際際滷

際際滷Share a Scribd company logo
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
1
SELF-ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEM SOLVING IMPLEMENTATION (SAPSI V2.4)
ADMINISTRATIVE INSTRUCTIONS
Purpose
Part of the Illinois ASPIRE project entails assessing the implementation of the problem solving process at the
building level. The Self-Assessment of Problem Solving Implementation (SAPSI) checklist monitors ongoing
efforts to establish permanent problem solving procedures, tools and products. The following categories of
products are those of interest for the evaluation process and were considered in developing the SAPSI
questions.
Categories of Products
Instructional Planning Forms
Screening data (CBM, SWIS)
Evidence of progress monitoring (Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3,Graphs)
Case management documentation (student level--choose every 10th
case)
Training (Training Logs or Sign in sheets)
School Improvement Plans
Administration
The SAPSI is to be administered in schools participating as data collection sites under Illinois ASPIRE. The
program coordinator or internal coach at the building level completes the survey with the building team.
Timeline for administration
The SAPSI is required to be administered once each academic year in the fall. However it may be
administered at anytime in order to assist with action planning. Data are to be submitted to your regional
coordinator within the deadlines set by the evaluation staff. Detailed information regarding dates to send
data back to Loyola University Chicago are available at the Illinois ASPIRE Program Coordinators
Page which is linked from the CSEIT ASPIRE webpage at http://www.luc.edu/cseit/aspire.shtml.
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
2
Administration Instructions
Under BENCHMARK DATE enter the date the SAPSI was completed. There are two columns; one for the
required fall administration and one for any additional administration.
For each of the questions, there are one or more components understood to be established in the case of
successful implementation. These components are listed to help you judge if the premise in the question has
a status of NOT STARTED, IN PROGRESS, ACHIEVED, or MAINTAINED as defined in the top of each
page. If the implementation in your building is still IN PROGRESS or NOT STARTED, it is expected that not
all (or none) of the components would be in place. It is also possible that for a given question some
components are established and others are not. To the best of your judgment, and with the understanding
that we are interested in information on how well the project is being implemented, use the COMPONENTS
OF DEFINITION to assist you to assess the level of implementation of the process stated in the question.
After completing the SAPSI, data are submitted to your district/regional Illinois ASPIRE Program Coordinator
or external coach. The Program coordinator will make sure all data are sent to the Center for School
Evaluation, Intervention, and Training at Loyola University Chicago by the appropriate deadline for that data
collection period.
Deadlines are available at the Illinois ASPIRE Program Coordinators Page which is linked from the
CSEIT ASPIRE webpage at http://www.luc.edu/cseit/aspire.shtml.
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
1
Illinois ASPIRE
Self-Assessment of Problem Solving Implementation (SAPSI v2.4)
School Name Date of Report
District Name & Number County
INSTRUCTIONS
Complete and submit one time per school year.
The problem solving team should complete this checklist once in the fall to monitor
activities for implementation of problem-solving tasks in the school. Completed forms can
be faxed or emailed to your Regional Evaluation Coordinator.
Problem Solving Team Members
NAME TITLE
Person(s) Completing Report
NAME NAME
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
2
Checklist #1: Startup Activity
Complete and submit
one time per school
year.
Status:
(M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or
more school years.
(A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at
least one school year.
(I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented
consistently for at least 3 months.
(N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented.
Benchmark
Dates
Date 1
(MM/DD/Y
Y)
Date 2
(MM/DD/Y
Y)
Comprehensive Commitment and Support
Components of Definition: STATUS
1. DISTRICT LEVEL
LEADERSHIP
PROVIDES ACTIVE
COMMITMENT AND
SUPPORT.
 Leadership team meets regularly (recommended
monthly)
 RtI and problem solving implementation are included in
district and school board goals
 Statement is issued about districts adoption of multi-
tiered, early intervening services model and SLD
 Overview of multi-tiered early intervening services model
and district commitment is presented to staff, community
members, and school board members
2. FACULTY AND STAFF
SUPPORT THE
DEVELOPMENT OF
COMMUNITY AND
PARENTAL
AWARENESS
 Present overview of multi-tiered early intervention
services model and district commitment to community
members
 Present overview of multi-tiered early intervention
services model and district commitment to School Board
Members
3. THE BUILDING
LEADERSHIP
PROVIDES SUPPORT
AND ACTIVE
INVOLVEMENT (I.E.
PRINCIPAL ACTIVELY
INVOLVED IN
LEADERSHIP TEAM
MEETINGS).
 Standing agenda item for all staff meetings or has
established communication process to share information
with staff
 Professional development communities are created with
targeted content related to RtI and problem solving
 One of the top 3 goals on School Improvement Plan
(SIP)
4. FACULTY/STAFF
SUPPORT AND ARE
ACTIVELY INVOLVED
WITH PROBLEM
SOLVING.
 80% of faculty document support
 Three year timeline
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
3
Checklist #1: Startup Activity
Complete and submit
one time per school
year.
Status:
(M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or
more school years.
(A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently at least
one school year.
(I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented
consistently for at least 3 months.
(N)ot Started = No components of definition have been completed.
Comprehensive Commitment and Support (continued)
Components of Definition: STATUS
5. A SCHOOL
LEADERSHIP TEAM IS
ESTABLISHED.
 School leadership represents the roles of an
administrator, facilitator, coach, data mentor, content
specialist, parent, and representative teachers
 Team meets regularly (recommended monthly)
6. DATA ARE USED TO
CREATE AN ACTION
PLAN
 Action items based on self-evaluation (e.g., SAPSI)
 Strengths and needs are identified, including:
 Interventions
 Assessments
 Skills/training
 Evidence of group and individual level goals for Tiers 2
and 3
Three-Tiered System
Components of Definition: STATUS
7. BUILDING HAS
ESTABLISHED A
THREE-TIERED
SYSTEM OF SERVICE
DELIVERY.
 Instructional Planning Form (IPF) (or similar form) for all
targeted grade levels (e.g., K-3 grade levels)
 Data collection for Tiers according to Three-Tiered
Model (Tier 1 three times a year; Tier 2 twice monthly;
Tier 3 weekly)
 Graphs with evidence of program change when
inadequate progress (sufficient data below aim-line)
8. THE BUILDING STAFF /
DISTRICT HAS A
PROCESS TO SELECT
EVIDENCE-BASED
PRACTICES.
 Procedures for selection of practices and programs
based on Scientifically-Based Reading Research
(SBRR) are clearly stated
 All programs in use are based on SBRR
9. BUILDING TEAM
DETERMINES TRAINING
NEEDS TO IMPLEMENT
RTI MODEL
 Identify assessment tools and training needs at each
tier
 Identify intervention tools and training needs at each tier
 Identify skill set deficits and training needs at each tier
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
4
Checklist #1: Startup Activity
Complete and submit
one time per school
year.
Status:
(M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or
more school years.
(A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least
one school year.
(I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented
consistently for at least 3 months.
(N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented.
Three-Tiered System
Components of Definition: STATUS
10. CURRICULUM BASED
MEASURES (CBM)
DATA ARE USED IN
CONJUNCTION WITH
OTHER DATA SOURCES
TO IDENTIFY STUDENTS
NEEDING TARGETED
GROUP INTERVENTIONS
AND INDIVIDUALIZED
INTERVENTIONS.
 All students at the Tier 3 level (e.g., determined by
scores verified below the 10th percentile, or Below
Basic level) receive Tier 3 intervention
 All students at the Tier 2 level (e.g., determined by
scores verified between the 11th and 25th
percentile
or At-Risk) receive Tier 2 intervention
11. DISCIPLINE DATA ARE
COLLECTED FOR
SCREENING
 If appropriate, discipline data are collected (e.g.,
ODR, suspensions, expulsions, change of
placement)
12A. COMPREHENSIVE
AND ON-GOING
TRAINING IS
PROVIDED TO ALL
KEY STAFF.
 Building Administration attends all trainings
 95% of teachers attend all trainings
 All paraprofessionals who provide direct services
attend all trainings
12B. COMPREHENSIVE
AND ON-GOING
TRAINING IS
PROVIDED TO
PARENTS
 Regular parent participation
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
5
Checklist #1: Startup Activity
Complete and submit
one time per school year.
Status:
(M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or
more school years.
(A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least
one school year.
(I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented
consistently for at least 3 months.
(N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented.
Three-Tiered System
Components of Definition: STATUS
13. EFFECTIVE PROBLEM
SOLVING TEAMS ARE
ESTABLISHED
 Team members include representatives from the
following groups:
o General education, special education, administration,
and related services personnel, including at least one
person who is skilled in:
 Reading
 Behavior
 Assessment
o Parents and community members (included when
appropriate)
 To ensure effective teaming and to avoid
overburdening any individual team member, members
are selected based on the skills required for each tier
rather than by position alone.
Establish and Maintain Team Process
Components of Definition: STATUS
14. TIER ONE PROBLEM
SOLVING TEAM HAS
BEEN ESTABLISHED
 Has common planning time
 Reviews school-wide data
 Analyzes core curriculum
 Rules for making decisions are explicitly stated in
procedures
 Makes basic recommendations for core curriculum
 Monitors curricula and instruction for integrity of
implementation
 Consists of individuals with skills to address the
components above.
15. TIER TWO PROBLEM
SOLVING TEAM HAS
BEEN ESTABLISHED (E.G.
GRADE LEVEL TEAM)
 Communicates with parents
 Has common planning time
 Reviews progress monitoring data
 Develops plans for groups of students
 Monitors interventions to ensure they are evidence-
based and implemented with integrity
 Consists of individuals with skills to address the
components above
16. TIER THREE PROBLEM
SOLVING TEAM HAS
BEEN ESTABLISHED
 Communicates with parents
 Has common planning time
 Reviews progress monitoring data
 Conducts individualized assessments
 Facilitates more intensive level supports
 Tier 2 standard protocol or problem solving is utilized
 Consists of individuals with skills to address the
components above.
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
6
Checklist #1: Startup Activity
Complete and submit
one time per school year.
Status:
(M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or
more school years.
(A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least
one school year.
(I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented
consistently for at least 3 months.
(N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented.
Establish and Maintain Team Process
Components of Definition: STATUS
17. TIER THREE TEAMS IMPLEMENT EFFECTIVE PROBLEM SOLVING PROCEDURES INCLUDING:
a. PROBLEM IS DEFINED
IN MEASURABLE AND
OBSERVABLE TERMS
 Problem defined as a discrepancy between what is
expected and what is occurring
 Examples: student is performing below 25th
percentile,
more than two ODRs, etc.
b. GOALS FOR EACH
TIER/TARGET
BEHAVIOR ARE
CLEARLY DEFINED
 Specific conditions, observable and measurable
targets, action specified (e.g., orally read), time bound
c. HYPOTHESES ARE
DETERMINED
 Examples: attention, avoidance
d. HYPOTHESES ARE
TESTED, IF NEEDED
 Examples: intervention probe, functional analysis
e. EVIDENCE-BASED
INTERVENTIONS ARE
IMPLEMENTED
 According to treatment plan (e.g., at least 30 minutes
daily)
f. SYSTEM IS IN PLACE
TO ENSURE THAT
INTERVENTIONS ARE
BEING IMPLEMENTED
WITH INTEGRITY
 Action plan, intervention checklists
g. RESPONSE TO
INTERVENTION IS
EVALUATED THROUGH
SYSTEMATIC DATA
COLLECTION
 Individual student graphs for all students receiving Tier
2 and 3 interventions
h. CHANGES ARE MADE
TO INTERVENTION
BASED ON STUDENT
RESPONSE
 Example: Rate of Improvement (ROI) less than 50%
of target for more than 3 weeks should trigger a
change in intervention shown on individual student
graphs
i. REPORTS ARE GIVEN
TO ALL RELEVANT
PARTIES
 Support staff
 Parents
 Case workers
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
7
Checklist #1: Startup Activity
Complete and submit
one time per school year.
Status:
(M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or
more school years.
(A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least
one school year.
(I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented
consistently for at least 3 months.
(N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented.
Self  Assessment
Components of Definition: STATUS
18. EXISTING RESOURCES
AND TOOLS ARE
IDENTIFIED
 Assessments and interventions that are in place at
each tier are identified
 Current assessment or intervention practices that
could be abandoned or reduced in frequency are
identified
19. A PROTOCOL IS IN PLACE
WHICH MATCHES
STUDENT NEEDS TO
INTERVENTION
PROGRAMS
 Is there an identification of the students needs
(e.g., function, academic deficit)
 Are interventions selected with an alignment to the
students needs
 Are key personnel and times identified on the
document for purposes of fidelity of implementation
 Are data sources identified for on-going progress
monitoring
Implementing Evidenced-Based Practice
Components of Definition: STATUS
20. A SCHOOL-WIDE
ASSESSMENT SYSTEM
FOR IDENTIFYING AND
MONITORING PROGRESS
OF ALL STUDENTS IS
IMPLEMENTED.
 Benchmark assessment for all students
 Twice-monthly monitoring for students at Tier 2
 Weekly progress monitoring for Tier 3
21. PARENTS ARE
ROUTINELY
INCORPORATED IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF
INTERVENTIONS.
 Evidence of three or more parent contacts for all
students receiving Tier 2 and 3 interventions
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
8
Checklist #2: Ongoing Activity Monitoring
Complete and submit
one time per school year.
Status:
(M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2
or more school years.
(A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at
least one school year.
(I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented
consistently for at least 3 months.
(N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented.
Monitoring and Action Planning
Components of Definition: STATUS
22. STAFF ARE PROVIDED
WITH REGULAR STATUS
REPORTS (e.g. standing
agenda item for all
possible staff
meetings).
 Successes delineated
 Continuing needs delineated
23. SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
PLAN (SIP) IS
CONTINUALLY
MONITORED FOR
INTEGRITY OF
IMPLEMENTATION.
 Specific people are identified to complete tasks
 Timelines for task completion are set
 Status report on action plan
24. EFFECTIVENESS OF THE
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
IS ASSESSED.
 Priorities are evaluated based on data (e.g.,
completion, fidelity, and outcomes)
25. STUDENT OUTCOME
DATA ARE ANALYZED.
 Evidence that movement through the tiers is
dynamic based on data rather than based only on
Fall status/benchmarking
 Evidence of changes in interventions on student
graphs
 Use of school-wide data to evaluate program
effectiveness
 Effectiveness of each tiers interventions are
evaluated
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
9
Action Plan for Completion of Start-Up Activities
Activity Activity Task Analysis Who When
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
1. Comprehensive
Commitment and
Support
 District level
 Development of
community/parent
al awareness
 One of top 3 SIP
goals
 80% of faculty
 Three year
timeline
 School Leadership
Team
 Data used to
create action plan
g.
a.
b.
c.
d.
2. Three-Tiered System
 Established 3
tiered system
 Process to select
evidence-based
practices
 Training needs
 Data to identify
students needing
intervention
 Problem-Solving
Teams
e.
a.
b.
c.
3. Establish and
Maintain Team
Process
 Tier One Team
 Tier Two Team
 Tier Three Team
 Tier Three
Problem Solving
Procedures
d.
Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago
SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE
10
a.
b.
c.
4. Self-Assessment
 Existing
resources/tools
identified
 Protocol matching
student need to
intervention
d.
a.
b.
c.
5. Implementing
Evidence-Based
Practice
 School-wide
assessment
system
 Parents included
d.
Ad

Recommended

Outcomes Training for Faculty Spring 2014
Outcomes Training for Faculty Spring 2014
Noelle Newhouse
Corporate portfolio 28 jan2015-la
Corporate portfolio 28 jan2015-la
larceneaux
TSchehr_Assessing the Assessment_AIR
TSchehr_Assessing the Assessment_AIR
Terra Schehr
Interactive 2 - Jacqueline Pincay and Fabian Tello
Interactive 2 - Jacqueline Pincay and Fabian Tello
ESPE - UFA
Levels evaluation models
Levels evaluation models
TULASI08
The Benefits Of Utilizing KirkpatrickS Four Levels Of
The Benefits Of Utilizing KirkpatrickS Four Levels Of
wendystein
Action plan
Action plan
Sandy4STEM
Teacher evaluations as pathways for professional growth
Teacher evaluations as pathways for professional growth
Learning Forward
Program Evaluation In the Non-Profit Sector
Program Evaluation In the Non-Profit Sector
wishart5
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels Of Evaluation Model
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels Of Evaluation Model
sikojp
2010 ohio tif meeting creating a comprehensive teacher effectiveness system
2010 ohio tif meeting creating a comprehensive teacher effectiveness system
Christopher Thorn
Program evaluation plan
Program evaluation plan
Cynthia Crump-Russell
Levels 1-4 Evaluation
Levels 1-4 Evaluation
Dawn Drake, Ph.D.
SLO Template steps 1, 2, 3
SLO Template steps 1, 2, 3
emilycaryn
Kirk patrick's simplistic approach
Kirk patrick's simplistic approach
rhimycrajan
Rubrics for IPCRF of Teachers per Objective of their KRAs
Rubrics for IPCRF of Teachers per Objective of their KRAs
DIEGO Pomarca
M2-Building the SLO-SSO-DemoSite
M2-Building the SLO-SSO-DemoSite
Research in Action, Inc.
New facultyie&evaluationjan2011 1
New facultyie&evaluationjan2011 1
Brian Nixon
丶亳 亳 亳仍舒. 亳仄 亳舒
丶亳 亳 亳仍舒. 亳仄 亳舒
亳从仂亳 舒亠仆从仂
ASPIRE Eval Report AY0607 Final
ASPIRE Eval Report AY0607 Final
Violeta Carrion
PROTOCOLLO AZIENDALE CONDIVISO ARTERIOPATIA PERIFERICA
PROTOCOLLO AZIENDALE CONDIVISO ARTERIOPATIA PERIFERICA
Salvatore Ronsivalle
SAPSI
SAPSI
Violeta Carrion
閣叩壊叩姻鉛坦庄
閣叩壊叩姻鉛坦庄
Baranyi Tawas
Powerpoint- Izumino
Powerpoint- Izumino
Aron Izumino
The rate of adoption of alternative energy sources in South African households
The rate of adoption of alternative energy sources in South African households
Sonja Patterson Chartered Engineer
The art-of-fire
The art-of-fire
Bikusoleando
从亟舒 于亰磿?
从亟舒 于亰磿?
亳从仂亳 舒亠仆从仂
PROTOCOLLO CONDIVISO TROMBOSI VENOSA PROFONDA
PROTOCOLLO CONDIVISO TROMBOSI VENOSA PROFONDA
Salvatore Ronsivalle
亳亟亳 仄亳亠于
亳亟亳 仄亳亠于
亳从仂亳 舒亠仆从仂
SD-Session-3-The-Revised-SBM-Tool.pptx
SD-Session-3-The-Revised-SBM-Tool.pptx
KarlaLycaSequijorEsc

More Related Content

What's hot (10)

Program Evaluation In the Non-Profit Sector
Program Evaluation In the Non-Profit Sector
wishart5
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels Of Evaluation Model
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels Of Evaluation Model
sikojp
2010 ohio tif meeting creating a comprehensive teacher effectiveness system
2010 ohio tif meeting creating a comprehensive teacher effectiveness system
Christopher Thorn
Program evaluation plan
Program evaluation plan
Cynthia Crump-Russell
Levels 1-4 Evaluation
Levels 1-4 Evaluation
Dawn Drake, Ph.D.
SLO Template steps 1, 2, 3
SLO Template steps 1, 2, 3
emilycaryn
Kirk patrick's simplistic approach
Kirk patrick's simplistic approach
rhimycrajan
Rubrics for IPCRF of Teachers per Objective of their KRAs
Rubrics for IPCRF of Teachers per Objective of their KRAs
DIEGO Pomarca
M2-Building the SLO-SSO-DemoSite
M2-Building the SLO-SSO-DemoSite
Research in Action, Inc.
New facultyie&evaluationjan2011 1
New facultyie&evaluationjan2011 1
Brian Nixon
Program Evaluation In the Non-Profit Sector
Program Evaluation In the Non-Profit Sector
wishart5
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels Of Evaluation Model
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels Of Evaluation Model
sikojp
2010 ohio tif meeting creating a comprehensive teacher effectiveness system
2010 ohio tif meeting creating a comprehensive teacher effectiveness system
Christopher Thorn
SLO Template steps 1, 2, 3
SLO Template steps 1, 2, 3
emilycaryn
Kirk patrick's simplistic approach
Kirk patrick's simplistic approach
rhimycrajan
Rubrics for IPCRF of Teachers per Objective of their KRAs
Rubrics for IPCRF of Teachers per Objective of their KRAs
DIEGO Pomarca
New facultyie&evaluationjan2011 1
New facultyie&evaluationjan2011 1
Brian Nixon

Viewers also liked (11)

丶亳 亳 亳仍舒. 亳仄 亳舒
丶亳 亳 亳仍舒. 亳仄 亳舒
亳从仂亳 舒亠仆从仂
ASPIRE Eval Report AY0607 Final
ASPIRE Eval Report AY0607 Final
Violeta Carrion
PROTOCOLLO AZIENDALE CONDIVISO ARTERIOPATIA PERIFERICA
PROTOCOLLO AZIENDALE CONDIVISO ARTERIOPATIA PERIFERICA
Salvatore Ronsivalle
SAPSI
SAPSI
Violeta Carrion
閣叩壊叩姻鉛坦庄
閣叩壊叩姻鉛坦庄
Baranyi Tawas
Powerpoint- Izumino
Powerpoint- Izumino
Aron Izumino
The rate of adoption of alternative energy sources in South African households
The rate of adoption of alternative energy sources in South African households
Sonja Patterson Chartered Engineer
The art-of-fire
The art-of-fire
Bikusoleando
从亟舒 于亰磿?
从亟舒 于亰磿?
亳从仂亳 舒亠仆从仂
PROTOCOLLO CONDIVISO TROMBOSI VENOSA PROFONDA
PROTOCOLLO CONDIVISO TROMBOSI VENOSA PROFONDA
Salvatore Ronsivalle
亳亟亳 仄亳亠于
亳亟亳 仄亳亠于
亳从仂亳 舒亠仆从仂
Ad

Similar to ASPIRE_SAPSIv2.4 (20)

SD-Session-3-The-Revised-SBM-Tool.pptx
SD-Session-3-The-Revised-SBM-Tool.pptx
KarlaLycaSequijorEsc
Benchmarks for Behaviour school wide approach
Benchmarks for Behaviour school wide approach
atocmarketing
Data Driven Decision Making Presentation
Data Driven Decision Making Presentation
Russell Kunz
Mmstlc steps to success
Mmstlc steps to success
Stephen Best
Aimsweb ppt
Aimsweb ppt
mrskbooks
Indistar速 Seeing the Big Picture
Indistar速 Seeing the Big Picture
Academic Development Institute
What, Why and How to Evaluate a Curriculum.pptx
What, Why and How to Evaluate a Curriculum.pptx
GabrielReyes889642
1st discussion By MelvinaProcedural Framework for a Program Ev.docx
1st discussion By MelvinaProcedural Framework for a Program Ev.docx
vickeryr87
Reviewing the Research and PEAC Recommendations around Principal Evaluation
Reviewing the Research and PEAC Recommendations around Principal Evaluation
Richard Voltz
Chapter 4 MAAM ELLA narrative report FINAL.docx
Chapter 4 MAAM ELLA narrative report FINAL.docx
jasontoballas
Chapter 4: Evaluating the curriculum
Chapter 4: Evaluating the curriculum
Rizza Lynn Labastida
W 2 WASC 101
W 2 WASC 101
WASC Senior
Curriculum monitoring
Curriculum monitoring
navanitha sinnasamy
Effective assessment practices Project
Effective assessment practices Project
windstar2002
M0 school leader orientation-final
M0 school leader orientation-final
Research in Action, Inc.
Course Evaluation
Course Evaluation
Annasta Tastha
Practical Evaluation Workshop
Practical Evaluation Workshop
Mentoring Partnership of Minnesota
Formatted_EvaluationPlanTemplate
Formatted_EvaluationPlanTemplate
Katrina Daoud
Using Your Data: Which, When and How? Mo SW-PBS SI 2008
Using Your Data: Which, When and How? Mo SW-PBS SI 2008
Nanci Johnson
factorsinconstructingevaluativeinstruments-210427040718.pptx
factorsinconstructingevaluativeinstruments-210427040718.pptx
EulogioLamputi
SD-Session-3-The-Revised-SBM-Tool.pptx
SD-Session-3-The-Revised-SBM-Tool.pptx
KarlaLycaSequijorEsc
Benchmarks for Behaviour school wide approach
Benchmarks for Behaviour school wide approach
atocmarketing
Data Driven Decision Making Presentation
Data Driven Decision Making Presentation
Russell Kunz
Mmstlc steps to success
Mmstlc steps to success
Stephen Best
Aimsweb ppt
Aimsweb ppt
mrskbooks
What, Why and How to Evaluate a Curriculum.pptx
What, Why and How to Evaluate a Curriculum.pptx
GabrielReyes889642
1st discussion By MelvinaProcedural Framework for a Program Ev.docx
1st discussion By MelvinaProcedural Framework for a Program Ev.docx
vickeryr87
Reviewing the Research and PEAC Recommendations around Principal Evaluation
Reviewing the Research and PEAC Recommendations around Principal Evaluation
Richard Voltz
Chapter 4 MAAM ELLA narrative report FINAL.docx
Chapter 4 MAAM ELLA narrative report FINAL.docx
jasontoballas
Chapter 4: Evaluating the curriculum
Chapter 4: Evaluating the curriculum
Rizza Lynn Labastida
Effective assessment practices Project
Effective assessment practices Project
windstar2002
Formatted_EvaluationPlanTemplate
Formatted_EvaluationPlanTemplate
Katrina Daoud
Using Your Data: Which, When and How? Mo SW-PBS SI 2008
Using Your Data: Which, When and How? Mo SW-PBS SI 2008
Nanci Johnson
factorsinconstructingevaluativeinstruments-210427040718.pptx
factorsinconstructingevaluativeinstruments-210427040718.pptx
EulogioLamputi
Ad

ASPIRE_SAPSIv2.4

  • 1. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 1 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEM SOLVING IMPLEMENTATION (SAPSI V2.4) ADMINISTRATIVE INSTRUCTIONS Purpose Part of the Illinois ASPIRE project entails assessing the implementation of the problem solving process at the building level. The Self-Assessment of Problem Solving Implementation (SAPSI) checklist monitors ongoing efforts to establish permanent problem solving procedures, tools and products. The following categories of products are those of interest for the evaluation process and were considered in developing the SAPSI questions. Categories of Products Instructional Planning Forms Screening data (CBM, SWIS) Evidence of progress monitoring (Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3,Graphs) Case management documentation (student level--choose every 10th case) Training (Training Logs or Sign in sheets) School Improvement Plans Administration The SAPSI is to be administered in schools participating as data collection sites under Illinois ASPIRE. The program coordinator or internal coach at the building level completes the survey with the building team. Timeline for administration The SAPSI is required to be administered once each academic year in the fall. However it may be administered at anytime in order to assist with action planning. Data are to be submitted to your regional coordinator within the deadlines set by the evaluation staff. Detailed information regarding dates to send data back to Loyola University Chicago are available at the Illinois ASPIRE Program Coordinators Page which is linked from the CSEIT ASPIRE webpage at http://www.luc.edu/cseit/aspire.shtml.
  • 2. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 2 Administration Instructions Under BENCHMARK DATE enter the date the SAPSI was completed. There are two columns; one for the required fall administration and one for any additional administration. For each of the questions, there are one or more components understood to be established in the case of successful implementation. These components are listed to help you judge if the premise in the question has a status of NOT STARTED, IN PROGRESS, ACHIEVED, or MAINTAINED as defined in the top of each page. If the implementation in your building is still IN PROGRESS or NOT STARTED, it is expected that not all (or none) of the components would be in place. It is also possible that for a given question some components are established and others are not. To the best of your judgment, and with the understanding that we are interested in information on how well the project is being implemented, use the COMPONENTS OF DEFINITION to assist you to assess the level of implementation of the process stated in the question. After completing the SAPSI, data are submitted to your district/regional Illinois ASPIRE Program Coordinator or external coach. The Program coordinator will make sure all data are sent to the Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training at Loyola University Chicago by the appropriate deadline for that data collection period. Deadlines are available at the Illinois ASPIRE Program Coordinators Page which is linked from the CSEIT ASPIRE webpage at http://www.luc.edu/cseit/aspire.shtml.
  • 3. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 1 Illinois ASPIRE Self-Assessment of Problem Solving Implementation (SAPSI v2.4) School Name Date of Report District Name & Number County INSTRUCTIONS Complete and submit one time per school year. The problem solving team should complete this checklist once in the fall to monitor activities for implementation of problem-solving tasks in the school. Completed forms can be faxed or emailed to your Regional Evaluation Coordinator. Problem Solving Team Members NAME TITLE Person(s) Completing Report NAME NAME
  • 4. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 2 Checklist #1: Startup Activity Complete and submit one time per school year. Status: (M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or more school years. (A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least one school year. (I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented consistently for at least 3 months. (N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented. Benchmark Dates Date 1 (MM/DD/Y Y) Date 2 (MM/DD/Y Y) Comprehensive Commitment and Support Components of Definition: STATUS 1. DISTRICT LEVEL LEADERSHIP PROVIDES ACTIVE COMMITMENT AND SUPPORT. Leadership team meets regularly (recommended monthly) RtI and problem solving implementation are included in district and school board goals Statement is issued about districts adoption of multi- tiered, early intervening services model and SLD Overview of multi-tiered early intervening services model and district commitment is presented to staff, community members, and school board members 2. FACULTY AND STAFF SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY AND PARENTAL AWARENESS Present overview of multi-tiered early intervention services model and district commitment to community members Present overview of multi-tiered early intervention services model and district commitment to School Board Members 3. THE BUILDING LEADERSHIP PROVIDES SUPPORT AND ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT (I.E. PRINCIPAL ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN LEADERSHIP TEAM MEETINGS). Standing agenda item for all staff meetings or has established communication process to share information with staff Professional development communities are created with targeted content related to RtI and problem solving One of the top 3 goals on School Improvement Plan (SIP) 4. FACULTY/STAFF SUPPORT AND ARE ACTIVELY INVOLVED WITH PROBLEM SOLVING. 80% of faculty document support Three year timeline
  • 5. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 3 Checklist #1: Startup Activity Complete and submit one time per school year. Status: (M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or more school years. (A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently at least one school year. (I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented consistently for at least 3 months. (N)ot Started = No components of definition have been completed. Comprehensive Commitment and Support (continued) Components of Definition: STATUS 5. A SCHOOL LEADERSHIP TEAM IS ESTABLISHED. School leadership represents the roles of an administrator, facilitator, coach, data mentor, content specialist, parent, and representative teachers Team meets regularly (recommended monthly) 6. DATA ARE USED TO CREATE AN ACTION PLAN Action items based on self-evaluation (e.g., SAPSI) Strengths and needs are identified, including: Interventions Assessments Skills/training Evidence of group and individual level goals for Tiers 2 and 3 Three-Tiered System Components of Definition: STATUS 7. BUILDING HAS ESTABLISHED A THREE-TIERED SYSTEM OF SERVICE DELIVERY. Instructional Planning Form (IPF) (or similar form) for all targeted grade levels (e.g., K-3 grade levels) Data collection for Tiers according to Three-Tiered Model (Tier 1 three times a year; Tier 2 twice monthly; Tier 3 weekly) Graphs with evidence of program change when inadequate progress (sufficient data below aim-line) 8. THE BUILDING STAFF / DISTRICT HAS A PROCESS TO SELECT EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICES. Procedures for selection of practices and programs based on Scientifically-Based Reading Research (SBRR) are clearly stated All programs in use are based on SBRR 9. BUILDING TEAM DETERMINES TRAINING NEEDS TO IMPLEMENT RTI MODEL Identify assessment tools and training needs at each tier Identify intervention tools and training needs at each tier Identify skill set deficits and training needs at each tier
  • 6. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 4 Checklist #1: Startup Activity Complete and submit one time per school year. Status: (M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or more school years. (A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least one school year. (I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented consistently for at least 3 months. (N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented. Three-Tiered System Components of Definition: STATUS 10. CURRICULUM BASED MEASURES (CBM) DATA ARE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER DATA SOURCES TO IDENTIFY STUDENTS NEEDING TARGETED GROUP INTERVENTIONS AND INDIVIDUALIZED INTERVENTIONS. All students at the Tier 3 level (e.g., determined by scores verified below the 10th percentile, or Below Basic level) receive Tier 3 intervention All students at the Tier 2 level (e.g., determined by scores verified between the 11th and 25th percentile or At-Risk) receive Tier 2 intervention 11. DISCIPLINE DATA ARE COLLECTED FOR SCREENING If appropriate, discipline data are collected (e.g., ODR, suspensions, expulsions, change of placement) 12A. COMPREHENSIVE AND ON-GOING TRAINING IS PROVIDED TO ALL KEY STAFF. Building Administration attends all trainings 95% of teachers attend all trainings All paraprofessionals who provide direct services attend all trainings 12B. COMPREHENSIVE AND ON-GOING TRAINING IS PROVIDED TO PARENTS Regular parent participation
  • 7. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 5 Checklist #1: Startup Activity Complete and submit one time per school year. Status: (M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or more school years. (A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least one school year. (I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented consistently for at least 3 months. (N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented. Three-Tiered System Components of Definition: STATUS 13. EFFECTIVE PROBLEM SOLVING TEAMS ARE ESTABLISHED Team members include representatives from the following groups: o General education, special education, administration, and related services personnel, including at least one person who is skilled in: Reading Behavior Assessment o Parents and community members (included when appropriate) To ensure effective teaming and to avoid overburdening any individual team member, members are selected based on the skills required for each tier rather than by position alone. Establish and Maintain Team Process Components of Definition: STATUS 14. TIER ONE PROBLEM SOLVING TEAM HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED Has common planning time Reviews school-wide data Analyzes core curriculum Rules for making decisions are explicitly stated in procedures Makes basic recommendations for core curriculum Monitors curricula and instruction for integrity of implementation Consists of individuals with skills to address the components above. 15. TIER TWO PROBLEM SOLVING TEAM HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED (E.G. GRADE LEVEL TEAM) Communicates with parents Has common planning time Reviews progress monitoring data Develops plans for groups of students Monitors interventions to ensure they are evidence- based and implemented with integrity Consists of individuals with skills to address the components above 16. TIER THREE PROBLEM SOLVING TEAM HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED Communicates with parents Has common planning time Reviews progress monitoring data Conducts individualized assessments Facilitates more intensive level supports Tier 2 standard protocol or problem solving is utilized Consists of individuals with skills to address the components above.
  • 8. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 6 Checklist #1: Startup Activity Complete and submit one time per school year. Status: (M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or more school years. (A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least one school year. (I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented consistently for at least 3 months. (N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented. Establish and Maintain Team Process Components of Definition: STATUS 17. TIER THREE TEAMS IMPLEMENT EFFECTIVE PROBLEM SOLVING PROCEDURES INCLUDING: a. PROBLEM IS DEFINED IN MEASURABLE AND OBSERVABLE TERMS Problem defined as a discrepancy between what is expected and what is occurring Examples: student is performing below 25th percentile, more than two ODRs, etc. b. GOALS FOR EACH TIER/TARGET BEHAVIOR ARE CLEARLY DEFINED Specific conditions, observable and measurable targets, action specified (e.g., orally read), time bound c. HYPOTHESES ARE DETERMINED Examples: attention, avoidance d. HYPOTHESES ARE TESTED, IF NEEDED Examples: intervention probe, functional analysis e. EVIDENCE-BASED INTERVENTIONS ARE IMPLEMENTED According to treatment plan (e.g., at least 30 minutes daily) f. SYSTEM IS IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT INTERVENTIONS ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED WITH INTEGRITY Action plan, intervention checklists g. RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION IS EVALUATED THROUGH SYSTEMATIC DATA COLLECTION Individual student graphs for all students receiving Tier 2 and 3 interventions h. CHANGES ARE MADE TO INTERVENTION BASED ON STUDENT RESPONSE Example: Rate of Improvement (ROI) less than 50% of target for more than 3 weeks should trigger a change in intervention shown on individual student graphs i. REPORTS ARE GIVEN TO ALL RELEVANT PARTIES Support staff Parents Case workers
  • 9. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 7 Checklist #1: Startup Activity Complete and submit one time per school year. Status: (M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or more school years. (A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least one school year. (I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented consistently for at least 3 months. (N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented. Self Assessment Components of Definition: STATUS 18. EXISTING RESOURCES AND TOOLS ARE IDENTIFIED Assessments and interventions that are in place at each tier are identified Current assessment or intervention practices that could be abandoned or reduced in frequency are identified 19. A PROTOCOL IS IN PLACE WHICH MATCHES STUDENT NEEDS TO INTERVENTION PROGRAMS Is there an identification of the students needs (e.g., function, academic deficit) Are interventions selected with an alignment to the students needs Are key personnel and times identified on the document for purposes of fidelity of implementation Are data sources identified for on-going progress monitoring Implementing Evidenced-Based Practice Components of Definition: STATUS 20. A SCHOOL-WIDE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM FOR IDENTIFYING AND MONITORING PROGRESS OF ALL STUDENTS IS IMPLEMENTED. Benchmark assessment for all students Twice-monthly monitoring for students at Tier 2 Weekly progress monitoring for Tier 3 21. PARENTS ARE ROUTINELY INCORPORATED IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERVENTIONS. Evidence of three or more parent contacts for all students receiving Tier 2 and 3 interventions
  • 10. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 8 Checklist #2: Ongoing Activity Monitoring Complete and submit one time per school year. Status: (M)aintaining = All components of definition implemented consistently for 2 or more school years. (A)chieved = All components of definition implemented consistently for at least one school year. (I)n Progress = At least one of the components of definition implemented consistently for at least 3 months. (N)ot Started = No components of definition have been implemented. Monitoring and Action Planning Components of Definition: STATUS 22. STAFF ARE PROVIDED WITH REGULAR STATUS REPORTS (e.g. standing agenda item for all possible staff meetings). Successes delineated Continuing needs delineated 23. SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (SIP) IS CONTINUALLY MONITORED FOR INTEGRITY OF IMPLEMENTATION. Specific people are identified to complete tasks Timelines for task completion are set Status report on action plan 24. EFFECTIVENESS OF THE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION IS ASSESSED. Priorities are evaluated based on data (e.g., completion, fidelity, and outcomes) 25. STUDENT OUTCOME DATA ARE ANALYZED. Evidence that movement through the tiers is dynamic based on data rather than based only on Fall status/benchmarking Evidence of changes in interventions on student graphs Use of school-wide data to evaluate program effectiveness Effectiveness of each tiers interventions are evaluated
  • 11. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 9 Action Plan for Completion of Start-Up Activities Activity Activity Task Analysis Who When a. b. c. d. e. f. 1. Comprehensive Commitment and Support District level Development of community/parent al awareness One of top 3 SIP goals 80% of faculty Three year timeline School Leadership Team Data used to create action plan g. a. b. c. d. 2. Three-Tiered System Established 3 tiered system Process to select evidence-based practices Training needs Data to identify students needing intervention Problem-Solving Teams e. a. b. c. 3. Establish and Maintain Team Process Tier One Team Tier Two Team Tier Three Team Tier Three Problem Solving Procedures d.
  • 12. Center for School Evaluation, Intervention, and Training Loyola University Chicago SAPSI V2.4 Illinois ASPIRE 10 a. b. c. 4. Self-Assessment Existing resources/tools identified Protocol matching student need to intervention d. a. b. c. 5. Implementing Evidence-Based Practice School-wide assessment system Parents included d.