School wide applications model sam in the dc public schools
Download
1 / 35

School-Wide Applications Model: SAM in the DC Public Schools - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 109 Views
  • Uploaded on

School-Wide Applications Model: SAM in the DC Public Schools. Action Planning and Effective Implementation Sailor, Roger, McCart & Wolf, 2008. Survey of Barriers to Implementation and Sustainability of SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008).

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'School-Wide Applications Model: SAM in the DC Public Schools' - tallis


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
School wide applications model sam in the dc public schools

School-Wide Applications Model: SAM in the DC Public Schools

Action Planning and Effective Implementation

Sailor, Roger, McCart & Wolf, 2008


Survey of Barriers to Implementation and Sustainability of SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)

10. Cultural difference between teacher-student

9. History of failed initiatives

8. Competing initiatives that drain resources

7. High proportion of inexperienced, short term teachers

6. Disconnect between school and district administration

5. Administrative turnover

4. Continuous change in district leadership and priorities

3. High bureaucratic complexity

2. Inadequate prepared teaching force

1. Teacher turnover

2


SAM SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)

Schoolwide Applications Model

Six Guiding Principles

Fifteen Critical Features


Six guiding principles of sam
Six Guiding Principles of SAM SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)

  • 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


Critical features of sam 1 5
Critical Features of SAM (1-5) SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)

  • 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
Critical Features of SAM (6-10) SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)

  • 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
Critical Features of SAM (11-15) SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)

  • 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 SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)

SAMAN


Samschools dcps
SAMSCHOOLS SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)DCPS

  • RtI: Response to Intervention Framework

  • Effective District Level Systems and Structure

  • District and School-Based Action Planning

  • Coaching Model

  • PBS: Positive Behavioral Support

  • Co-Teaching

Year One


Response to intervention
RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)


Positive behavioral support
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL SUPPORT SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)


General implementation process
GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS SW-PBS in Urban Settings (Putnam et al., 2008)

Team

Agreements

Data-based

Action Plan

Evaluation

Implementation

Washington, D.C. Summer Insitute 2008 SAMSCHOOLS, LLC.


District level support

Systems and Supports at the District Level: District and School Based Action Planning

DISTRICT LEVEL SUPPORT


Sam action plan
SAM Action Plan School Based Action Planning


Instructional coaching

Based on the work of Jim Knight School Based Action Planning

INSTRUCTIONAL COACHING


What is instructional coaching
What Is Instructional Coaching School Based Action Planning

  • A collaborative process that aimed to improve teaching.

  • An on-site professional developer who partners with educators to identify and assist with implementation of proven teaching strategies. (Jim Knight, KU, Center for Research on Learning)

  • An instructional coach:

  • Is on site

  • Is a professional developer

  • Partners with teachers

  • Identifies with teachers

  • Uses proven strategies (research-based)

  • Assists teachers

Jim Knight

Journal of Staff Development, Spring 2004 (Vol. 25, No. 2)


Co teaching

Based on the work of Marilyn Friend School Based Action Planning

CO-TEACHING


The power of two
The Power of Two School Based Action Planning

  • Co-Teaching is a model for successful collaboration between special education and general education teachers in order to meet the needs of all students with diverse learning abilities in the general education classroom.


Co teaching is a collaborative process
Co-teaching is a collaborative process. . . School Based Action Planning

  • Two educators

  • Delivering instruction together in the regular classroom

  • To diverse groups of students

  • Accomplished through joint planning and both educators delivering instruction in large, small, and individual groups.

Co-TeachingSouth Central RPDC 10-22-07


Initial outcomes

Year One School Based Action Planning

INITIAL OUTCOMES


What are the expectations for sam schools in wdc over a three year period
“What are the expectations for SAM schools in WDC over a three-year period?”

  • SAM uses an RTI logic model to examine the relationship of the implementation fidelity tool, SAMAN, to repeated assessments of pupil progress over time using a procedure called latent growth modeling.

  • As schools learn to implement the critical features of SAM, fifteen of which are sampled by SAMAN, outcomes will be reflected in pupil progress as measured by grade level and school gains in curriculum based measures, benchmark assessments and annual standardized assessments.

  • It is expected that over a three year period SAM schools will outperform demographically comparable schools within the same district in math and reading gains as estimated by statistical probability assessments. Moreover, we expect these gains to be reflected in all subgroups including special education.

Sailor & Choi, 2009


Samschools year one
SAMSCHOOLS YEAR ONE three-year period?”

  • We expect modest trends in a positive direction and gains on the SAMAN from initiation to implementation score ranges for the same corresponding period.

Sailor & Choi, 2009


Samschools year two
SAMSCHOOLS YEAR TWO three-year period?”

  • We expect statistically significant trends on outcome data as SAMAN assessments move toward the upper ranges of implementation.

Sailor & Choi, 2009


Samschools year three
SAMSCHOOLS YEAR THREE three-year period?”

  • We expect significant differences between SAM schools and a comparable match set of non-SAM schools (SAM waitlisted), on math and reading, and with statistically significant trends in a positive direction within each SAM school.

Sailor & Choi, 2009


To illustrate the desired trend
To Illustrate the Desired Trend three-year period?”

  • SAMAN progress from Chavez Elementary, Ravenswood School District, California.

  • Chavez took three years to reach SAMAN scale score 2.5 and higher which is the phase of enculturation.

  • Scores in that phase indicate that the SAM process has become “business as usual” at the school.

  • California State test (STAR) on math and reading over the span from 2003-2004 AY to 2007-2008 AY and the resultant statistical analysis.

Sailor & Choi, 2009


Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test three-year period?”

Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test

Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test

Repeated Measure ANOVA- Significant main effect on year of measurement

F(1.96, 522.13) = 53.62, p < .01, ηp2 = .17


Dcps initial data
DCPS Initial Data three-year period?”

  • 2008-2009 AY DC-BAS

  • Seven of the eight schools are trending upward averaged across all grades

  • If the trend continues, cohort 1 schools as a group should reflect gains in annual grade level assessments by the end of year three.

  • In year two, we will create a matched sample of schools with comparable demographics and do a comparative analysis of SAM vs. non-SAM school gains.


Next year
Next Year three-year period?”

  • We add additional training on the core components (RtI, coaching, co-teaching, PBS)

  • We look for additional gains in progress and outcome data

  • As we introduce children back into the classroom there will be additional needs to address. Not sure of the impact on the data.

  • Additional focus on capacity building and school climate.


Thank you
Thank You three-year period?”

Amy McCart, Ph.D.

Research Assistant Professor

University of Kansas

[email protected]

816-719-3393

Pbis.org


ad