Project Directors Meeting Washington, D.C. July 17, 2007

1. Building State Capacity Through Regional Collaboration: Two Innovative Models of Professional Development Project Directors MeetingWashington, D.C. July 17, 2007

2. Tracy Evans Luiselli New England Center Deafblind Project tracy.luiselli@perkins.org Diane Kelly Connections Beyond Sight and Sound, MD dmkelly@umd.edu Ruth Ann King WV Deafblind Project raking@access.k12.wv.us Susan Edelman VT Project for Children and Youth with Deafblindness susan.edelman@uvm.edu Presentation Team

3. Session Overview • Who we are and how we came to the identified need for a unique approach to professional development • CVI Multi-state Mentorship Project • CVI Advisor Project • Discussion • Wrap-up and evaluation

4. We represent … • TA, Training and Dissemination projects of eight eastern states (ME, NH, CT, MA, VT, MD, DE, WV) • Professionals serving a low incidence disability: deafblindness (~10,000 in US) • States with varying… • service delivery models • resources ($, skilled professionals) • varying population characteristics even among deafblind • “Low incidence” professionals

5. Our common need… • Network, collegiality • Connection to cutting edge research and development • Professional development National Consortium on Deafblindness (NCDB formerly NTAC) has served to bring DB projects together annually to meet these needs and to support professional development outcomes.

6. NTAC Topical Workshop 2001 • Introduced to a newly recognized diagnostic category of visual impairment: Cortical Visual Impairment (CVI) • Dr. Christine Roman • Early Interventionist • Teacher of Blind and Visually Impaired • CVI Screening Interview (doctoral dissertation) • CVI Assessment Protocol based on ten characteristic behaviors

7. CVI is… • Leading cause of visual impairment in children in the western world • Neurological disorder • Results in unique visual responses to people, educational materials, and to the environment

8. CVI is… • Diagnosed when: • Medical history of central nervous system pathology • Vision evaluation (eye exam) is normal or does not explain visual performance problems • Visual behavioral characteristics (10) which are the basis of the CVI Assessment Protocol developed by Dr. Roman • Responsive to specific educational (not medical) strategies that address these characteristics - environmental engineering

9. 2001-2002 Maine Massachusetts

10. 2001-2002 New Hampshire

11. 2001-2002 Delaware Vermont

12. 2001-2002 Maryland West Virginia

13. In what ways might we… • Provide more intensive training guided by expertise and experience of Dr. Roman and other leaders in the field? • Build on new awareness and knowledge of professionals that resulted from introductory trainings across states? • Establish skillful intervention design practices (changes in practice)? • Demonstrate impact relative to service provider, child, family skills and state systems? • Maximize the use of limited resources?

14. OSEP DB Proposals for 2003-2008: Our opportunity to… • Be creative, collaborative and strategic • Develop 5-year training models for in-depth, sustained, guided professional development • Develop the knowledge and skills of a selected group of professionals in the use of the CVI Assessment Protocol (C. Roman, in press, 2007) • Build local capacity as these individuals serve as “CVI Advisors” or “CVI Mentors” in their own states • Use NCDB Outcomes and Performance Indicators (OPIs) in our planning and evaluation (child, family service provider, systems) • http://www.nationaldb.org/TAOutcomes.php

15. CVI Multi-state Mentorship Project A multi-state commitment to improving services for children and youth with CVI partnering with Delaware, Maryland ,West Virginia and Vermont

16. Planning Group Process • DB project staff (8) and Dr. Roman as consultant to the Planning Group • Organized as a collaborative team Interstate Agreement written into individual state proposals • Agreed to: • Share costs • Share all tasks and responsibilities • Rotate lead

17. Planning Group Roles • Dr. Roman • Consultant • CVI competencies • Training content • Syllabus • Primary presenter/trainer • State project personnel • Primary designers of syllabus • Evaluation/data collection • Organization and logistics • Leads for home state teams • Trainers of specific non-CVI content (mentorship skills)

18. Mentor Selection Qualities/Criteria • Have a passion for helping children • Believe that children who have disabilities have the right to an individually designed, appropriate education • Support family-centered practices • Respect the diverse cultures and values of families • Recognize the importance of multidisciplinary representation in educational teams • Value thementor model as a means of expanding access to specialized skills

19. Why We’re Doing This….

20. Delaware One teacher of the deafblind One occupational therapist One paraprofessional Maryland Three TVIs from MD School for the Blind Two project staff Vermont One TVI Two physical therapists One deaf mentor West Virginia Two TVIs One occupational therapist One early intervention developmental specialist CVI State Mentor Teams

21. Mentors are expected to… • Commit to five year training according to the expectations in the syllabus • Be able to provide statewide outreach with state team members • Complete requirements of the syllabus • Attain CVI Competencies and Mentor Competencies (see packet)

22. Annual conferences Videoconferencing/webinars Phone chats with Dr. Roman Trip to the NICU Readings Field work Case studies Training Components

23. Training Content • CVI (competencies) • CVI characteristics with and without ocular impairment • Medical conditions associated with CVI • Working with families • CVI Screening Interview and CVI Range • Interventions (environmental engineering) • Mentorship (competencies) • collaborative teaming • adult learning • peer coaching • presentation skills

24. Annual Conferences • Burlington VT - 2003 • Rehoboth Beach DE - 2004 • Stonewall Resort WV - 2005 • Annapolis MD - 2006 • Burlington VT - 2007

25. Data Collection • Scoring videos for reliability • Journals/Monthly field notes • Conference quizzes • Outcomes and performance indicators • Evaluations from state trainings • Case studies • Video documentation as part of assessments

26. Lessons Learned So Far… • Participation of mentors - 100% continuation • Mentor sharing across states • Face-to-face annual conferences • Listserve (assisted by NCDB) • Webinar interactions • Networking and problem-solving • Secretarial support provided by DE • Field work • Annual leadership rotation

27. More Lessons Learned So Far… • Technology challenges (TA from NCDB) • Video-conferencing • Webinars • One mentor inspired to do doctoral study on the CVI Range • Data collection and analysis • Evaluation (TA from NCDB) • Great honor & privilege to work with Dr. Roman to receive knowledge and mentoring and to, in turn, contribute to her refinement of the tools and strategies (Practice to Research)

28. New England Center Deafblind Project CVI Advisor Training Project: Building a Foundation for Effective Local and Multi-State Training.

29. New England Center Deafblind Project (NEC) Unique Multi-State Project

30. Initial Questions • Reliability and validity of CVI Range (C. Roman, 2004)? • Benefit from CVI intervention? (children, families, service providers) • State systems addressing needs of children with CVI?

31. Initial Questions continued • Correlation of CVI Range with acuity measures? (validity) • Influence on CVI Advisors’ skills, motivation and service provision? • Effective in addressing multistate training needs? • Effective in facilitating research to practice?

32. CVI Advisors • All applicants accepted • Initially 26 CVI Advisors; currently 22 CVI Advisors • 16 Teachers of the Blind and Visually Impaired (TVI’s), 6 teachers trained in deafblindness • Prior commitment to increase knowledge and skills and to provide training to others

33. Key Training Components • Interagency agreements; supervisor approval • 2-3 multistate trainings per year; interim phone conferences • Video case-study format • “Real time” assessment, group discussion of results, collection of reliability data

34. Data Collection Strategies • Initial reliability measures on item per item ratings - 76% reliability • 2006-2007 - Score level , 92% reliability • Self-report, interview, direct observation or survey

35. All 22 CVI Advisors… • Initially - overview of CVI characteristics (Awareness/Knowledge Level) • Began in-state training in the use of the CVI Range to TVI’s in 2007 (Skill Level)

36. Impact • 96 instate trainings; 1938 people trained • Increased awareness of families and teachers (CVI risk factors, characteristics, and intervention strategies) • Increased skills of CVI Advisors • Increased referrals to NECDBP

37. Impact continued • Development and support of “Community of Practice” in 4 states • Contribution to the refinement of the CVI Assessment Protocol (in press, C. Roman, 2007) • Development of products (CVI Journal; Training Modules)

38. Child Measures • 96% of children with increased visual skills (per CVI Advisor ratings, 28 children)

39. Child Measures • Communication levels (percent of children per CVI Advisor ratings) (C. Rowland, 2004) • Preintentional – 4% • Intentional – 36% • Unconventional – 28% • Conventional – 7% • Concrete symbols – 11% • Abstract Symbols – 7% • Language – 7%

40. Family Measures and Impact • 84% of families with increased skills about CVI (per CVI Advisor ratings)

41. Service Provider Measures and Impact • 88% of teachers with increased knowledge about CVI (per CVI Advisor ratings) • Professional development (CVI Portfolios)

42. CVI Advisors • 100% increase in knowledge • 100% increase in skill • Determination of level of competency

43. Systems Measures and Impact • 37 state meetings and systems activities

44. Lessons Learned • Budget and training incentives • Supervisor agreement/support • University credit/certificate • Communication Assessment • IEP’s (pre/post) • Participants with high interest in the topic • Most working in isolation and need ongoing support and feedback to develop skills

45. Lessons Learned (cont.) • Video case study, live assessment with group scoring and immediate discussion/feedback • Commitment to training project and data collection • In-State coordination and multistate coordination • Model facilitates research-to-practice • Model works well with the NCDB OPI’s • Results would not have been possible without highly skilled trainer who is passionate about the topic and understanding of issues facing teachers in real-world settings.

46. Discussion: Guiding Questions(for DB Projects) • How can the CVI Mentorship and Advisor projects best support your work? • What “next steps” do you suggest? • What other topics or research areas could be addressed using these models of training?

47. Discussion: General Guiding Questions • What unique staff development strategies have you used to… • build skills around a new area of practice or research? • reach geographically-dispersed recipients? • increase sustainability of new skills? • What other topics or research areas could be addressed using these (or similar) models of training?

48. Wrap up and evaluation • Feel free to contact us for more information on these project activities Thank you !