sld guidelines school psychologist plc january 16, 2015 update and opportunities for input
TRANSCRIPT
SLD GuidelinesSCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST PLC
JANUARY 16, 2015
UPDATE AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR INPUT
Thank you!
Kimberly Wyse
Nancy Theis
Libby Vince
Brian Lloyd
Erin Rappuhn
Michelle Urbanek
Michelle Rigsby
Eileen McKee
Tonya Stokes
Sara Leggett
Marcia O’Brien
We would like to thank and credit the hard, on-going work of the members of the SLD Guidelines Committee:
WHO ARE YOU AND WHERE ARE YOU FROM??
Overview of the morning8:30 – 9:25 Setting the stage
Share overall updateDiscussionReport out…Positives…Challenges…Questions
9:25 – 10:15 Presentation of content
10:15 – 10:30 Break
10:30 – 10:45Presentation of content continued
10:45 – 11:45Response to challenges/questions and discussion of additional supports needed by districts Communication planning and next steps
Setting the Stage• A committee was formed during the 2013-2014 school year to look into revising our 2010 SLD Guidelines document.
• The PSW identification model was a bridge to RTI in 2008-2010.
• A model is needed that is legally defensible and evidence-based.
• With advances in the field, research supports the use of RTI to identify Specific Learning Disabilities. This method is also supported by many professional organizations including:
• National Center for Learning Disabilities• RTI Action Network• National Association for School Psychologists• American Institute of Research
“Special Education can't change the whole system by itself. It's got to be all hands on deck.”
Daphne Pereles - Executive Director, Office of Learning Supports, Colorado Department of Education
Listening to You! Listening
SLD Update (as shared with Curriculum Directors and SE Directors)
Read Curriculum Director Update
Highlight any positives and challenges that stand out to you
Record your individual thoughts re:1. Things you like2. Challenges you see for your district3. Questions you may have
Number off from 1-5
Go to your table
Look for common themes
Report out
New Great Resource…RTI Action Network Tool Kit
This Toolkit provides…◦ Vision: Focus on clear vision of best practice related to an RTI-
based SLD Identification process ◦ Systems& Structures: Focus on school systems to develop
structures to facilitates instructional decision making◦ National Perspective: all states make mention of RTI in their
regulations and a growing number include the collection and analysis of screening, progress-monitoring, and instructional-adequacy data as a required step in identifying whether a student has SLD
Practical Guidance
Layout of draft Ingham ISD SLD Guidelines
Chapter 1 – Overview of Ingham ISD’s Specific Learning Disabilities Rule
Chapter 2 – The Special Education Evaluation Process
Chapter 3 – Criteria for Determining SLD Eligibility During Initial Evaluation
Chapter 4 – Required Data Sources for Evaluation Activities
Chapter 5 – Exclusionary Factors and Special Topics
Chapter 6 – Determining the Need for Special Education and Next Steps
Chapter 7 – Reevaluation Criteria
References and Appendices
BIG IDEAS
Chapter 1 - OverviewProvides the context for identifying SLD eligibility using student response to RTI within an Multi-Tiered
System of Supports
Chapter 2 - The Special Education Evaluation Process
New and ImprovedProblem Solving Model
oNot a how-to. Reference to Ingham ISD Problem Solving Meeting: Facilitator's Guide
Pre-referral Process 1. Has the student received evidence-based intervention that is targeted to the student’s area of need, in addition to being provided with core instruction?
2. Is there sufficient, reliable data for decision-making? 3. Does the student demonstrate inadequate progress, and inadequate classroom achievement below the level of same-grade peers?
4. Have exclusionary factors been discussed or addressed?
Data Needed at REEDS (see next slide for example)
Chapter 2 – Data Needed at REEDs
Just an example!
Chapter 3-Criteria for Determining SLD Eligibility During Initial Evaluation
Evidence-based Interventions
Establishing Insufficient Progress
GAP analysisConsideration of professional judgment
John Maynard Keynes
Insufficient Progress
Inadequate Classroom
Achievement
IMPAIRMENT?
NEED FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION?
December 2013 17
Inadequate Classroom Achievement
Focus on the Core!
Is there evidence that the student received
appropriate instruction in the area of concern?
Core instruction provided regularly?
Core instruction delivered according
to design and methodology by
qualified personnel?
Differentiated instruction in the core curriculum was provided?
To get to "all"we must pay attention to "every“.We must pay attention to the "System", first, and then,we move to small groups and individuals.
--Dave Tilly
Inadequate Classroom Achievement
Existing data from a variety of sources, to determine the gap between the student’s current performance and age- or grade-level state standards, at a minimum should include the following:
Performance on state assessment i.e. state’s general assessments Universal screening. Formative and progress-monitoring assessments Classroom-based observation(s) Norm-referenced assessments of academic achievement, Information provided by the student’s parents
Insufficient Progress
Inadequate Classroom
Achievement
IMPAIRMENT?NEED FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION?
Insufficient Progress
A Little Discussion!1.Consider what factors should be considered
in looking at insufficient progress ? Write it down on a yellow sticky.
2. Put the stickys in the middle of the table. 3.Discuss the ideas on the stickys and pick the
best ideas at your table….
When is Progress Insufficient?
1. Insufficient response to intensive evidence-based interventions (EBIs)◦ Progress monitoring data from at least 2 EBIs in each area of concern
2. Progress is the same or less than same-age peers OR
3. Progress is greater than same-age peers but will not result in reaching the average range of achievement in a reasonable period of time OR
4. Progress is greater than same-age peers but the intensity of resources necessary to obtain this rate of progress cannot be maintained in general education
Establishing Insufficient Progress: The Quick Version
Establish baseline
Begin and document evidence based intervention that is aligned to student need
Collect weekly or bi-weekly progress monitoring (PM) data using probes
Use baseline and subsequent PM data to analyze progress using a standard that measures a student’s progress against that of peers
EBIs should be implemented before a SE referral, but may be as a part of the evaluation
Foundational Concepts!
EBIs and ROI
Evidence Based Interventions and Rate of Improvement
What is an EBI…Evidence-based intervention? Take two minutes and talk with the person next to you about this. What is an EBI? How would you explain it to a parent/administrator? What are some sources you use to find an evidence based intervention?
An EBI is…Used with individual or small groupsFocused on single or small number of discrete skills closely aligned to individual learning needs (area of concern)Culturally responsiveProvides substantial number of instructional minutes beyond what is provided to all studentsImplemented with adequate fidelityYields successful responses and outcomes from other students with similar and/or identical skill deficits.
Rate of Improvement (ROI)
◦ Identify the rate of growth necessary to meet grade-level expectations (norms or benchmarks based on age- or grade-level state standards ( i.e., close the gap with typical peers),
◦Analysis is based on research based norms or criterion referenced benchmarks and‐
◦Compare the student’s actual growth against rate of growth expected or required.
More to come!
The guidelines will allow for professional judgment with the use of a variety of tools. Data collection will be key.More time will be spent on this when the guidelines are rolled out.
First, a professional judgment is data driven. Neither bias nor tradition are reasons for judgment that are professional. Data collected through the RTI-based process provide the foundation for this significant decision.
Second, a professional judgment is a competent application of the expertise, experience, and training of those making the judgment. Commitment to collaborative problem-solving and optimism about student outcome gives the judgment the best chance of having a positive effect.
Third, and most importantly, a professional judgment is student centered and not made based on the needs of the educators and/or parents. Student-centered judgments provide the best chance for improving educational outcomes.
(Kukic, personal communication, April 12, 2014)
Chapter 4 - Required Data Sources for Evaluation Activities No big changes here – just a bigger push for data!!
RIOT ICEL
Chapter 5 - Exclusionary Factors and Special Topics
Not a lot that is new in this chapter…but the highlights are:
Drum roll please.... http://free-loops.com/7907-drum-roller-122.html
Insufficient Progress
Inadequate Classroom
Achievement
IMPAIRMENT?
NEED FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION?
December 2013 33
Defining Exclusionary Factors
•Environmental or economic disadvantage, or cultural factors.•Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, math or any other areas of SLD being considered.•Limited English proficiency.•Other impairments.
Applying Exclusionary Factors
The IEP team may not identify a student with SLD if inadequate classroom achievement or insufficient progress is primarily due to an exclusionary factor.
Exclusionary Factors
Special TopicsSpeech and Language Concerns
RTI also used for SLD areas of Oral Expression and Listening Comprehension
Evaluation of Young ChildrenBe careful and make sure you consider exclusionary factors.
Parentally Placed Private School and Home-schooled StudentsUse same guidelines and criteria.
Transfer Students (Both in-state and out-of-state)Consider all data and need for more.
Applying the Rule: MET/IEP Team Discussion of Special TopicsHelpful suggestions.
Insufficient Progress
Inadequate Classroom
Achievement
IMPAIRMENT?NEED FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION?
Insufficient Progress
Chapter 6 - Determining the Need for Special Education and Next Steps
1. What are the student’s needs that cannot be met through general education as structured at the time of evaluation?
2. What accommodations, if any, can be made in the general education program to meet the student’s identified needs that will allow the student to access the general education curriculum and meet the educational standards that apply to all children?
3. What additional instruction does the student need that is not currently provided through the general education curriculum?
Chapter 7 - Reevaluation Criteria
The BIG CHANGE in this chapter is that for a reevaluation, the process does not require the same criteria as for an initial.
WHY?? Because we can’t take Special Education away because it’s working! There is more focus on whether the student continues to need specialized instruction to make adequate progress.
For a reevaluation, we more simply consider the overarching need for continued services. (That said, if a student has caught up with his/her peers, consider exit of eligibility with the appropriate supports).
What is our role as School Psychologists in the roll out of the new guidelines?
We’re all in this together! Dr. Klotz
Dr. Mary Beth Klotz has served as the National Association of School Psychologists’ (NASP) Director of IDEA Projects and Technical Assistance since 1999. She is NASP’s primary liaison for numerous coalitions and grant projects including, NCLD’s RTI Action Network, the National Center on Response to Intervention, the IDEA Partnership Project, the National Center on Student Progress Monitoring, and the Learning Disabilities Roundtable.
Roll out and Strategic Communication Plan
SE Directors have been updated monthly regarding the new guidelines
Curriculum Directors were updated on January 6, 2015
Curriculum Directors and SE Directors have requested a joint meeting to discuss implications of these guidelines for GE and SE staff/students. This is a BIG YAY and has been scheduled for February 25.
It has been recommended that we consider an advisory group when considering a strategic plan which includes a GE Teacher, a SE Teacher, a Principal, a School Psych, a Curriculum Director and a SE Director.
We have connected with a national presenter from Kansas, Dawn Miller, to help foster continuing MTSS Implementation and consideration of the supports needed for SLD Guideline Changes.
We want to include: Global plan for all Customized plan for each district based on their current level of MTSS implementation and specific needs
THOUGHTS??
Dialogue regarding challenges/questions and discussion of additional supports needed by districts
Additional Feedback Wanted DISCUSS AT YOUR TABLE THE FOLLOWING. SELECT ONE PERSON TO BE THE RECORDER AND TYPE INPUT INTO https://todaysmeet.com/january16plc If you would like to add something personally/anonymously, the room will be open all next week.
1. Challenges that you anticipate in your district 2. Things you will need from the ISD to support this change in your district
3. Other Suggestions/Comments/Questions