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