Fall 05
Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET)
School Progress on Critical Features3
2 2
3
2 2
3
2
3 3
2 2
3 3
2
2.47
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 MEAN
SAMAN CRITICAL FEATURE PROGRESS
SA
MA
N S
CA
LE
SC
OR
ES
Jan. 04
Apr./May 04
2005
Jan. 06
May. 06
Progress By Cohort
2.2
2.47
2.332.4
2.27 2.272.33
0.87
1.73
2
1.2
1.93
2.46
2.73
2.26
2.53
2.332.26 2.26
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
A B C D E F G H I J K L
SAMAN CRITICAL FEATURES
SAM
AN
SC
ALE
SC
OR
ES Jan. 04
Apr./May 04
2005
Jan. 06
May. 06
Repeated Measure ANOVA- Significant main effect on year of measurementF(1.75, 298.60) = 12.85, p < .01, ηp2 = .07
Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test
Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test
Repeated Measure ANOVA- Significant main effect on year of measurementF(1.908, 324.30) = 15.66, p < .01, ηp2 = .08
Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test
Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test
Repeated Measure ANOVA- Significant main effect on year of measurementF(1.77, 297.56) = 5.14, p = .09, ηp2 = .03
Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test
SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.
Definition of SAM Cohorts
Four elementary schools
or Two elementary schools and one middle school
or Two middle schools
or One comprehensive high school
SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.
SAM STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS
District-Level Instructional Coaches (.50 EFT per cohort
District-Level SAM Coordinator (.50 EFT per cohort)
Baseline SAMAN assessment data SLT—School Leadership Team SCP—School-Centered Plan process
Renewable Site Action Plans DLT—District Leadership Team DRT—District Resources Team
SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.
SAMInternal Staffing Requirements
One instructional coach per cohort .50 – 1.0 FTE
Trained by SAM staff Supervised by district SAM coordinator
One district-level coordinator .50 – 1.0 FTE per cohort
Trained by SAM staff One “data manager” per school site One district-level data manager District Administrator responsible for SAM
implementation Usually Assistant Superintendent for C&I
SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.
SAM Assessment Tools
Step One: Teacher/Administrator Survey Step Two: SAMAN Baseline Assessment Step Three: SET Assessment of SWPBS Step Four: District Level Self Assessment Step Five: Quarterly SAMAN Assessments
100.00
70.00
83.30
100.00
25.00
62.50
0.00
62.97
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Expectationsdefined
Behavioralexpectations
taught
Ongoingsystem forrewardingbehavioral
expectations
System forresponding
to behavioralviolations
Monitoringand
evaluation
Leadership District levelsupport
Total meanscore
New Orleans Elementary School A SET
Expectationsdefined
Behavioralexpectationstaught
OngoingsystemforrewardingbehavioralexpectationsSystemforresponding tobehavioralviolations
Monitoring andevaluation
Leadership
Districtlevelsupport
Totalmeanscore
SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.
SAM Self-AssessmentDistrict Leadership Features
92
67
100
50 50
010
203040
50607080
90100
LeadershipTeam
Data Collection Staffing Training Sustainability
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Co
mp
lete
Baseline
SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.
SAM Self-AssessmentCritical Features
13
0 0 0 0
33
17
87
0
17
0
100
33
25 25
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Serv
es a
ll St
uden
ts
Cons
ider
all
stud
ents
gen
eral
ed
Gene
ral e
d te
ache
rsre
spon
sible
for
all stud
ents
All stud
ents
inc
lude
d in
all
scho
ol fun
ctio
ns
All su
ppor
t an
d se
rvices
inte
grat
ed
All stud
ents
are
tau
ght
the
gene
ral ed
cur
riculum
PBS
at a
ll th
ree
leve
ls
Data
driv
en d
ecision
mak
ing
syst
em
Utiliz
ing
stud
ents
in the
teac
hing
/lea
rning
All sc
hool
per
sonn
elpa
rticipat
e in the
tec
hing
-lear
ning
Avoid
using
cate
goric
alde
scrip
tors
Scho
ol g
uide
d by
a s
itelead
ersh
ip t
eam
Pare
nts
are
netw
orke
d
Enga
gemen
t with
loc
albu
sine
sses
, indu
stry
, &
com
mun
ity s
ervic
e ag
encies
Distric
t su
ppor
ts in
tegr
ate
and
coor
dina
te a
ll sc
hool
reso
urce
s, s
uppo
rts, &
ser
vice
s
Per
cen
tag
e co
mp
lete
Baseline
SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.
SAM Self-AssessmentEvaluation Features
33
50
010
2030
405060
7080
90100
Evaluation Tools EvaluationSchedule
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Co
mp
lete
Baseline
SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.
District Assessment Tools
Step One: Risk Screening Assessment SSBD ISTEEP
Step Two: Ongoing Risk Monitoring SSBD CBM’s
Step Three: Grade Level State Assessments
Wayne Sailor University of Kansas 785-864-4950 wsailor@ku.edu
Thank You For Your Time
SAM
choolwide
pplications
odel
SAM
choolwide
pplications
odel
SAMSAM
choolwide
pplications
odel
Recommended Resources
Sailor, W., Zuna, N., Choi, J., Thomas, J., McCart, A., & Roger, B. (2006). Anchoring schoolwide positive behavior support in structural school reform. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities31(1), 18-30.
Sailor, W., & Roger, B. (2005). Rethinking inclusion: Schoolwide applications. Phi Delta Kappan 86(7), 503-509
National Association of State Directors of Education: Response to Interventionwww.nasde.org
www.PBIS.org
top related