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

SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.

SAM Agenda

What is SAM? Does it work? What is required to implement SAM?

What is SAM?

Schoolwide Applications Model

RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

A Logic Model of Support

White Church Elementary

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)

SAMSchoolwide Applications Model

Six Guiding Principles

Fifteen Critical Features

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.

Schoolwide Applications

Model Analysis

SAMAN

Does SAM Work?

Evaluating the SAM Model

Ravenswood School District

Demographics

Data

and

Outcomes

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

School A

N=5 N=5 N=5 N=4 N=2 N=1 N=2 N=3

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

School A

N=86 N=72 N=89 N=87

What is Required to Make SAM Work?

Systems, Structures and Tools

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