Prepared for Educational Leaders Fall, 2019 HISTORY 1967 Almost - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
prepared for educational leaders fall 2019 history
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Prepared for Educational Leaders Fall, 2019 HISTORY 1967 Almost - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 24, 2022 10 likes •644 views

Improving organizational efficiencies to impact academic outcomes and student success. Prepared for Educational Leaders Fall, 2019 HISTORY 1967 Almost 200,000 individuals with significant disabilities were in state institutions, many of

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Improving organizational efficiencies to impact academic outcomes and student success.

Prepared for Educational Leaders Fall, 2019

slide-2
SLIDE 2

1967 – Almost 200,000 individuals with significant disabilities were in state institutions, many of which provided only minimal food, clothing, and shelter. 1970 – U.S. schools educated only 1 in 5 of the nation’s children with disabilities, and many states had laws excluding those who were deaf, blind, emotionally disturbed or intellectually disabled.

HISTORY

slide-3
SLIDE 3

SS

De Minimis Educational Benefit

slide-4
SLIDE 4

HHISTORY

Failed Instructional Models Process vs Outcome Approaches IQ/Achievement Discrepancy Model Vestibular Stimulation Auditory Discrimination

slide-5
SLIDE 5

# 1 Failed Intervention in Special Ed

Preferential Seating

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Newest Attempt at Specially Designed Instruction

Personalized Learning Computer Assisted Instruction

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Congress passes the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, P.L. 94-142.

Four Purposes of P.L. 94-142:

  • To assure that all children with disabilities have available to them…a free

and an appropriate education which emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs;

  • To assure that the rights of children with disabilities and their

parents….are protected;

  • To assist States and localities to provide for the education of all children

with disabilities;

  • To assess and assure the effectiveness of efforts to educate all children

with disabilities.

NOVEMBER 1975

slide-8
SLIDE 8

350,000 infants and toddlers receive early intervention. 7.0 million children and youth receive special education and related services. 14% of all students were receiving Special Education in the 2017-18 school year

Source: www.IDEAdata.org

TODAY

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Both the number and percentage of students served under IDEA declined from 2004–05 through 2011–12. Between 2011–12 and 2017–18, the number of students served increased from 6.4 million to 7.0 million and the percentage served increased from 13 percent of total public school enrollment to 14 percent of total public school enrollment.

slide-10
SLIDE 10

63 percent of students with disabilities are in general education classrooms for 80 percent or more of the day.

slide-11
SLIDE 11

80% or more of their day in Gen Ed

87% of those with SLI 71% of those with SLD , 68% of those with Visual Impairments 67% of those with OHI 65% of those with Developmental Delays 62% of those with Hearing Impairments.

slide-12
SLIDE 12

80% of more of their time in Gen Ed

ONLY 17 % of students with intellectual disabilities 14 % of students with multiple disabilities

slide-13
SLIDE 13

LRE DATA

18% spend between 40% and 79% in General Ed; 13% spend less than 40% of their time in General Ed;

slide-14
SLIDE 14

LRE DATA

5% of SWDs are educated in other environments. Other environments are a separate school, a residential facility, a private school placement by the parent, a correctional facility, and a home or hospital.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

LRE DATA

Of all children with disabilities ages 6 through 21, 3% receive their education in a separate school and an additional 1.4% are parentally placed in a private school

slide-16
SLIDE 16

School year

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Percentage of students served under IDEA, Part B, by disability category: SY 2016

[CATEGORY NAME] 6.3% Hearing Impairments 1.2% [CATEGORY NAME] 19.7% Visual Impairments 0.4% [CATEGORY NAME] 5.0% Orthopedic Impairments 0.9% [CATEGORY NAME] 14.1% [CATEGORY NAME] 34.4% Deaf-Blindness 0.0% Multiple Disabilities 2.2% [CATEGORY NAME] 9.6% Traumatic Brain Injury 0.4% Developmental Delay 2.0%
slide-18
SLIDE 18

Part B child count for the U.S. and outlying areas, ages 6-21

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Change 2004-10 Mental retardation 567,780 545,492 523,240 498,159 476,131 461,337 445,258
  • 21.6%
Hearing impairments 72,626 72,387 72,559 72,160 70,781 70,650 69,780
  • 3.9%
Speech or language impairments 1,151,260 1,157,215 1,160,904 1,154,165 1,121,961 1,107,428 1,090,378
  • 5.3%
Visual impairments 26,130 25,996 26,352 26,423 25,816 25,848 25,670
  • 1.8%
Emotional disturbance 484,488 472,384 458,881 440,202 418,068 405,475 387,556
  • 20.0%
Orthopedic impairments 65,452 63,127 61,866 60,523 62,371 57,972 55,741
  • 14.8%
Other health impairments 511,869 561,028 599,494 631,188 648,398 678,970 704,250 37.6% Specific learning disabilities 2,839,694 2,780,218 2,710,476 2,620,240 2,525,898 2,486,419 2,415,564
  • 14.9%
Deaf-blindness 1,725 1,592 1,472 1,380 1,745 1,365 1,285
  • 25.5%
Multiple disabilities 133,364 133,914 134,189 132,594 124,073 124,529 123,592
  • 7.3%
Autism 166,424 193,637 224,594 258,305 292,818 333,234 370,011 122.3% Traumatic brain injury 23,248 23,509 23,932 23,864 24,866 24,402 24,602 5.8% Developmental delay 74,377 79,070 83,931 88,629 96,923 104,528 109,121 46.7% Total 6,118,437 6,109,569 6,081,890 6,007,832 5,889,849 5,882,157 5,822,808
  • 4.8%
slide-19
SLIDE 19

As intellectual disability rates trended down, autism diagnosis shot up:

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Total Number of Children Served under IDEA Part B, ages 6-21, in the 50 States, D.C., and BIE

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 3M 4.5M 6M 6,033,425 6,021,462 5,705,466 5,903,959 5,789,806 5,986,644 5,770,718 Decrease of 6.0% (362,745)
slide-21
SLIDE 21

Percent of Enrollment, Children Served under IDEA Part B, ages 6-21, in the 50 States, D.C., and BIE

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0%

12.4% 12.2% 12.1% 12.0% 11.7% 11.7% 11.5%
slide-22
SLIDE 22

Students age 6-21 with learning disability classifications in the 50 states, D.C., and the Bureau of Indian Education

2004 2011 change percent LD 2,789,895 2,293,861

  • 496,034
  • 17.8%

all disabilities 6,033,425 5,670,680

  • 362,745
  • 6.0%
slide-23
SLIDE 23
slide-24
SLIDE 24
slide-25
SLIDE 25
slide-26
SLIDE 26

The primary focus of Federal and State monitoring activities shall be on –

  • improving educational RESULTS and functional OUTCOMES for

all children with disabilities

  • ensuring that States meet… the program requirements, with…

emphasis on those most related to improving results

20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(2)

slide-27
SLIDE 27

IEP

IDEA requires that the IEP include the following: the child’s present levels

  • f academic achievement and

functional performance;

slide-28
SLIDE 28

IEP

Measurable Annual Goals, including academic and functional goals, designed to meet the child’s needs that result from the child’s disability to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum;

slide-29
SLIDE 29

IEP

Measurable Annual Goals MUST also meet each of the child’s other educational needs that result from the child’s disability;

slide-30
SLIDE 30

IEP

How the child’s progress toward meeting the above annual goals will be measured and when periodic reports on the progress the child is making toward meeting the annual goals will be provided;

slide-31
SLIDE 31

IEP

the Special Education and Related Services and supplementary aids and services, (based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable), to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child, and the program modifications or supports for School Personnel that will be provided for the child

slide-32
SLIDE 32

IEP

Services Provided should allow the child to advance appropriately toward attaining the annual goals; be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum and participate in Extracurricular and other Nonacademic Activities;

slide-33
SLIDE 33

IEP

The SWD MUST be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and nondisabled children TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT APPROPRIATE

slide-34
SLIDE 34

IEP

The extent, if any, to which the child will not participate with nondisabled children in the regular class;

slide-35
SLIDE 35

IEP

Any appropriate Accommodations that are necessary to measure the academic achievement and functional performance of the child

  • n State and District-wide

Assessments

slide-36
SLIDE 36

IEP

If the IEP team determines that the child will take an Alternate Assessment on a particular state or district-wide assessment of student achievement, the IEP should detail why the child cannot participate in the regular assessment and why the particular Alternate Assessment selected is appropriate for the child;

slide-37
SLIDE 37

IEP

The projected date for the beginning

  • f the Assessments and their

frequency, location, and duration.

slide-38
SLIDE 38

IEP

Beginning not later than when the first IEP is in effect when the child is 16, and updated annually thereafter, the IEP must include appropriate measurable postsecondary goals

slide-39
SLIDE 39

IEP TRANSITION

Post Secondary goals related to Training, Education,EMPLOYMENT, and, where Appropriate, Independent Living Skills and the transition services needed to assist the child in reaching those goals

slide-40
SLIDE 40

WHAT RESULTS?

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Trend in National Average Percent of Timely Transition of Students with Disabilities

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Trend in National Average Percent of Accurate Data

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Trend in National Average Percent of Written Complaints Timely Resolved

slide-44
SLIDE 44

Trend in National Average Percent of Timely Evaluations of Students with Disabilities

slide-45
SLIDE 45

Trend in National Average Reading Proficiency for Students with Disabilities

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Discrepancy between tested and actual grade level in Reading

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Trend in National Average Math Proficiency for Students with Disabilities

slide-48
SLIDE 48

Discrepancy between tested and actual grade level in Math

slide-49
SLIDE 49

NAEP DATA 2017

  • The gold standard of education statistics, the

National Assessment of Educational Progress, reported in 2017 that only 11 percent of fourth-graders and 7 percent of eighth-graders in special education were proficient in reading.

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Exit Data

  • The percentage of exiting students who

graduated with a regular high school diploma was highest for students with speech or language impairments (85 percent) and lowest for students with intellectual disabilities (43 percent).

slide-51
SLIDE 51

Exit Data

  • The percentage of exiting students who

received an alternative certificate was highest for students with intellectual disabilities (35 percent) and lowest for students with speech

  • r language impairments (3 percent).
slide-52
SLIDE 52

Exit Data

  • The percentage of exiting students who

dropped out in 2016–17 was highest for students with emotional disturbances (35 percent) and lowest for students with deaf- blindness (5 percent).

slide-53
SLIDE 53

What we focus on is what improves.

  • There are not enough resources to pay

attention to everything, so we must prioritize.

  • We must make time to focus on results.
  • The accountability system must be designed

to drive desirable behaviors and best practices among all stakeholders.

slide-54
SLIDE 54

Disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to participate in or contribute to society. Improving educational results for children with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy of ensuring equality of

  • pportunity, full participation, independent

living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities.

The Preamble to IDEA 2004

slide-55
SLIDE 55

Importance of LiteracyIL

In a national survey of K Teachers in 2010, 80% expect their students to be READING by the end of K, up from 30% in 1998.

slide-56
SLIDE 56

Results-Driven Accountability

RDA

slide-57
SLIDE 57
  • State Performance Plan/Annual Performance

Report (SPP/APR) – Indicators measure compliance and results

  • Determinations – Broadly reflect State

performance

  • Differentiated monitoring and technical

assistance

Components of RDA

slide-58
SLIDE 58

Changes from 2015 to present:

  • Reduce burden
  • Reduce indicators
  • Pare down reporting requirements to just those

specifically required

  • One improvement plan focused on analyzing current

system and putting improved system in place – to improve results

  • Improvement plan as a qualitative indicator

SPP/APR

slide-59
SLIDE 59
  • No one variable or data element is indicative of

how effectively a State is educating students with disabilities.

  • However, there are multiple measures that, when

considered together, do represent the educational progress of students with disabilities.

  • Some variables currently yield unreliable data

and should not be used for the purposes of accountability.

CONCEPTUALIZING ACCOUNTABILITY FOR RESULTS

slide-60
SLIDE 60

A matrix design provides for representation of multiple elements with no one element triggering negative consequences. Examples of meaningful outcome data:

  • Participation in the general assessment
  • Improvement in proficiency over time
  • Proficiency gap on general assessment between SWD

and All Students

  • Percent proficient on state general assessments
  • Percent Basic and Proficient on NAEP
  • Graduation Rate
  • Graduation Gap

State Results Matrix

slide-61
SLIDE 61
  • We need leaders!
  • Disrupt the assumptions of IEP teams.
  • More training and support for teachers.
  • Expand accommodations and technology.
  • Inform and engage families.
  • Invest in meaningful secondary transition and employment.

WHAT MUST HAPPEN?

slide-62
SLIDE 62
  • More emphasis on outcomes
  • Universal high-quality pre-kindergarten
  • Shared responsibility
  • Inclusive school-wide reform
  • Incentives
  • Longitudinal data systems
  • Value-added teacher and leader evaluation

ON THE HORIZON…

slide-63
SLIDE 63

What’s so special about special education?