How Can We Work Together to Close the Achievement Gap? h c L i - - PDF document
9/19/16 Dr. Alan Coulter Results Driven Accountability Where were we? are we? do we go next? new realities new choices Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2016 #SPEDAhead How Can We Work Together to Close the Achievement Gap? h c L i t
9/19/16 1
…were we? …are we?
new realities new choicesTuesday, Sept. 20, 2016
…do we go next?
Results Driven Accountability
#SPEDAhead
Where…
How Can We Work Together to Close the Achievement Gap?
P D
F A P E
RTI
MTSS IEP FBA
Laws
R e s e a r c h L i t i g a t i
9/19/16 2
and state DOEs and LEAs on accountability issues
Excellence in Special Education
Associate Professor at the Louisiana State University Health Sciences and Human Development Center.
Intervening Early to Reach all Students)
#SPEDAhead
9/19/16 3 Special Education: It's Time to Get Results!
We have limited time to get the best results for children with disabilities and their families
9/19/16 4
Where Were We?
Part
Today’s Webinar
Where Were We?
Part
Where Are We?
Part
Today’s Webinar
Where Were We?
Part
Where Are We? Where Do We Go Next?
Part
Part
Today’s Webinar
9/19/16 5
Where Were We?
Part
Results Driven Accountability Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 Purposes of the Law:
locals to provide services
effectiveness “Everyone can agree with the objective stated in the title of this bill -- educating all handicapped children in our Nation. The key question is whether the bill will really accomplish that objective.”
President Gerald Ford, 1975
9/19/16 6
39 Years of Special Education Law
Purpose 1 of the Law
“…to assure that all children with disabilities have available to them… a Free Appropriate Public Education which emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs.”
Child Find
“All children residing in the state who are handicapped, regardless of the severity of their handicap, and who are in need of special education and related services are identified, located, and evaluated.”
Prevalence of Disabilities in the U.S.
1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000
First 25 Years of IDEA
1976 1980 1990 2000 2010
Child Find is working
9/19/16 7
Purpose 2 of the Law
“…to assure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents… are protected.”
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 New York Puerto Rico D.C. All Other States 2004 2006 2008 2010
Due Process Hearings Steadily Decreasing
Purpose 3 of the Law
“…to assist states and localities to provide for the educations of ALL children with disabilities.”
9/19/16 8
Technical Assistance & Dissemination Network
Projects funded by the U.S. DOE
Technical Assistance & Dissemination Network
Projects funded by the U.S. DOE
Purpose 4 of the Law
“…to assess and assure the effectiveness
with disabilities.”
9/19/16 9 What’s Your Altitude Today?
Altitude affects view of effectiveness of special education
Monitoring Compliance
“The Office of Special Education Services will be looking at 6,000 to 7,000 IEPs in the next few months to see whether any problems are developing.”
Ernest Boyer, Director, Bureau of Education for the Handicapped
Never Forget…
There are more than 755 process requirements in IDEA ’04 regulations.
9/19/16 10 Checklist Mentality Going to Non Compliance Jail?
Historic Focus
Student Learning Outcomes Procedural Compliance
9/19/16 11 IDEA-B: SPP Results Indicators
1: Graduation 2: Drop out 3: Statewide assessment 4: Suspension and expulsion 5: Educational environments 6: Preschool educational environments 7: Preschool outcomes 8: Parent involvement 14: Postsecondary outcomes 18: Resolution session agreements 19: Mediated agreements
Group 1
1: Graduation 2: Drop out 3: Statewide assessment 4: Suspension and expulsion 5: Educational environments 6: Preschool educational environments 7: Preschool outcomes 8: Parent involvement 14:Postsecondary outcomes 18: Resolution session agreements 19:Mediated agreements
Group 1 IDEA-B: SPP Results Indicators
Not Counted Towards Determination of Compliance
IDEA-B: SPP Compliance Indicators
These were the basis of state status determinations (up to 2014)
10: Disproportionate representation 11: Child Find 12: Early childhood transition 13: Secondary transition 15: Compliance findings 20: Timely and accurate data
Group 2
9/19/16 12
2007 U.S. Dept. of Education Determinations on State Implementation
Aggregate Performance on Selected Compliance Indicators
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Transition B to C Complaints Timely Resolved Timely Evaluations Data
2005 2010
Getting Better!
What Could Have Been before RDA
Virgin Islands Puerto Rico
9/19/16 13
Never Forget
Even if you could be in compliance with all 755, you would have NO ASSURANCE OF RESULTS.
Never Forget… What’s Missing?
“For too long we’ve been a compliance- driven bureaucracy when it come to educating students with disabilities.”
U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan
9/19/16 14
The Emphasis of I.D.E.A.
and functional OUTCOMES for all children with disabilities
the program requirements, with… emphasis on those most related to IMPROVING RESULTS
Focus of Monitoring Activities
Percentage of Public School Students with a ‘Proficient' Score
Students w/IEPs Other students reading math reading math
4th grade 10 14 30 35 8th grade 8 7 34 27 12th grade 12 6 40 26
National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2015
9/19/16 15
Percentage of public school students with a ‘Proficient' score
National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2015
Students w/IEPs Other students reading math reading math
4th grade 10 14 30 35 8th grade 8 7 34 27 12th grade 12 6 40 26
Closing the Achievement Gap
Equal outcomes for students who have disabilities compared to students who do not
% of 8th Grade Students with Disabilities at or Above Achievement Levels
Data Source: OSEP
9/19/16 16 U.S. Average Graduation Rate: 63%
Range: 83% to 28%
Employment Rate
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Less Than 40%
9/19/16 17 Shift the Balance
Student Learning Outcomes Procedural Compliance
Shift the Balance
Student Learning Outcomes Procedural Compliance
9/19/16 18 RDA = Effectiveness of Services
if changes are needed
requirements
Remember This? Procedural Compliance Only
Several additional US Territories not shown
Washington, D.C.
Remember This? Procedural Compliance Only
Several additional US Territories not shown
Washington, D.C.
9/19/16 19
U.S. Dept. of Education Determinations
Part B Determinations - 2014
Meets Requirements (18) Needs Assistance (37) Needs Intervention (5)
Several additional US Territories not shown
U.S. Dept. of Education Determinations
Part B Determinations - 2015
Meets Requirements (21) Needs Assistance (36) Needs Intervention (3)
Several additional US Territories not shown
U.S. Dept. of Education Determinations
Part B Determinations - 2016
Meets Requirements (26) Needs Assistance (31) Needs Intervention (3)
Several additional US Territories not shown
9/19/16 20 State Status Determinations Over Time
Meets Requirements Needs Assistance Needs Intervention
2014 18 37 5 2015 21 36 3 2016 26 31 3
Not Entirely Accurate
Remember the Concept of Altitude!
Three Guiding Principles of RDA
Focus your resources on what is most likely to reduce the achievement gap
9/19/16 21
Document what is minimally required by law
How students with disabilities perform compared to their peers
Three Results Indicators
ü Graduation rates ü Assessments ü Post-secondary
OSEP’s Focus for RDA
9/19/16 22 State Systematic Improvement Plan
Indicator #17 describes how states are supporting school districts in improving results Where Are We?
Part
Results Driven Accountability
Five Step Process
9/19/16 23 DATA Data Analysis
Data Analysis
9/19/16 24 Data Analysis
Data Analysis
Data Analysis
9/19/16 25
Special Education Services, Alabama Department of Education State Performance Plan - Annual Performance Report
2012 - 2013
Reading
2012 - 2013
Math
Participation Rate
99.69% 99.54%
Proficiency
48.67% 47.25%
Alabama
Students with Disabilities
Alabama Proficiency in Reading & Language Arts for Students w/IEPs
2010 to 2011 2011 to 2012 2012 to 2013
Grade 3 51.5 55.1 53.4 4 51.5 51.7 54.3 5 50.9 52.1 52.6
6
49.5
48.5 48.8
7
43.3
44.2
48.1
8
34.4 35.2
37.2
9 35.8 35.8 44.8 Total 45.7 46.5 48.6
Alabama 2011 to 2012 ARMT Reading Proficiency Score Comparison
0 ¡ 20 ¡ 40 ¡ 60 ¡ 80 ¡ 100 ¡ 6th ¡ 7th ¡ 8th ¡
Proficiency
Grade
General Education Students Students with Disabilities
Special Education Services, Alabama Department of Education State Performance Plan - Annual Performance Report
GAP
9/19/16 26
Alabama 2012 to 2013 ARMT Reading Proficiency Score Comparison
0 ¡ 20 ¡ 40 ¡ 60 ¡ 80 ¡ 100 ¡ 6th ¡ 7th ¡ 8th ¡
Proficiency
Grade
General Education Students Students with Disabilities
Special Education Services, Alabama Department of Education State Performance Plan - Annual Performance Report
GAP
Special Education Graduation
Diploma Rates 2009 to 2010
Cesar D’Agord, 2013
65.4% 51.4% 40.7% 38.5% 32.5% 30.4% 28.2% 25.8% 24.6% 18.3%
38.0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Guam Hawaii American Samoa Northern Marianas Washington Alaska California Idaho Oregon Nevada U.S. and
areas
Source: Section 618 Data
Idaho
Special Education Graduation Rate Trends (comparing 2005 to 2009)
Cesar D’Agord, 2013 Source: Section 618 Data
32.5%
10.1% 3.6% 3.2% 2.8% 1.8%
4.9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Washington Guam Alaska American Samoa Nevada Oregon Idaho California Hawaii Northern Marianas U.S. and
areas
Idaho
9/19/16 27 Special Education Graduation Rate Trends (comparing 2005 to 2009)
Cesar D’Agord, 2013 Source: Section 618 Data
32.5%
10.1% 3.6% 3.2% 2.8% 1.8%
4.9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Washington Guam Alaska American Samoa Nevada Oregon Idaho California Hawaii Northern Marianas U.S. and
areas
Washington Idaho
Special Education Graduation Rate Trends (comparing 2005 to 2009)
Cesar D’Agord, 2013 Source: Section 618 Data State 5-year trend Graduation Rate Special Education Students National Rank 5-year trend Washington
32.5% 1
Guam
10.1% 14
Alaska
3.6% 33
American Samoa
3.2% 35
Nevada
2.8% 36
Oregon
1.8% 40
Idaho
44
California
46
Hawaii
52
Northern Marianas
57
U.S. and outlying areas
4.9% Lowest rank = 57
Note: Information from RMI, FSM and Palau is not included on 618 data tables.
DATA
INFRASTRUCTURE
9/19/16 28
Although not all change is improvement, all improvement is change.
The First Law of Improvement and Sustaining Results
Every system is perfectly designed to achieve exactly the results it gets
Infrastructure Analysis: OSEP’s Definition
Does the system have results-building capacity?
development
assistance
Looks at how states can be organized to get better results
9/19/16 29 Oregon DOE Reorganization
Oregon’s Office of Learning is an example of how to reorganize and integrate programs to get better results.
DATA
INFRASTRUCTURE
SIMR State Identified Measurable Result (SIMR)
9/19/16 30 SIMR
MN, MT, NC, ND, NJ, PA
AZ, CNMI, CO, CT, DE, FSM, GU, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, LA, MI, MS, NE, NV, NM, NY, OH, OH, OR, Palau, SC, SD, TX, VI, WA, WI, WY
RI, UT, VT
Source: IDEA Data Center
SIMR
Reading & Math CA, MO
Source: IDEA Data Center
Early Childhood Outcomes MA, NH Post-School Outcomes AL, BIE
Broad (25 States) Limited (31 States) ??? (3 States) ??? (3 States)
Source: IDEA Data Center
SIMR Scope
Source: IDEA Data Center
9/19/16 31 State-Identified Measurable Result (SIMR)
Graduation Reading/Literacy Math Others
Source: Adapted from IDEA Data Center presentation
Child-Level Variations in SIMRs
How Do We Hold Ourselves Accountable?
9/19/16 32
Go to your state’s DOE web site to find your SSIP
Find Your State’s SSIP
California’s Board of Education SSIP
It’s more than 30 pages!
9/19/16 33
DATA
INFRASTRUCTURE
SIMR
IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES Coherent Improvement Strategies
to get better results
to area of focus
improvement area
Project “Closing the Gap”
Alabama DOE program improves understanding
9/19/16 34
65% of students w/IEPs had gains on STAR Assessments
Alabama Project “Closing the Gap” Improvements
Results suggest that a different way of doing things can result in significant improvements in student outcome Use implementation drivers to make certain that your improvement strategies stick
The Key to Implementation Science
Alabama’s Implementation Strategies
9/19/16 35
DATA
INFRASTRUCTURE
SIMR
IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES
THEORY OF ACTION AL’s Theory of Action (Hypothesis) If…
Effective instruction
And if…
Appropriate services
Then…
Positive
DATA
INFRASTRUCTURE
SIMR
IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES
THEORY OF ACTION
9/19/16 36
Where Do We Go Next?
Part
Results Driven Accountability What’s in it for me?... possibilites?... potential?... RDA & SSIP
identified in SSIP
methodology
implementation science
RDA Opportunities In Your School District
9/19/16 37 Look at your state’s SIMR Look at your state’s SIMR
Is this a priority for me?
Look at your state’s SIMR
Is this a priority for me? Is this a priority for my school?
9/19/16 38 Look at your state’s SIMR
Is this a priority for me? Is this a priority for my school? Is this a priority for my district?
Your Results Suggest a Focus – an Identified Measurable Result (IMR)
Enablers/Barriers of Your Infrastructure
9/19/16 39
Six months after making a New Year’s resolution only about 8% of the people have followed through.
Initiative Overload Other Initiatives for Linking
Identified Measurable Result as an Economic Engine for Your Community
9/19/16 40
Immediate Past Experience in Improving Results
Things often don’t go well when everyone doesn’t buy in. What resources can we bring to bear to focus on results for our SSIP?
Consider Evidence-Based Practices
Which ones? Do we have the staff to implement them? Can we ensure fidelity and get results?
Consider Evidence-Based Practices
9/19/16 41 Communication Breakdown
School District State
Student Achievement Data Errors and lags in data transmission are barriers to evaluating the effectiveness of programs. D A T A
Commitment to Continuing Professional Learning
9/19/16 42 What commitments are needed to sustain efforts to improve results?
Commitment Needed from Students and Adults
Adult absenteeism negatively impacts plans to get better results and to close the achievement gap
Acknowledgement of Long Term Efforts
It takes 3-7 years to achieve data-proven sustainable results
9/19/16 43 Involvement of District Leaders
Administrators must be deeply involved in developing and implementing plans
Stakeholder Involvement
Engage the entire academic community: teachers, administrators, staff, and parents.
Attitude Adjustment toward Special Education
General education must have an inclusive view. All students can make progress.
9/19/16 44
#SPEDAhead
new realities new choices#SPEDAhead
new realities new choicesWhere do we begin with RDA?
#SPEDAhead
new realities new choicesWhat data do we need to be using to set our students up for success?
9/19/16 45
#SPEDAhead
new realities new choicesWith so much emphasis placed on result-based achievement, how can we, as therapists, translate this achievement in to actual real life learning and success?
#SPEDAhead
new realities new choicesWhat is the best evidence based practice for measuring results- how do states measures of accountability compare?
#SPEDAhead
new realities new choicesWhat is the best way to show student progress?
9/19/16 46
#SPEDAhead
new realities new choicesWhat data system best shows student progress?
#SPEDAhead
new realities new choicesWhat strategies are most effective in closing the achievement gap for students with special needs?
#SPEDAhead
new realities new choicesResearch currently trashes remediation as a way to close the achievement gap. What's up?
9/19/16 47
#SPEDAhead
new realities new choicesInterested in Becoming an Online Provider?
Refer your colleagues:
plearn.co/apply-to-pl
PresenceLearning has
Available On Demand Available On Demand
9/19/16 48
A Certificate of Attendance will be sent to attendees who have:
To receive CE credit:
included valid ASHA membership ID & contact information
required information for self-reporting Questions? Email SPEDforum@presencelearning.com Look for follow-up email soon with the link to webinar recording and associated materials
PresenceLearning.com PresenceLearn PresenceLearning
#SPEDAhead