Taylor A Koriakin1, Sarah L McKee2, Marlene B Schwartz2, Sandra M Chafouleas1. 1. Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut, 249 Glenbrook Road, Unit 3064, Storrs, CT, 06269. 2. Rudd Center for Obesity and Food Policy, University of Connecticut, 1 Constitution Plaza, Suite 600, Hartford, CT, 06103.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stakeholders increasingly recognize the role of policy in implementing Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child (WSCC) frameworks in schools; however, few tools are currently available to assess alignment between district policies and WSCC concepts. The purpose of this study was to expand the Wellness School Assessment Tool (WellSAT) for evaluation of policies related to all 10 domains of the WSCC model. METHODS: Developing the WellSAT WSCC was an iterative process that involved (1) identifying items for each domain based on key concepts and best practice recommendations; (2) expert review of the draft measure; (3) cognitive pre-testing; (4) developing scoring criteria; and (5) pilot-testing the measure. RESULTS: Ratings from expert reviewers indicated that the tool included items that were both relevant and important to each of the 10 WSCC domains. Results of cognitive pre-testing indicated that the items were understood as intended. Feedback from expert reviews, cognitive pre-testing, and pilot-testing was used to further revise and refine the measure and develop a final version of the tool. Acceptable interrater reliability was established for the final selection of items. CONCLUSIONS: The WellSAT WSCC provides a reliable means for assessing integration and alignment between WSCC model concepts and district policies.
BACKGROUND: Stakeholders increasingly recognize the role of policy in implementing Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child (WSCC) frameworks in schools; however, few tools are currently available to assess alignment between district policies and WSCC concepts. The purpose of this study was to expand the Wellness School Assessment Tool (WellSAT) for evaluation of policies related to all 10 domains of the WSCC model. METHODS: Developing the WellSAT WSCC was an iterative process that involved (1) identifying items for each domain based on key concepts and best practice recommendations; (2) expert review of the draft measure; (3) cognitive pre-testing; (4) developing scoring criteria; and (5) pilot-testing the measure. RESULTS: Ratings from expert reviewers indicated that the tool included items that were both relevant and important to each of the 10 WSCC domains. Results of cognitive pre-testing indicated that the items were understood as intended. Feedback from expert reviews, cognitive pre-testing, and pilot-testing was used to further revise and refine the measure and develop a final version of the tool. Acceptable interrater reliability was established for the final selection of items. CONCLUSIONS: The WellSAT WSCC provides a reliable means for assessing integration and alignment between WSCC model concepts and district policies.