minneapolis public schools · minneapolis public schools enhancing academic achievement and...

Minneapolis Public Schools Enhancing academic achievement

and supports for students with special needs

The Special Education Opportunities Review was based on a few key guiding principles.

Guiding Principles to Enhance Achievement of Students with Special Needs DRAFT

Most students can master grade level content

Effective core instruction is critical to a student’s learning

All systems can improve continuously

Raising student achievement is possible within our budget

2

MPS has numerous strengths that help lay the foundation for continuous improvement.

Commendations DRAFT

• The district offers many in-district programs for serving a wide range of student needs

- Over 14 different citywide programs for autism, emotional disturbance, transition, etc.

- Very few out of district referrals owing to a wide range of in-district programs

• The district staff is very dedicated and passionate

- Both general education and special education staff are excited about working in schools

- Staff are committed to ensuring that all struggling students thrive

- Staff are open to the idea of improving on their current practices to improve student outcomes

• The senior leadership and staff in MPS have a strong commitment to parent engagement

- Leaders and staff engage with parents while drafting and operationalizing important policies

- Parents feel well informed about their child’s progress with regards to the IEP

- The district has invested in cultural liaisons to help engage with parents from diverse communities

3

By concentrating on a small number of high impact opportunities, the district can raise achievement for struggling students.

High Impact Opportunities to Raise Achievement for Struggling Students DRAFT

4

Elementary

Reading

High Impact

Opportunities

Secondary

Reading

Expectations

for students

with special

needs

1

2

3 4

5

Special

Education

Service

Providers

Citywide

Classrooms

Develop a clear and consistent

approach for providing reading

instruction at the elementary level

Implement large scale

formal reading instruction

at the secondary level

Ensure that the vast

majority of students with

special needs are

expected to master grade

level content, and are

provided the exposure

and support to do so

Maximize staff time for

students with related

services, such as speech

and language,

occupational therapy,

physical therapy, and

social work

Flexibly match the

staffing to enrollment

of citywide

classrooms, while

ensuring the needs

of students drive the

placement of such

programs



5

Elementary

Reading

High Impact

Opportunities

Secondary

Reading

Expectations

for students

with special

needs

1

2

3 4

5

Special

Education

Service

Providers

Citywide

Classrooms

Develop a clear and consistent

approach for providing reading

instruction at the elementary level

In Minneapolis Public Schools, a large number of students struggle to read at the elementary level.

Elementary Reading - Current Proficiency Rates DRAFT

23%

19% 20%

43%

40%

43%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5

% A

t o

r a

bo

ve

go

al

Ge

nera

l E

d.

Sp

ec

ial.

Ed

. • Only one in five elementary students with disabilities is at or above goal in language arts

• Over half of regular education students also struggle in reading

6

1

Eight interconnected best practices have resulted in dramatic gains in reading proficiency in a variety of other districts.

Elementary Reading - Key Components of an Effective Elementary

Reading Program

DRAFT

MPS implements many but not all best practices, and not in every room

every day

Staffing of highly skilled

teachers of reading

Early identification of struggling readers

Frequent measurement of

achievement

Extensive time and balanced core

instruction

Explicit teaching of phonics

and comprehension

Connection of remediation

to core instruction

Features of

an effective

elementary

reading

program

Clear rigorous grade-level expectations Immediate and intensive additional

instruction for struggling students

7

1

Students will benefit from developing a clear and consistent vision for elementary reading instruction based on best practice.

Elementary Reading – Key Opportunities DRAFT

Create an “intervention for all”

approach to elementary reading

Ensure general education

teachers take primary

responsibility for the delivery of

core reading instruction

Build a data and accountability

system to support the

elementary reading program

• Institute 2.5 hour/day literacy block in all schools

• Provide support/training for general education teachers

through reading coaches

• Provide reading interventionists to assist in the reading

block

• Ensure delivery of core and intervention instruction by

highly skilled/trained teachers to all students (including

students with mild to moderate disabilities)

• Finalize benchmark assessments and standards

• Process the data into insightful reports

• Structure time during the week for teachers to review

and make meaning of the data

8

Opportunity Key Features

1



9

Elementary

Reading

High Impact

Opportunities

Secondary

Reading

Expectations

for students

with special

needs

1

2

3 4

5

Special

Education

Service

Providers

Citywide

Classrooms

Implement large scale

formal reading instruction

at the secondary level

Secondary Reading - Rationale for Providing Reading Instruction at the

Secondary Level

DRAFT

Elementary Level Secondary Level

Many students at the secondary level continue to struggle with reading, particularly with comprehension.

Struggling

readers

Students struggling with reading are unlikely to succeed in English, Social

Studies, Science, or Math

10

2

Students on

grade level

Struggling

readers

Students on

grade level

Many students continue to struggle in reading at the

secondary level

Some struggling students reach grade level

All struggling readers, even at the secondary level, require reading instruction in addition to English.

Secondary Reading – Key Opportunities DRAFT

Develop mechanism to identify

struggling readers at the secondary

level as well as track their success

over time

Provide opportunities within the

school day for all struggling readers

to receive at least 45 minutes of

reading instruction in addition to the

core English instruction

• Screen all incoming students using clear,

consistent criteria in all secondary grades

• Measure student progress through assessment and

monitoring

• Provide additional time for reading instruction

• Ensure all students who struggle to read receive

rigorous academic instruction by skilled teachers of

reading

11

2




12

Elementary

Reading

High Impact

Opportunities

Secondary

Reading

Expectations

for students

with special

needs

1

2

3 4

5

Special

Education

Service

Providers

Citywide

Classrooms

Ensure that the vast

majority of students with

special needs are

expected to master grade

level content, and are

provided the exposure

and support to do so

Instruction for Students with Special Needs - Service Delivery Model for

Students with Special Needs DRAFT

In MPS, there is a reliance on Special Education to provide extensive academic

support for struggling students, and often outside the general education setting.

Students with IEPs, 19%

Students without IEPs,

81%

Students with IEP served in setting III

and IV, 40%

Students with IEP served in

other settings,

60%

Total students in MPS Setting for Students with IEPs

13

3

MPS identifies more students

as needing special education

services than the state

average of ~14%

Of students with IEPs, more are

served in substantially separate

settings than in some districts,

where the number is less than 20%

Instruction for Students with Special Needs – SERT* Time Spent Across Settings DRAFT

Even students served in resource (inclusion) receive much of their instruction

away from the general education classroom.

Heavy reliance on a pull out/replacement model can lead to struggling students

never being exposed to grade level material or high standards

*SERTs (Special Education Resource Teachers) provide supports to students with special needs in the resource (inclusion) program

Source: schedule collection survey

Special education/re-

source classroom,

74%

Co-teaching gen. ed.

classroom, 14%

Gen. ed. classroom,

10%

Substantially separate

classroom, 2%

While most of

SERT time should

be in the general

education

classroom, only

24% of their time

on average is

spent in the

general education

classroom

14

3

Instruction for Students with Special Needs - Key Opportunities DRAFT

Increase the number of

students who are educated in

an “inclusive” setting

Ensure there is no watering

down of content or

expectations for students who

are not cognitively impaired

Ensure that all students with

special needs get extra help

from teachers who are skilled in

specific content areas

• Build capacity of teachers to support inclusion

• Provide needed supports in general education classrooms

• Provide all students access to core content curriculum

• Provide extra help for the struggling students

• Assess skills and training of staff providing instruction

to students

• Provide support and training, and adjust human capital

decisions as needed

Students with mild to moderate disabilities would benefit from more instruction in a

general education setting and with general education expectations.

15

3 Opportunity Key Features



16

Elementary

Reading

High Impact

Opportunities

Secondary

Reading

Expectations

for students

with special

needs

1

2

3 4

5

Special

Education

Service

Providers

Citywide

Classrooms

Maximize staff time for

students with related

services, such as speech

and language,

occupational therapy,

physical therapy, and

social work

Special Education Service Providers – Current Activities of

Related Service Providers

DRAFT

Activity Speech OT PT

Therapy with students 41% 32% 39%

Paperwork/IEP writing/due process 10% 11% 12%

Planning/materials preparation 8% 7% 3%

IEP testing/assessment 6% 6% 3%

Collaboration with colleagues 5% 6% 6%

Medicaid billing/service documentation 4% 6% 7%

Personal Lunch 5% 5% 3%

Travel 4% 4% 15%

Equipment maintenance and fabrication 0% 2% 2%

Attend IEP/due process meeting 2% 2% 2%

Student observation 2% 2% 1%

Attend meeting (other than IEP/due process) 2% 2% 2%

Professional development/PLC 2% 1% 1%

Coordination with outside agencies 1% 0% 1%

Parent communication 1% 0% 1%

Other 7% 14% 2%

Total time not spent providing therapy 59% 68% 61%

A large proportion of related services staff time is spent on activities that do not involve providing therapy to students.


17

4

• Most of staff

time is spent on

activities other

than providing

therapy to

students

• Non-therapy

responsibilities

could be

streamlined to

allow more time

with students

Special Education Service Providers – Current Activities of Mental

Health Service Providers

DRAFT

Activity Psychologists Social Workers

Counseling/crisis intervention 8% 20%

Assessment/testing/test scoring and interpretation 21%

Paperwork/IEP writing/due process 20% 12%

Collaboration with colleagues 9% 11%

Attend IEP/due process meeting 7% 10%

Attend meeting (other than IEP/due process) 6% 5%

Student observation 6% 1%

Planning/materials preparation 4% 3%

Personal Lunch 2% 3%

Parent communication 2% 7%

Assigned school duties (i.e. bus duty, lunch duty, etc) 1% 5%

Travel 1% 2%

Agency coordination of supports and services 1% 6%

Service documentation/logging service on Easy IEP 1%

Other 11% 15%

Total time not providing counseling services 92% 80%

Likewise for psychologists and social workers, only a small proportion of

total time is spent in providing counseling services to students.


18

4

• Most of staff

time is spent

on activities

other

counseling

• Streamlining

IEP-related

responsibilities

could

significantly

increase the

amount of

counseling

services

Some staff are asked to work with students many more hours per week than others.

Special Education Service Providers - Variation in Hours Spent Providing

Therapy to Students

(Example: Speech and language clinicians)

DRAFT

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Hours per week on therapy

Spee

ch a

nd

lan

guag

e cl

inic

ian

s

Average: 16 hours

Some clinicians spend

more than 20 hours per

week providing therapy to

students

Some clinicians spend

less than 10 hours per

week providing therapy to

students

Some staff may feel overwhelmed while others may have capacity to help out

19

4



20

Elementary

Reading

High Impact

Opportunities

Secondary

Reading

Expectations

for students

with special

needs

1

2

3 4

5

Special

Education

Service

Providers

Citywide

Classrooms

Flexibly match the

staffing to enrollment

of citywide

classrooms, while

ensuring the needs

of students drive the

placement of such

programs

DRAFT

Determining staffing for citywide classrooms is a complex task; there is wide

deviation in staffing and enrollment in citywide classrooms from guidelines.

• Student enrollment changes throughout the year, month, and week

• Assignment of 1:1 aides may not take in to consideration aides already in the classroom

Note: Chart shows a snapshot in time; staffing may fluctuate throughout the year. District staffing guidelines were not available for Care/Treatment, DHH

Citywide, T-Plus and ECSE classrooms

Number of classrooms with more adults than the

guideline

Number of classrooms with student enrollment that

differ from the guideline

Numerous complexities lead to deviation in staffing and enrollment in citywide classrooms from guidelines:

21

Citywide Classroom - Staffing and Enrollment

2

7

13

20

33

41 40

35 31

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1 ormoreabove

0above

orbelow

1 below2 below3 below4 below5 below6 below 7 ormorebelow

Nu

mb

er

of

cla

ss

roo

ms

Number of students compared to guidelines

5

87

169

28

8

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

0 0 to 1 1 to 2 more than 2

Nu

mb

er

of

Cla

ss

roo

ms

FTEs above guidelines

Citywide Classrooms - Location and Movement

Many parents feel as though students with special needs suffer disproportionately from changes in classroom locations.

• Many perceive that the location of citywide classrooms is driven by individual principals and the

willingness to provide space

• A lack of clear and transparent processes for placing citywide programs adds to the concern that

movement of classrooms is not driven by student need

Citywide classroom

School C

School A

School B

22

5

ILLUSTRATIVE

Citywide Classrooms – Key Opportunities

DRAFT

Closely match staffing to

enrollment and existing

guidelines

Create transparent, student

centered rules around location

and movement of special

education citywide programs

• Adjust staffing as student enrollment shifts

• Create guidelines for allocating SEAs

• Institute clear and transparent process for placing

citywide programs across schools

• Minimize change in location of citywide classrooms

from year to year

Management tools and systems will allow the district to serve students with severe special needs more effectively.

23

5


DRAFT

The district has the opportunity to increase achievement for all students and improve services, all within existing budgetary constraints.

The following steps will be required:

• A thoughtful plan

• An inclusive process to gather feedback

• Tight integration and alignment of the district academic

plan with the special education plan

• A measured, balanced approach toward instituting

changes

24

minneapolis public schools · minneapolis public schools enhancing academic achievement and...

Documents