Administrative Overview: Specific Learning Disability SLD Initial Guidance Documents

1. Administrative Overview: Specific Learning Disability (SLD) Initial Guidance Documents October 21, 2011 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 1 The following slides were presented two times on October 21, 2011 via live ITV sessions to 12 CESA sites from the Pyle Center in Madison, WI. Presenters were Kathy Laffin , private consultant and Paula Volpiansky, DPI School Administration Consultant. The presentation lasted 2 ½ hours. Approximately 1 hour of the presentation time was allocated to questions and answers. These slides and video of the taped ITV sessions is available on the DPI website at http://www.dpi.wi.gov/sped/ld.html The following slides were presented two times on October 21, 2011 via live ITV sessions to 12 CESA sites from the Pyle Center in Madison, WI. Presenters were Kathy Laffin , private consultant and Paula Volpiansky, DPI School Administration Consultant. The presentation lasted 2 ½ hours. Approximately 1 hour of the presentation time was allocated to questions and answers. These slides and video of the taped ITV sessions is available on the DPI website at http://www.dpi.wi.gov/sped/ld.html

2. Today’s AGENDA Introductions & Welcome Review of Overview: Implementing Wisconsin Criteria for SLD Review of Frequently Asked Questions about Making SLD Eligibility Decisions Review of revised SLD Checklists, forms, and Notes to Accompany Form ER-2 Agenda for Fall SLD Workshops 7/2/2012 2 SLD Initial Guidance [Briefly review the agenda topics] Today we will provide you with a brief overview of the Initial SLD Guidance documents that were posted on the DPI website this summer. These documents are all available at http://www.dpi.wi.gov/sped/ld.html. We will also share the agenda for the full-day workshops we will conduct later this fall. These workshops will provide a more detailed and hands-on overview of the content of these documents with additional extended guidance provided on applying and documenting the SLD criteria requirements during IEP team evaluations. [Click on info icon and show folk where they can download docs if they haven’t done so already.] Before we start, we would like to set the stage by reminding everyone that the revised rules put new responsibilities on IEP teams. The revised rules are more detailed and complex than prior rule. IEP team participants will need to understand the rules and discuss the data, particularly progress data from intensive intervention. The department will be providing on-going technical assistance and resources to assist LEAs in this effort. [Briefly review the agenda topics] Today we will provide you with a brief overview of the Initial SLD Guidance documents that were posted on the DPI website this summer. These documents are all available at http://www.dpi.wi.gov/sped/ld.html. We will also share the agenda for the full-day workshops we will conduct later this fall. These workshops will provide a more detailed and hands-on overview of the content of these documents with additional extended guidance provided on applying and documenting the SLD criteria requirements during IEP team evaluations. [Click on info icon and show folk where they can download docs if they haven’t done so already.] Before we start, we would like to set the stage by reminding everyone that the revised rules put new responsibilities on IEP teams. The revised rules are more detailed and complex than prior rule. IEP team participants will need to understand the rules and discuss the data, particularly progress data from intensive intervention. The department will be providing on-going technical assistance and resources to assist LEAs in this effort.

3. Overview: Implementing Wisconsin Criteria for SLD Three Criteria Inadequate Classroom Achievement Insufficient Progress Exclusionary Factors not primary Evaluation Activities Documentation Requirements 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 3 The document titled Overview: Implementing Wisconsin Criteria for SLD, is intended to provide a brief overview of Wisconsin’s current SLD rule. It summarizes all required components including the 3 criteria that must be considered, the other evaluation activities that must be completed, and the documentation requirements of the rule. The document titled Overview: Implementing Wisconsin Criteria for SLD, is intended to provide a brief overview of Wisconsin’s current SLD rule. It summarizes all required components including the 3 criteria that must be considered, the other evaluation activities that must be completed, and the documentation requirements of the rule.

4. Overview: Implementing Wisconsin Criteria for SLD 7/2/2012 4 SLD Initial Guidance This graphic appears in the Overview document, and represent the criteria that must be considered in the current WI SLD rule. We encourage use of this graphic to illustrate that the criteria are interdependent and together support determination of the impairment of SLD. All three criteria must be considered in an integrated way when IEP teams decide if a student has the impairment of SLD for the first time. The element in the middle of the graphic, “Need for Special Education” is considered only if the student meets the three SLD impairment criteria. Once a student is identified as having the impairment of SLD and is found to need special education, different criteria are used for reevaluation. Before we start, we would like to discuss an aspect of the new rule. Usually administrative rules are written to reflect existing well-established practice. Wisconsin’s new SLD rule, like that of other states adopting similar rules, is different in that it is driving rather than reflecting the current practice in many districts. We are aware some of the rule’s components, in particular the requirement of intensive scientific-research or evidence-based intervention and the use of progress data require continued analysis. We know these are still being refined by the field and are in various stages of implementation in your districts. For example, we are aware that progress monitoring tools are not currently available for all 8 areas of potential specific learning disability. The sunset period was included in the rule to allow for transitioning from the use of significant discrepancy to an analysis of progress during intervention. The development and dissemination of additional implementation level guidance will be ongoing as updated information and technologies become available.  This graphic appears in the Overview document, and represent the criteria that must be considered in the current WI SLD rule. We encourage use of this graphic to illustrate that the criteria are interdependent and together support determination of the impairment of SLD. All three criteria must be considered in an integrated way when IEP teams decide if a student has the impairment of SLD for the first time. The element in the middle of the graphic, “Need for Special Education” is considered only if the student meets the three SLD impairment criteria. Once a student is identified as having the impairment of SLD and is found to need special education, different criteria are used for reevaluation. Before we start, we would like to discuss an aspect of the new rule. Usually administrative rules are written to reflect existing well-established practice. Wisconsin’s new SLD rule, like that of other states adopting similar rules, is different in that it is driving rather than reflecting the current practice in many districts. We are aware some of the rule’s components, in particular the requirement of intensive scientific-research or evidence-based intervention and the use of progress data require continued analysis. We know these are still being refined by the field and are in various stages of implementation in your districts. For example, we are aware that progress monitoring tools are not currently available for all 8 areas of potential specific learning disability. The sunset period was included in the rule to allow for transitioning from the use of significant discrepancy to an analysis of progress during intervention. The development and dissemination of additional implementation level guidance will be ongoing as updated information and technologies become available.

5. SLD Evaluation Requirements Checklist Purpose – to assist the IEP team in completing all the elements of the SLD evaluation process. The checklist includes all the requirements of the rule, and specifies when each requirement must be completed (e.g. initial or reevaluation or both). 7/2/2012 5 SLD Initial Guidance The final section of the Overview document includes the Evaluation Requirements Checklist . The checklist has been developed as a resource to guide IEP team discussion of the SLD criteria and eligibility requirements; and to assist those responsible for preparing written evaluation reports. If you are looking at the document, it is pages 6 and 7. The final section of the Overview document includes the Evaluation Requirements Checklist . The checklist has been developed as a resource to guide IEP team discussion of the SLD criteria and eligibility requirements; and to assist those responsible for preparing written evaluation reports. If you are looking at the document, it is pages 6 and 7.

6. Frequently Asked Questions about Making SLD Eligibility Decisions Process for discussion: Focused on selected topics Opportunities for questions Resource: Frequently Asked Questions about Making SLD Eligibility Decision 7/2/2012 6 SLD Initial Guidance We will now discuss several sections of the Frequently Asked Questions about Making SLD Eligibility Decisions document. This document addresses questions we received from the field about the implementation of Wisconsin’s new SLD rule. If you don’t have the document in front of you, you might want to look on with someone else who does, or pull up the document on the DPI website link (Show Link) Our process will be to review selected topics. We will stop and provide some opportunity for questions at various points. We also have allocated some time for questions at the end of the session. We will now discuss several sections of the Frequently Asked Questions about Making SLD Eligibility Decisions document. This document addresses questions we received from the field about the implementation of Wisconsin’s new SLD rule. If you don’t have the document in front of you, you might want to look on with someone else who does, or pull up the document on the DPI website link (Show Link) Our process will be to review selected topics. We will stop and provide some opportunity for questions at various points. We also have allocated some time for questions at the end of the session.

7. FAQs on Intensive Interventions #14-21 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 7 Our first area of discussion from the FAQs is intensive intervention, which is addressed in questions 14 – 21 of the FAQ document. http://www.dpi.wi.gov/sped/ld.html Our first area of discussion from the FAQs is intensive intervention, which is addressed in questions 14 – 21 of the FAQ document. http://www.dpi.wi.gov/sped/ld.html

8. Intensive Interventions The rule uses the term “intensive intervention” in two ways: Intensive Intervention required before testing to determine Inadequate Classroom Achievement (11.02 6t and 6m) Intensive Scientific Research-based or Evidence-based Intervention required during collection of progress monitoring data to determine Insufficient Progress. (11.02 4e, 6t, 6m and 12). 7/2/2012 8 SLD Initial Guidance There are two different applications of the term “intensive intervention” within the rule. The Intensive Intervention required before testing to determine Inadequate Classroom Achievement. This intervention is essentially the same as what has always been required for IEP team documentation of “previous interventions and effects”. However, the rule more clearly defines intervention and specifies that intervention must occur before administering the standardized achievement test used to determine Inadequate Classroom Achievement. i.e. achievement testing occurs after intervention. The second type of Intensive Interventions are required once a school begins to analyze Insufficient Progress based on “Insufficient response to intensive scientific research-based or evidence-based intervention”. In this case, two interventions occur while progress monitoring data is being collected. The progress monitoring data collected during intensive intervention is then used by the IEP team to determine rate of progress. The standards for the two types of intervention are different. The IEP team decides if the intensive intervention meets the standards required for its particular purpose. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PI 11.02 (4e) “Evidence-based interventions” means scientific, research-based interventions with substantial evidence of their effectiveness through multiple outcome evaluations. (6t) “Intervention” means the systematic use of a technique, program or practice designed to improve learning or performance in specific areas of pupil need. (6m) “Intensive interventions” means interventions used with individual or small groups of pupils, focusing on single or small numbers of discrete skills, with substantial numbers of instructional minutes in addition to those provided to all pupils. (12) “Scientific, research-based” has the meaning under section 20 U.S.C. 7801 (37). There are two different applications of the term “intensive intervention” within the rule. The Intensive Intervention required before testing to determine Inadequate Classroom Achievement. This intervention is essentially the same as what has always been required for IEP team documentation of “previous interventions and effects”. However, the rule more clearly defines intervention and specifies that intervention must occur before administering the standardized achievement test used to determine Inadequate Classroom Achievement. i.e. achievement testing occurs after intervention. The second type of Intensive Interventions are required once a school begins to analyze Insufficient Progress based on “Insufficient response to intensive scientific research-based or evidence-based intervention”. In this case, two interventions occur while progress monitoring data is being collected. The progress monitoring data collected during intensive intervention is then used by the IEP team to determine rate of progress. The standards for the two types of intervention are different. The IEP team decides if the intensive intervention meets the standards required for its particular purpose. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PI 11.02 (4e) “Evidence-based interventions” means scientific, research-based interventions with substantial evidence of their effectiveness through multiple outcome evaluations. (6t) “Intervention” means the systematic use of a technique, program or practice designed to improve learning or performance in specific areas of pupil need. (6m) “Intensive interventions” means interventions used with individual or small groups of pupils, focusing on single or small numbers of discrete skills, with substantial numbers of instructional minutes in addition to those provided to all pupils. (12) “Scientific, research-based” has the meaning under section 20 U.S.C. 7801 (37).

9. Standards for ALL Intensive Interventions Used with individual or small groups Focused on single or small number of discrete skills. Include substantial number of instructional minutes beyond what is provided to all students. Applied in a manner highly consistent with its design, closely aligned to student need. Culturally responsive. 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 9 The department received quite a few questions about the standards required for interventions. This is a summary of our answers to these questions. The rule defines “intervention “ as a “systematic use of a technique, program or practice designed to improve learning or performance in a specific area of pupil need. PI 11.02 (6t). These standards on this slide apply to all intensive interventions: the intervention required before administering standardized achievement test(s) and the interventions required when collecting progress monitoring data used to determine insufficient progress: All Intensive Interventions must provide additional instructional time beyond the time spent on instruction for ALL students. The focus of intensive intervention is a single discrete skill or a small number of skills taught to individuals or small groups of students. PI 11.02(6m). Finally, IEP teams must be able to document that intensive intervention(s) was closely aligned with student need, culturally appropriate, and was implemented according to design. PI 11.36(6)(f)4 The IEP team determines if these standards have been met. The department received quite a few questions about the standards required for interventions. This is a summary of our answers to these questions. The rule defines “intervention “ as a “systematic use of a technique, program or practice designed to improve learning or performance in a specific area of pupil need. PI 11.02 (6t). These standards on this slide apply to all intensive interventions: the intervention required before administering standardized achievement test(s) and the interventions required when collecting progress monitoring data used to determine insufficient progress: All Intensive Interventions must provide additional instructional time beyond the time spent on instruction for ALL students. The focus of intensive intervention is a single discrete skill or a small number of skills taught to individuals or small groups of students. PI 11.02(6m). Finally, IEP teams must be able to document that intensive intervention(s) was closely aligned with student need, culturally appropriate, and was implemented according to design. PI 11.36(6)(f)4 The IEP team determines if these standards have been met.

10. Intensive Intervention and Inadequate Classroom Achievement When: PRIOR TO assessment of Inadequate Classroom Achievement Where: In general education; implemented by licensed general education staff 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 10 The intensive intervention provided before assessing Inadequate Classroom Achievement must meet the standards for all interventions listed on the previous slide. The intensive intervention is considered part of general education programming, as are all intensive interventions referenced in the SLD rule. The intensive intervention provided before assessing Inadequate Classroom Achievement must meet the standards for all interventions listed on the previous slide. The intensive intervention is considered part of general education programming, as are all intensive interventions referenced in the SLD rule.

11. Standards for Intensive Interventions to Consider Insufficient Progress using PM Must meet standards for all intensive interventions ADDITIONAL features: Scientific research-based or evidence-based. Closely aligned to individual learning needs (area of concern) Implemented with adequate fidelity At least TWO interventions required 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 11 Now lets turn to the two Intensive Interventions required when a school adopts the method of determining Insufficient Progress using progress monitoring (PM) data. In the SLD rule this is formally referred to as Insufficient Progress based on “insufficient response to intensive, scientific, research-based or evidence-based intervention”. These interventions must meet the standards for ALL intensive interventions listed on the previous slide, as well as some additional standards. The standards for Intensive Interventions implemented with the student while collecting progress monitoring data are more rigorous. These interventions must be scientific research-based or evidence-based and implemented with adequate fidelity; meaning , they are applied in a manner highly consistent with its design, and provided at least 80% of recommended weeks, sessions, or minutes per session. Information about the number of recommended sessions and minutes should be provided as part of the intervention manual or guide. The rule requires a minimum of two such intensive interventions when data collected during intervention is used to determine if the student demonstrates Insufficient Progress. The interventions must address the area(s) of concern under consideration. It is possible for one intervention to address more than one area of concern (eg. reading comprehension and reading fluency could be addressed by the same intervention). Although, good practice, two interventions meeting this standard are not required when applying the Significant Discrepancy criterion. We encourage districts to begin this process before transitioning away from the use of the significant discrepancy method. Now lets turn to the two Intensive Interventions required when a school adopts the method of determining Insufficient Progress using progress monitoring (PM) data. In the SLD rule this is formally referred to as Insufficient Progress based on “insufficient response to intensive, scientific, research-based or evidence-based intervention”. These interventions must meet the standards for ALL intensive interventions listed on the previous slide, as well as some additional standards. The standards for Intensive Interventions implemented with the student while collecting progress monitoring data are more rigorous. These interventions must be scientific research-based or evidence-based and implemented with adequate fidelity; meaning , they are applied in a manner highly consistent with its design, and provided at least 80% of recommended weeks, sessions, or minutes per session. Information about the number of recommended sessions and minutes should be provided as part of the intervention manual or guide. The rule requires a minimum of two such intensive interventions when data collected during intervention is used to determine if the student demonstrates Insufficient Progress. The interventions must address the area(s) of concern under consideration. It is possible for one intervention to address more than one area of concern (eg. reading comprehension and reading fluency could be addressed by the same intervention). Although, good practice, two interventions meeting this standard are not required when applying the Significant Discrepancy criterion. We encourage districts to begin this process before transitioning away from the use of the significant discrepancy method.

12. Intensive Intervention and Insufficient Progress using PM data When: AFTER baseline data has been gathered. Either before OR after referral. Where: In general education; implemented by licensed general education staff. 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 12 The Intensive interventions required for this criterion, must begin after a baseline has been established (will discuss this later). After a baseline is established, the intervention is started and the progress monitoring data needed to consider Insufficient Progress can be collected. Collection of progress monitoring data from intensive interventions may occur before or after referral. General education staff implement the intensive interventions as part of general education instruction. A general education paraprofessional may support, reinforce or follow-up on instruction provided by or under the supervision of a licensed general education teacher. The collection of progress data is considered part of the intervention. If intensive intervention has not occurred before referral, the IEP team would, after reviewing existing data, request consent to collect progress data during intensive intervention. The IEP team (including the parent) may agree to allow for an extension beyond the 60 day evaluation timeline to implement intensive intervention and collect necessary data. A written agreement with the parent is required to extend the evaluation timeline. DPI Model Form M-3 (Agreement to Extend Time Limit To Complete SLD Evaluation ) available on the DPI website, may be used to document this agreement. If an extension is not agreed upon, the IEP team may decide that it does not have sufficient data to make an SLD eligibility determination. If an intervention meeting the higher standards was completed before standardized achievement test data was collected, it may also be used to fulfill the requirement for intervention prior to achievement testing to determine inadequate classroom achievement. The Intensive interventions required for this criterion, must begin after a baseline has been established (will discuss this later). After a baseline is established, the intervention is started and the progress monitoring data needed to consider Insufficient Progress can be collected. Collection of progress monitoring data from intensive interventions may occur before or after referral. General education staff implement the intensive interventions as part of general education instruction. A general education paraprofessional may support, reinforce or follow-up on instruction provided by or under the supervision of a licensed general education teacher. The collection of progress data is considered part of the intervention. If intensive intervention has not occurred before referral, the IEP team would, after reviewing existing data, request consent to collect progress data during intensive intervention. The IEP team (including the parent) may agree to allow for an extension beyond the 60 day evaluation timeline to implement intensive intervention and collect necessary data. A written agreement with the parent is required to extend the evaluation timeline. DPI Model Form M-3 (Agreement to Extend Time Limit To Complete SLD Evaluation ) available on the DPI website, may be used to document this agreement. If an extension is not agreed upon, the IEP team may decide that it does not have sufficient data to make an SLD eligibility determination. If an intervention meeting the higher standards was completed before standardized achievement test data was collected, it may also be used to fulfill the requirement for intervention prior to achievement testing to determine inadequate classroom achievement.

13. FAQs for Inadequate Classroom Achievement #22-24 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 13 The next topic we will review is the Inadequate Classroom Achievement criterion, which is addressed in questions 22-24 in the FAQ document. The next topic we will review is the Inadequate Classroom Achievement criterion, which is addressed in questions 22-24 in the FAQ document.

14. FAQs: Inadequate Classroom Achievement 1.25 SD cut score on reliable/valid test Exceptions Scores within 1 SEM (standard error of the measurement) of 1.25 SD when the student meets all other criteria When a valid, reliable score can not be obtained Behavior, language, other impairment No appropriate standardized tests for student’s age. Must document with other empirical evidence. 7/2/2012 14 SLD Initial Guidance The rule states that a student’s classroom achievement is inadequate when the score, after intensive intervention, is equal to or more than 1.25 SD below the mean for the student’s age in at least one of the 8 areas of SLD. This standard replaced the old requirements for Classroom Achievement Delay, which was not based on the results of a standardized achievement test. Tests used for this criterion can be the same as the achievement tests used when determining Significant Discrepancy. There are two exceptions to the requirement that a student’s score be 1.25 SD below the mean: The student may be considered to meet the criterion if his or her test score is within 1 SEM AND the student meets all other criteria (insufficient progress, exclusionary factors are not the primary reason for inadequate achievement or insufficient progress) When the student’s test behavior, language proficiency, or another impairment interfere with obtaining a valid, reliable score, OR there are no valid, reliable assessments appropriate for the student’s age, the results of standardized achievement tests should not be used. Then the IEP team must document Inadequate Classroom Achievement using other empirical data. Some sources of empirical data may include Curriculum Based Measurements (CBMs), portfolios, grading rubrics, district developed formative grade level assessments, unit assessments, criterion based assessments, and statewide or district assessments. We recommend sources based on state or national norms rather than local performance measures be utilized whenever possible. The rule states that a student’s classroom achievement is inadequate when the score, after intensive intervention, is equal to or more than 1.25 SD below the mean for the student’s age in at least one of the 8 areas of SLD. This standard replaced the old requirements for Classroom Achievement Delay, which was not based on the results of a standardized achievement test. Tests used for this criterion can be the same as the achievement tests used when determining Significant Discrepancy. There are two exceptions to the requirement that a student’s score be 1.25 SD below the mean: The student may be considered to meet the criterion if his or her test score is within 1 SEM AND the student meets all other criteria (insufficient progress, exclusionary factors are not the primary reason for inadequate achievement or insufficient progress) When the student’s test behavior, language proficiency, or another impairment interfere with obtaining a valid, reliable score, OR there are no valid, reliable assessments appropriate for the student’s age, the results of standardized achievement tests should not be used. Then the IEP team must document Inadequate Classroom Achievement using other empirical data. Some sources of empirical data may include Curriculum Based Measurements (CBMs), portfolios, grading rubrics, district developed formative grade level assessments, unit assessments, criterion based assessments, and statewide or district assessments. We recommend sources based on state or national norms rather than local performance measures be utilized whenever possible.

15. FAQs: Inadequate Classroom Achievement  What about standardized testing done before intensive intervention? The assessment of Inadequate Classroom Achievement must be after intensive intervention. 7/2/2012 15 SLD Initial Guidance To meet the standard in the rule the assessment of inadequate classroom achievement must take place after intensive intervention. To meet the standard in the rule the assessment of inadequate classroom achievement must take place after intensive intervention.

16. FAQs for Insufficient Progress #25-33 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 16 Our next topic of discussion is the Insufficient Progress criterion which is addressed in FAQs # 25-33. Our next topic of discussion is the Insufficient Progress criterion which is addressed in FAQs # 25-33.

17. FAQs: Insufficient Progress What are the methods for determining Insufficient Progress? Method 1: Significant Discrepancy between academic achievement and intellectual ability; permitted until November 30, 2013. Method 2: Insufficient progress using progress monitoring data from intensive intervention; required beginning December 1, 2013. 7/2/2012 17 SLD Initial Guidance There are two methods in rule for determining insufficient progress. One method, significant discrepancy, has not changed from the previous rule, and is permitted until November 30, 2013. The second method is “Insufficient Response to Intensive, Scientific, Research-based or Evidence-based Intervention” . When using this method, the IEP team decides if the student demonstrates insufficient progress by analyzing data collected during intensive intervention that meet the standards we described earlier. This method will be required of all schools beginning December 1, 2013 for all students enrolled in the public schools. The rest or our discussion about Insufficient Progress will focus on this second method. When the LEA decides a school will begin using progress data from intensive intervention to determine if a referred student demonstrates insufficient progress, the LEA must notify all parents of students enrolled in the school of the decision at least 10 days before this criterion is used at the school. The decision of which criterion to use must be made on a school by school basis. Once the decision is made, the same criterion must be used for all students in the school being considered for initial SLD eligibility (whenever considering SLD for the first time.). Note: If a student was previously identified as an eligible student with a disability with another impairment and this is the first time SLD is being considered, initial SLD criteria apply. There are two methods in rule for determining insufficient progress. One method, significant discrepancy, has not changed from the previous rule, and is permitted until November 30, 2013. The second method is “Insufficient Response to Intensive, Scientific, Research-based or Evidence-based Intervention” . When using this method, the IEP team decides if the student demonstrates insufficient progress by analyzing data collected during intensive intervention that meet the standards we described earlier. This method will be required of all schools beginning December 1, 2013 for all students enrolled in the public schools. The rest or our discussion about Insufficient Progress will focus on this second method. When the LEA decides a school will begin using progress data from intensive intervention to determine if a referred student demonstrates insufficient progress, the LEA must notify all parents of students enrolled in the school of the decision at least 10 days before this criterion is used at the school. The decision of which criterion to use must be made on a school by school basis. Once the decision is made, the same criterion must be used for all students in the school being considered for initial SLD eligibility (whenever considering SLD for the first time.). Note: If a student was previously identified as an eligible student with a disability with another impairment and this is the first time SLD is being considered, initial SLD criteria apply.

18. FAQs: Insufficient Progress What is progress monitoring? A scientifically based practice to assess student response to intervention Uses valid and reliable PM tools (probes) brief, direct measures of specific academic skills, with multiple equal or nearly equal forms, that are sensitive to small changes in student performance, and provide valid, reliable measures of performance during intervention. PI 11.02 (9) 7/2/2012 18 SLD Initial Guidance The data used to analyze this criterion is collected during a process we know of as, “progress monitoring”. Progress monitoring is a scientifically based practice for determining a student’s response to intensive intervention. Progress monitoring requires the use of a scientifically based tool to measure progress, such as probes. The probes used must provide reliable and valid data about the area or areas of concern that are the target of the intervention and of the special education evaluation. Based on the definition of “probe” in the rule, locally developed progress monitoring tools are not likely to meet the required standard. The IEP team determines if the progress data collected meets the requirements of the rule.The data used to analyze this criterion is collected during a process we know of as, “progress monitoring”. Progress monitoring is a scientifically based practice for determining a student’s response to intensive intervention. Progress monitoring requires the use of a scientifically based tool to measure progress, such as probes. The probes used must provide reliable and valid data about the area or areas of concern that are the target of the intervention and of the special education evaluation. Based on the definition of “probe” in the rule, locally developed progress monitoring tools are not likely to meet the required standard. The IEP team determines if the progress data collected meets the requirements of the rule.

19. FAQs: Insufficient Progress How frequently must progress monitoring occur? Progress monitoring data from intensive intervention must be gathered weekly or more often When an intensive intervention does not call for weekly progress monitoring data, another appropriate progress monitoring tool must be used to gather data at least weekly 7/2/2012 19 SLD Initial Guidance The rule requires that progress monitoring data be gathered weekly or more often. If an intensive intervention is designed to be monitoring less than once a week, the intervention may continue to be used IF a valid, reliable progress monitoring tool is available that allows progress monitoring data to be collected weekly or more often on the area or areas being addressed. The rule requires that progress monitoring data be gathered weekly or more often. If an intensive intervention is designed to be monitoring less than once a week, the intervention may continue to be used IF a valid, reliable progress monitoring tool is available that allows progress monitoring data to be collected weekly or more often on the area or areas being addressed.

20. FAQs: Insufficient Progress Determining Insufficient Progress Establish baseline For each intervention, baseline is set using the median score of 3 probes. Begin Intervention Collect weekly or more frequent progress monitoring (PM) data Use baseline and subsequent PM data to analyze progress using least squares regression. 7/2/2012 20 SLD Initial Guidance So, How does the IEP team determine if a student demonstrates insufficient progress using progress data from intensive intervention? Here are the basic steps: Establish baseline- For each intervention, baseline is set using the median score of 3 probes. To find the median, you put the baseline scores in order from low to high and use the score in the middle; in this case, the 2nd score. Begin Intervention Collect weekly or more frequent progress monitoring (PM) data Use baseline and subsequent PM data to analyze progress using least squares regression. So, How does the IEP team determine if a student demonstrates insufficient progress using progress data from intensive intervention? Here are the basic steps: Establish baseline- For each intervention, baseline is set using the median score of 3 probes. To find the median, you put the baseline scores in order from low to high and use the score in the middle; in this case, the 2nd score. Begin Intervention Collect weekly or more frequent progress monitoring (PM) data Use baseline and subsequent PM data to analyze progress using least squares regression.

21. FAQs: Insufficient Progress What is least squares regression and how is it used? A statistical method for analyze multiple data points Places PM data on a line and illustrates progress as a “slope” A steeper slope means a greater change in achievement from baseline A flatter slope means a smaller change from baseline 7/2/2012 21 SLD Initial Guidance Least squares regression is a statistical method for summarizing the relationship between two variables. In the SLD rule, this method is used to analyze multiple data points. We do not have time to explain this method in detail during this presentation, but we will do so in more detail during the upcoming full day workshops. There should be staff in most of your districts who are familiar with this statistical procedure for graphing data. Most school psychologists can serve as a resource on this topic. Least squares regression is a statistical method for summarizing the relationship between two variables. In the SLD rule, this method is used to analyze multiple data points. We do not have time to explain this method in detail during this presentation, but we will do so in more detail during the upcoming full day workshops. There should be staff in most of your districts who are familiar with this statistical procedure for graphing data. Most school psychologists can serve as a resource on this topic.

22. FAQs: Insufficient Progress When is the rate of progress considered insufficient? The same or less than same-age peers OR greater than same-age peers but will not result in reaching the average range of achievement in a reasonable period of time OR greater than same-age peers but resources needed to obtain rate of progress cannot be maintained in general education 7/2/2012 22 SLD Initial Guidance (end 10:15/20) When is the rate of progress considered insufficient? A referred student’s rate of progress is insufficient when any one of these decision rules is met: The rate of progress is: The same or less than same-age peers greater than same-age peers but will not result in reaching the average range of achievement in a reasonable period of time greater than same-age peers but the intensity of resources needed to obtain rate of progress cannot be maintained in general education The department is in the process of developing additional implementation level guidance and a generic graphing tool to help IEP teams implement this criterion. Please remember, you do not have to complete an analysis of progress data using this method until your school has begun implementing this method for determining Insufficient Progress. Additional guidance will be made available well before the end of the sunset on significant discrepancy. (end 10:15/20) When is the rate of progress considered insufficient? A referred student’s rate of progress is insufficient when any one of these decision rules is met: The rate of progress is: The same or less than same-age peers greater than same-age peers but will not result in reaching the average range of achievement in a reasonable period of time greater than same-age peers but the intensity of resources needed to obtain rate of progress cannot be maintained in general education The department is in the process of developing additional implementation level guidance and a generic graphing tool to help IEP teams implement this criterion. Please remember, you do not have to complete an analysis of progress data using this method until your school has begun implementing this method for determining Insufficient Progress. Additional guidance will be made available well before the end of the sunset on significant discrepancy.

23. Break for Questions 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 23 10:20-10:40 We will now take a break to answer questions or provide clarification on the topics we have presented thus far. If you need to take a comfort break, now would be an appropriate time. We will continue with the presentation at 10:40AM. Start with CESA 1- End at 10:40--- will start with next CESA when we take questions at the end of the presentation.  10:20-10:40 We will now take a break to answer questions or provide clarification on the topics we have presented thus far. If you need to take a comfort break, now would be an appropriate time. We will continue with the presentation at 10:40AM. Start with CESA 1- End at 10:40--- will start with next CESA when we take questions at the end of the presentation.

24. FAQ: Exclusions # 34-35 How are the exclusionary factors applied to determining SLD eligibility? The IEP team may NOT identify a student as SLD if any of the exclusions apply When applying this requirement, consider whether the findings of inadequate classroom achievement or insufficient progress are due to any one of the exclusions. 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 24 Presenter: Kathy 10:40-10:55 The IEP team must analyze the student data it receives in light of the exclusionary factors. If there is evidence that any one of the exclusions is the primary reason for inadequate classroom achievement or insufficient progress, the IEP team may not find the student to have the impairment of SLD. Presenter: Kathy 10:40-10:55 The IEP team must analyze the student data it receives in light of the exclusionary factors. If there is evidence that any one of the exclusions is the primary reason for inadequate classroom achievement or insufficient progress, the IEP team may not find the student to have the impairment of SLD.

25. FAQ: Exclusions Exclusionary factors identified in rule are: Environmental, economic or cultural factors Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, math or any of the other eight SLD achievement areas being considered Limited English proficiency Other impairments 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 25 These are the exclusions named in rule. With respect to other impairments. It is possible that students with certain other impairments (e.g. EBD, OHI) may also be identified as having SLD. The exclusion applies if the student’s other impairment is the primary reason for the student’s inadequate achievement or insufficient progress. The only caveat to this is the impairment of Speech and Language. In general, speech and language impairments are not considered exclusionary because language issues are often directly connected to SLD. In fact, two of the areas of concern listed in the SLD rule, oral expression and listening comprehension, are language based areas. The discussion of exclusionary factors and their potential impact on the eligibility decision is an important role of the IEP team. These are the exclusions named in rule. With respect to other impairments. It is possible that students with certain other impairments (e.g. EBD, OHI) may also be identified as having SLD. The exclusion applies if the student’s other impairment is the primary reason for the student’s inadequate achievement or insufficient progress. The only caveat to this is the impairment of Speech and Language. In general, speech and language impairments are not considered exclusionary because language issues are often directly connected to SLD. In fact, two of the areas of concern listed in the SLD rule, oral expression and listening comprehension, are language based areas. The discussion of exclusionary factors and their potential impact on the eligibility decision is an important role of the IEP team.

26. Lack of Appropriate Instruction The IEP team may not identify a student as SLD if the reason for inadequate classroom achievement or insufficient progress is a lack of appropriate instruction IEP team considers appropriate general education instruction in the area(s) of concern for evaluation No requirement to document appropriate instruction in all 8 areas 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 26 If the IEP team finds that a student’s inadequate classroom achievement or insufficient progress in the area(s) of concern under consideration is due to a lack of appropriate instruction, it may not identify that student as having SLD. Lack of appropriate instruction may occur in any of the 8 achievement areas listed in the rule, not just reading and math. The IEP team considers whether instruction has been appropriate only for the area(s) of concern being evaluated for the referred student, not all 8 areas of SLD. Appropriate instruction in reading includes the essential elements of reading: Phonemic awareness/phonics, vocabulary, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. . If the IEP team finds that a student’s inadequate classroom achievement or insufficient progress in the area(s) of concern under consideration is due to a lack of appropriate instruction, it may not identify that student as having SLD. Lack of appropriate instruction may occur in any of the 8 achievement areas listed in the rule, not just reading and math. The IEP team considers whether instruction has been appropriate only for the area(s) of concern being evaluated for the referred student, not all 8 areas of SLD. Appropriate instruction in reading includes the essential elements of reading: Phonemic awareness/phonics, vocabulary, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. .

27. FAQs: Observation #36-39 Observation is required for all SLD evaluations The IEP team must review data from a systematic observation of routine classroom instruction ONE observation may address multiple areas of concerns 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 27 The department received several kinds of questions regarding the systematic observation required in SLD eligibility determination. The first relates to the number of required observations. At least one observation is still required, even if the significant discrepancy method is used. The first observation is always required: This observation must occur during routine general education instruction in at least one area of concern being evaluated. The IEP team must examine information from systematic observation of routine classroom instruction in each area of student concern. . The department received several kinds of questions regarding the systematic observation required in SLD eligibility determination. The first relates to the number of required observations. At least one observation is still required, even if the significant discrepancy method is used. The first observation is always required: This observation must occur during routine general education instruction in at least one area of concern being evaluated. The IEP team must examine information from systematic observation of routine classroom instruction in each area of student concern. .

28. Additional Observation Required When a school begins using data from intensive intervention to determine Insufficient Progress: At least 1 systematic observation of routine classroom instruction At least 1 observation during intensive intervention These are separate observations. Both types required December 1, 2013 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 28 When a school begins to use progress data from a student’s response to intensive intervention to determine insufficient progress, two distinct observations are required. One is the systematic observation of the student during routine instruction in the areas of concern and the other is during the intensive intervention implemented to meet the insufficient progress requirement. When using data from intensive intervention to determine insufficient progress, 1 systematic observation during intervention is required . Only 1 of the 2 required interventions must be observed. All schools must implement both types of observations beginning December 1, 2013. When a school begins to use progress data from a student’s response to intensive intervention to determine insufficient progress, two distinct observations are required. One is the systematic observation of the student during routine instruction in the areas of concern and the other is during the intensive intervention implemented to meet the insufficient progress requirement. When using data from intensive intervention to determine insufficient progress, 1 systematic observation during intervention is required . Only 1 of the 2 required interventions must be observed. All schools must implement both types of observations beginning December 1, 2013.

29. Systematic Observation  Documenting observation Summarize in: Evaluation Report (ER-1) OR Additional requirements form when a student is evaluated for SLD (ER-2) 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 29 Presenter: Kathy Documentation of the results of systematic observation may be included on either the evaluation report or the ER-2 (Additional Requirements for SLD), or on any attachments to the evaluation report. We will briefly review the forms later. Presenter: Kathy Documentation of the results of systematic observation may be included on either the evaluation report or the ER-2 (Additional Requirements for SLD), or on any attachments to the evaluation report. We will briefly review the forms later.

30. FAQs: Additional IEP Team Roles#41-46 When considering SLD eligibility for the first time using data from intensive interventions to determine Insufficient Progress Required beginning December 1, 2013. Same IEP team member can fill multiple roles. NOT required for reevaluation of SLD eligibility or for LEAs still using significant discrepancy method for initial evaluations 7/2/2012 30 SLD Initial Guidance Presenter: Kathy When the school has begun using progress monitoring data from intensive intervention to determine Insufficient Progress, additional IEP team member roles are only required when completing initial SLD evaluations.Presenter: Kathy When the school has begun using progress monitoring data from intensive intervention to determine Insufficient Progress, additional IEP team member roles are only required when completing initial SLD evaluations.

31. Additional IEP Team Member Roles Licensed person qualified to assess data on individual rate of progress Licensed person who implemented scientific, research-based or evidence-based, intensive interventions Licensed person qualified to conduct individual diagnostic evaluations Student’s general education teacher; or individual licensed to teach a student of the same age (required of all IEP teams) 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 31 Here is the list of additional IEP team member roles required for initial SLD evaluations when your school has adopted the use of progress monitoring data to analyze the Insufficient Progress criterion. The last role listed is not an additional role as it is required of all IEP teams, irrespective of the impairment being considered. The additional roles are NOT required for reevaluation or when a school is still using the significant discrepancy criterion. Here is the list of additional IEP team member roles required for initial SLD evaluations when your school has adopted the use of progress monitoring data to analyze the Insufficient Progress criterion. The last role listed is not an additional role as it is required of all IEP teams, irrespective of the impairment being considered. The additional roles are NOT required for reevaluation or when a school is still using the significant discrepancy criterion.

32. Documenting Additional IEP Team Members The LEA appoints the IEP team following receipt of referral Each role and name (if known) must be listed on “Notice of Receipt of Referral and Start of Initial Evaluation” A member may fill more than one role, so a member’s name may be listed more than once on the form 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 32 (end 10:40) The roles and names (if known at the time of appointment of the team) of each IEP team member must be listed on the “Notice of Receipt of Referral and Start of Initial Evaluation.” One IEP team member can serve multiple roles. Districts are encouraged to use discretion in assigning multiple roles to a single staff person so that each distinct function can be appropriately served during the IEP team meeting. TRANSITION TO PAULA (end 10:40) The roles and names (if known at the time of appointment of the team) of each IEP team member must be listed on the “Notice of Receipt of Referral and Start of Initial Evaluation.” One IEP team member can serve multiple roles. Districts are encouraged to use discretion in assigning multiple roles to a single staff person so that each distinct function can be appropriately served during the IEP team meeting. TRANSITION TO PAULA

33. FAQs: Reevaluation #47-49 Criteria for continuing SLD impairment is the same as prior to December 1, 2010 A student remains eligible if: There is continued demonstrated need for special education AND No exclusionary factors apply Criteria standards for Inadequate Classroom Achievement and Insufficient Progress standards DO NOT apply 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 33 10:40-10:55 The SLD rule revisions that took effect Dec. 1, 2010 did not include any changes to the SLD reevaluation process. Upon reevaluation a student remains eligible if he or she continues to need special education and no exclusions now apply. While it is good practice to review formal and informal achievement and progress data when conducting a reevaluation for SLD, the criteria standards for Inadequate Classroom Achievement and Insufficient Progress standards DO NOT apply Once identified as a student with a disability, special education and related services (except OT and PT) may be added to the IEP without a reevaluation, unless someone believes a reevaluation is needed because additional information is needed to determine the student’s services. The IEP team develops an IEP annually to address the student’s disability related needs. And, a reevaluation is conducted at least every three years unless the LEA and parent agrees a reevaluation is not needed. 10:40-10:55 The SLD rule revisions that took effect Dec. 1, 2010 did not include any changes to the SLD reevaluation process. Upon reevaluation a student remains eligible if he or she continues to need special education and no exclusions now apply. While it is good practice to review formal and informal achievement and progress data when conducting a reevaluation for SLD, the criteria standards for Inadequate Classroom Achievement and Insufficient Progress standards DO NOT apply Once identified as a student with a disability, special education and related services (except OT and PT) may be added to the IEP without a reevaluation, unless someone believes a reevaluation is needed because additional information is needed to determine the student’s services. The IEP team develops an IEP annually to address the student’s disability related needs. And, a reevaluation is conducted at least every three years unless the LEA and parent agrees a reevaluation is not needed.

34. Checklists, Forms, Other Items Document Review: SLD Criteria Checklist – Initial SLD Criteria Checklist – Reevaluation ER- 2 and Notes to Accompany ER-2 Other Items: Agenda for 1 Day Workshops Final Questions and Comments 7/2/2012 34 SLD Initial Guidance The last segment of our discussion will be a quick review of the checklists and forms that have been developed to assist IEP teams in implementing the new SLD rule. We will also review the purpose and content of the 1 Day SLD Workshops to be held in November and December and continue to answer questions as time allows. The presentation will end at 11:30 PM (or 3:00 PM) The last segment of our discussion will be a quick review of the checklists and forms that have been developed to assist IEP teams in implementing the new SLD rule. We will also review the purpose and content of the 1 Day SLD Workshops to be held in November and December and continue to answer questions as time allows. The presentation will end at 11:30 PM (or 3:00 PM)

35. SLD Criteria Checklists SLD Criteria Checklist – Initial Evaluation SLD Criteria Checklist – Reevaluation Model form ER-2: Additional SLD Documentation Notes to Accompany ER-2 http://www.dpi.wi.gov/sped/ld.html 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 35 (end 10:55) We want to make you aware that these have all been posted. These checklists and model form was developed to assist IEP teams in determining initial or continuing eligibility. The checklists are structured using the same format as previous checklists and are intended to be used in the same way as other eligibility checklists. Use of the checklists are not required, however the elements included must all be documented by the IEP somewhere in the evaluation report. WALK THROUGH DOCUMENTS- DEPENDING ON TIME DPI Model form ER-2- State and federal law have long required additional documentation for SLD Eligibility decisions. The notes accompanying this supplemental form is available on how to address the additional documentation requirements We will use the checklists and model form ER-2 in some detail during the full day workshops TRANSITION TO KATHY (end 10:55) We want to make you aware that these have all been posted. These checklists and model form was developed to assist IEP teams in determining initial or continuing eligibility. The checklists are structured using the same format as previous checklists and are intended to be used in the same way as other eligibility checklists. Use of the checklists are not required, however the elements included must all be documented by the IEP somewhere in the evaluation report. WALK THROUGH DOCUMENTS- DEPENDING ON TIME DPI Model form ER-2- State and federal law have long required additional documentation for SLD Eligibility decisions. The notes accompanying this supplemental form is available on how to address the additional documentation requirements We will use the checklists and model form ER-2 in some detail during the full day workshops TRANSITION TO KATHY

36. Implementing SLD Rule in Your LEA Resources: Guiding Questions and Self-Assessment SLD Rule and RtI Compliance PowerPoint 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 36 (10-55-11:05) These additional resources were developed to help your districts as they implement the SLD rules The first two resources were intended to address the systemic changes that all LEAs will need to consider as they implement the requirements of the rule, in particular, the use of progress data from intensive intervention to analyze the Insufficient Progress criterion. These resources are maintained by the WI RtI Center The PowerPoint was developed shortly after the rule took effect and is intended to provide a compliance overview of the rule. (10-55-11:05) These additional resources were developed to help your districts as they implement the SLD rules The first two resources were intended to address the systemic changes that all LEAs will need to consider as they implement the requirements of the rule, in particular, the use of progress data from intensive intervention to analyze the Insufficient Progress criterion. These resources are maintained by the WI RtI Center The PowerPoint was developed shortly after the rule took effect and is intended to provide a compliance overview of the rule.

37. Full-Day SLD Workshops Purpose: Provide comprehensive initial guidance for Implementing Wisconsin’s revised SLD rule Share resources that support implementation Target Audience: Special education teachers, diagnostic teachers, school psychologists, administrators, other professionals responsible for evaluating/reevaluating students for suspected SLD 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 37 Six full day workshops have been scheduled around the state in November and December Review the contents of the slide. Six full day workshops have been scheduled around the state in November and December Review the contents of the slide.

38. AGENDA: SLD Workshops Introduction and Overview of the Rule SLD Rule in Detail SLD Criteria Evaluation activities Documentation requirements IEP team Process and Timelines Other Issues and Considerations Questions/Discussion To register: http://www.dpi.wi.gov/sped/ld.html Review the items on the slide. Other details: Registration at 8 AM; workshop from 8:30 – 3:00 PM; lunch included. For more information contact your CESA RSN. Review the items on the slide. Other details: Registration at 8 AM; workshop from 8:30 – 3:00 PM; lunch included. For more information contact your CESA RSN.

39. Recap 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 39 Kathy (Note to PV: Open Checklist)   To recap our discussion today I will briefly review the SLD Evaluation Requirements Checklist. It is designed to assist IEP teams completing an evaluation for specific learning disabilities, and is currently part of the DPI document “Overview: Implementing Wisconsin Criteria for SLD” which you may have in your handout packet. It is also available on the SLD page of the DPI website.   The checklist summarizes the responsibilities of the IEP Team when it determines SLD eligibility, and identifies requirements for initial evaluation and reevaluation. The checklist is divided into sections including impairment criteria and need for special education, sources of data, evaluation report documentation, and additional requirements when using data from intensive, research or evidence-based interventions.   Use of the checklist is optional.Kathy (Note to PV: Open Checklist)   To recap our discussion today I will briefly review the SLD Evaluation Requirements Checklist. It is designed to assist IEP teams completing an evaluation for specific learning disabilities, and is currently part of the DPI document “Overview: Implementing Wisconsin Criteria for SLD” which you may have in your handout packet. It is also available on the SLD page of the DPI website.   The checklist summarizes the responsibilities of the IEP Team when it determines SLD eligibility, and identifies requirements for initial evaluation and reevaluation. The checklist is divided into sections including impairment criteria and need for special education, sources of data, evaluation report documentation, and additional requirements when using data from intensive, research or evidence-based interventions.   Use of the checklist is optional.

40. Resources Documents referenced in this presentation are available on the DPI Website at: http://www.dpi.wi.gov/sped/ld.html For more information contact the Special Education Team at 608-266-1781 or dpisped@dpi.wi.gov 7/2/2012 40 SLD Initial Guidance Presenter: Kathy All the documents used in this webcast are available on the DPI website at the address listed on this slide. This presentation , including our speaker notes, will also be posted after today’s meeting. The department will be posting additional implementation level SLD guidance onto this webpage. We expect to provide you with a preview of some of this guidance next month at the State Superintendent's Conference on Special Education & Pupil Services Leadership Issues. Presenter: Kathy All the documents used in this webcast are available on the DPI website at the address listed on this slide. This presentation , including our speaker notes, will also be posted after today’s meeting. The department will be posting additional implementation level SLD guidance onto this webpage. We expect to provide you with a preview of some of this guidance next month at the State Superintendent's Conference on Special Education & Pupil Services Leadership Issues.

41. Other Questions? 7/2/2012 SLD Initial Guidance 41 Presenter: Kathy & Paula 11:05-11:30 Starting with next CESA, take questions as time allows. Both presenters say good-bye and thank audience at 11:30 AM (3:00 PM).Presenter: Kathy & Paula 11:05-11:30 Starting with next CESA, take questions as time allows. Both presenters say good-bye and thank audience at 11:30 AM (3:00 PM).