Using Continuous System Level Assessment to Build School Capacity

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to introduce a conceptual model for internal assessment and professional development planning. The continuous systems-level assessment (CSLA) is a model that can provide school and other professionals with a method for making data-based decisions, and is intended to foster local expertise by utilizing assessment information to design effective professional development strategies. The CSLA model includes three phases: needs assessment and problem identification; designing interventions and building staff capacity; and implementing and evaluating interventions. The authors outline the values associated with the CSLA model, the major phases involved in the process, and provide an example of how the process is currently being implemented in an urban school in Kansas.

School-based programs are complex, dynamic, and usually involve long-term commitments from a variety of partners. In addition, program implementation often occurs within the context of organic, changing organizations and therefore, requires a flexible model of evaluation. Several bottom-up program evaluation models have been developed that can be used to guide an assessment of the commitments, values, and capacities of schools and other organizations (Fawcett et al., 1996; Fetterman, 1996; Greenwood, Whyte, & Harkavy, 1993; Knoff, 1996; Levin, 1996; Millett, 1996; Scriven, 1967; Stake, 1967, 197 6). The approach described here is similar to these bottom-up program evaluation models, and is being used to assess ongoing improvement efforts and identify professional development needs for schools.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen, W. J. (1997). Results-based performance reviews and evaluations. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 18, 629-643.

Blanco, H. (1994). How to think about social problems: American pragmatism and the idea of planning (pp. 158-161). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Carr, E. G. (2000). Reconceptualizing functional assessment failures: Comments on Kennedy. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 2, 205-207.

Carr, E. G. , Carlson, J. I. , Langdon, N. A. , Magito-McLaughlin, D. , & Yarbrough, S. C. (1999). Two perspectives on antecedent control: Molecular and molar. In J. Luiselli & M. Cameron (Eds.), Antecedent control: Innovative approaches to behavioral support (pp. 3-28). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Fawcett, S. B. , Paine-Andrews, A. , Francisco, V. T. , Schultz, J. A. , Richter, K. P. , Lewis, R. K. , Harris, K. J. , Williams, E. L. , Berkley, J. Y. , Lopez, C. M. , & Fisher, J. L. (1996). Empowering community health initiatives through evaluation. In D. Fetterman , S. Kafterian , & A. Wandersman (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability (pp. 13-14). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fetterman, D. M. (1996). Empowerment evaluation: An introduction to theory and practice. In D. Fetterman , S. Kafterian , & A. Wandersman (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability (pp. 161-187). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Forester, J. (1989). Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Freeman, R. L. , Smith, C. , & Tieghi-Benet, M. (in press). Promoting implementation success through the use of continuous systems-level assessment strategies. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions.

Greenwood, D. J. , Whyte, W. F. , & Harkavy, I. (1993). Participatory action research as a process and as a goal. Human Relations, 46, 175-192.

10.

Guskey, T. (1995). Professional development in education: In search of the optimal mix. In T. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in education (pp. 113-131). New York: Teachers College Press.

11.

Horner, R. H. , & Sugai, G. (2000). School-wide behavior support: An emerging initiative. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 2, 231-232.

12.

Joyce, B. , & Showers, B. (1995). Student achievement through staff development: Fundamentals of school renewal (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

13.

Knoff, H. M. (1996). The interface of school, community, and health care reform: Organizational directions toward effective services for children and youth. School Psychology Review, 25, 446-464.

14.

Levin, H. M. (1996). Empowerment evaluation and Accelerated Schools. In D. Fetterman , S. Kafterian , & A. Wandersman (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability (pp. 49-64). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

15.

Millett, R. A. (1996). Empowerment evaluation and the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. In D. Fetterman , S. Kafterian , & A. Wandersman (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability (pp. 65-74). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

16.

Nakasato, J. (2000). Data-based decision making in Hawaii’s behavior support effort. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2, 247-251.

17.

Nersesian, M. , Todd, A. , Lehmann, J. , & Watson, J. (2000). School-wide behavior support through district-level system change. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 2, 244-246.

18.

O’Neill, R. , Horner, R. , Albin, R. , Storey, K. , & Sprague, J. (1997). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

19.

Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. Stake (Ed.), Perspectives on Curriculum Evaluation, (AERA Monograph Series on Curriculum Evaluation, No. 1). Chicago: Rand McNally.

20.

Scriven, M. (1993). Hard-won lessons in program evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, Number 58. San Francisco: Josey-Bass.

21.

Stake, R. E. (1967). The countenance of educational evaluation. Teachers College Record, 68, 523-540.

22.

Stake, R. E. (1976). A theoretical statement of responsive evaluation. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 2, 19-20.

23.

Stufflebeam, D. (1994). Empowerment evaluation, objectivist evaluation, and evaluation standards: Where the future of evaluation should not go and where it needs to go. Evaluation Practice, 15, 321-338.

24.

Stuffelbeam, D. , & Shinkfield, A. J. (1985). Systematic evaluation. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff.

25.

Sugai, G. , Horner, R. H. , Dunlap, G. , Hieneman, M. , Lewis, T. J. , Nelson, C. M. , Scott, T. , Liaupsin, C. , Sailor, W. , Turnbull, A. P. , Turnbull, H. R. , Wickham, D. , Ruef, M. , & Wilcox, B. (1999). Applying positive behavioral supports and functional behavioral assessment in schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2, 131-143.

26.

Sugai, G. , Lewis-Palmer, T. , Todd, A. W. , & Horner, R. H. (2001). Systems Evaluation Tool: School-wide. Eugene: University of Oregon, Positive Behavioral Intervention and Supports Technical Assistance Center.

27.

Sugai, G. , Todd, A. , & Horner, R. (1998). Effective Behavior Support (EBS) Survey: Assessing and planning behavior support in schools. University of Oregon, Eugene.

28.

Taylor-Greene, S. J. , & Kartub, D. (2000). Durable implementation of school-wide behavior support: The high five program. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2, 233-234.

29.

Turnbull, H. R. , Turnbull, A. P. , Wilcox, B. L. , Sailor, W. , & Wickham, D. (1999). Positive behavioral interventions and supports under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Lawrence: University of Kansas, Beach Center on Families and Disability, OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports.

30.

Worthen, B. R. , & Sanders, J. R. (1987). Educational evaluation: Alternatives and practical guidelines. New York: Longman.

31.

Yeich, S. , & Levine, R. (1992). Participatory research’s contributions to a conceptualization of empowerment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1894-1908.