2011 OSEP Leadership Mega Conference Collaboration to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career 2.0 Integrating Systems The Schoolwide Applications Model (SAM) Wayne Sailor, Ph.D. Strand #212 and 224

Better educational and social outcomes as verified from research Better fit with federal policy (i.e., ADA; IDEIA) Consistent with Supreme Court decisions challenging LRE Inclusion: The Good News

Disconnected from general curriculum Velcro-aide (dedicated paraprofessional) blocks natural interactions Disruptive to general education class Driven by special education with little or no participation from general education Inclusion: The Bad News

Integrate all school resources for the benefit of all students Accomplish de facto inclusion through collaborative instruction Driven by general education with support from special education A Better Approach (Perhaps)

Contemporary logic – Medical Model Teaching/learning informed by psychology Locus of academic/social failure is child Pathologizing process (i.e., LD; EBD; etc.) Diagnostic/prescriptive remedy Requires quasi-medical industry to service referrals Emphasizes place rather than need (congregate service delivery). Competing Logic Models

Suggested Logic – Schoolwice RTI Model  Teaching/learning informed not only by psychology (i.e., student assessment) but by sociology (i.e., school organization and leadership) and anthropology (i.e., focus on culture of the school). Locus of academic/social failure is ecology of the child Addresses measured needs of child rather than assesses pathology Addresses prevention rather than remediation Integrates specialized resources so all students benefit Reduces referrals for IEPs (special education). Competing Logic Models (cont.)

No special population classes. General ed teachers responsible for all students at each grade level All support services delivered in ways such that non-designated students can also benefit Collaborative teaching (general ed and support ed) Team-driven infrastructure with coaching support. Integrating Means:

Integrating all school resources for the benefit of positive academic gains for all student (i.e., no silos). RTI as Comprehensive School Reform

Extension of standard protocol RTI Alternative to medical model All personnel focused on all students All resources integrated in a universal design for learning Problem-Solving Logic

General education Special education Title I Gifted English Language Learners Section 504 Anything else All resources means

Program Evaluation Model Does SAM Work?

School A SAMAN (Fall, 2010)

School A SET (Fall, 2010)

Repeated Measure ANOVA- Significant main effect on year of measurement F(1.96, ) = 53.62, p <.01, η p2 =.17 Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test

School B CELDT California English Language Development Test) Score Relationship between CELDT and SAMAN scores CELDT score (M = , SD = 54.97, N = 520) SAMAN score (M = 2.03, SD =.5) Significance r(518) =.286, p < Correlation SAMAN score could be a significant predictor of CELDT (ß =.286, p <.01), explaining about 8.2% of the variance. Regression

Repeated Measure ANOVA- Significant main effect on year of measurement F(2, 534) = 60.47, p <.01, η p2 =.19 Significant on Tuckey’s HSD Test

Repeated one-way ANOVA Significant difference among 2002, 2003, and 2004 school year CELDT scores, F(1.83, ) = , p <.001. Significant increase from 2002 (M = , SD = 65.18) to 2004 (M = , SD = 47.69) school year. Post-hoc Test with Tuckey’s Comparison among 2002, 2003, and 2004 school year Significant School B CELDT California English Language Development Test) Score

DC-BAS Reading Score ( School Year Only)

DC-BAS Math Score ( School Year Only)

DC-BAS Reading - Scale Score Changes (08-09 to School Year)

DC-BAS Math - Scale Score Changes (08-09 to School Year)

Visit Contact me... For More...