1 / 29

GRO Presentation

GRO Presentation. Response to Intervention and Special Education Pre-Intervention Model August 11th, 2008. Continuous Improvement Model. Stage 1 Take Stock PLAN. Stage 5 Maintain Momentum ACT. Core Components of School Excellence: Rigorous and Relevant Courses

idona-hopkins
Download Presentation

GRO Presentation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GRO Presentation Response to Intervention and Special Education Pre-Intervention Model August 11th, 2008

  2. Continuous Improvement Model Stage 1 Take Stock PLAN Stage 5 Maintain Momentum ACT • Core Components of School Excellence: • Rigorous and Relevant Courses • Personalized Learning Environment • Multiple Pathways to Post-Secondary • Student Assessment and Program Evaluation Data • Continuous Improvement Plan Stage 2 Focus on the Right Solution DO Stage 4 Monitor and Adjust STUDY Stage 3 Take Collective Action DO

  3. Restructure Model

  4. Edina High School • A School of Excellence! • A School for Everyone! • A Place Where We Prepare All Students for Their Next Level!

  5. Questions to Ponder • What resources (time, space, people, funding) are available to be used to support this project? • Are there existing resources that could be utilized to support this project? • Who are the students to participate in these programs? • Are student needs consistent with program goals?

  6. Questions Continued…. • Will our program need to diagnose individual needs and prescribe interventions? • What methods will be used to engage, interest, and motivate our students? • What would we like to see our students learn as a result of their participation? • In what ways will involvement in our programs enhance the participants in-school experience?

  7. Building capacity for RTIOur Journey – Personal Learning Problem Solving/Organization Assessment RTI Instruction

  8. RTI Model

  9. Special Services Dept. At-a-glance • 13 Teachers • 17 Paraprofessionals • Specialists • 165 Students in Special Education Grades 10, 11 & 12

  10. 3 site based programs Network ASD DCD Resource Rooms Grade level 3 sections at grades 10 & 11 4 sections at grade 12 Total of 24 teacher hours a day Special Services Dept. At-a-glance

  11. Lab Classes Math Lab (3 sections) Reading Lab (2) English 10 Lab English 11 Lab US History Lab Work Experience Lab Alternative Classes Math Reading History Special Services Dept. At-a-glance

  12. Special Education • Restructured Service Delivery Model • Meet the needs of students more efficiently • Utilizes our special education staff optimally • Paper maze may become more manageable • Just makes sense!

  13. Decentralizing • Break down silos • “Your Students” to “Our Students” • Move away from Lab classes as a replacement to core curriculum • Place expertise of staff into classroom • Collaboration • Differentiation • Intervention • Progress Monitoring • High expectations

  14. Decentralizing • Move away from tutoring model in resource rooms Goals: • Reduce homework support • Reduce dependence on paraprofessionals for curriculum knowledge • Reduce number of students requiring resource support by meeting needs within the classroom

  15. Emergent Need Arises • Math Department identifies a need for collaborative action • Test security and modifications • Student placement in classes • Number of students in lab classes • High stakes testing and accountability A Meeting was held…

  16. Pilot Model • Embed teacher into Math and Language Arts departments • Semester 2 • Funding – Director of Special Ed. • Staff Development to define roles and responsibilities • Understand strengths and weakness of model

  17. Collaborative Model • Special Education Department Member/ 1 per department • Consultations with department members on IEP’s / Modifications • Teaming with teachers on classes or special lessons • Mainstream students with support • Creation of collaborative assessments • Worth of Department Members… did I enter teaching to push papers or work with students? • MORE!!!! Math Language Arts

  18. Assessment Classroom • Define Learning Gaps • Individualized Learning Format • Plato • Algebra Class • Instruction Based Upon Need • Progress Monitoring • Mainstream • Co-planning • Member of the department • Small Group (All Students) • Modifications Special Education Teacher Instructional Model • Instructional Model • Mainstream • Small Group Sped/Non-sped • Computer Based Instruction • Remedial • Content Driven

  19. Pilot Service Delivery Model • Team Teaching • Small Group Interventions • Special Education • Non-special Education • Plato Learning Lab • Math Example in Algebra 1

  20. Building capacity for RTIHow this fits Problem Solving/Organization Assessment RTI Instruction

  21. Tier 1 Standards Aligned Instruction for All Students High Performance Instruction for all students AP Courses Specialized Courses TIER 1

  22. Tier 2 Instruction Assessments Plato Math Assessment MCA Data Math Score Data 6-9 Student Performance in Class Supplemental Interventions for students at-risk Literacy Coach Numeracy Coach Plato Math Support After School Help Plato Instruction 101 Special Education Restructure Model TIER 2

  23. Tier 3 Supplemental Interventions High Risk Assessments Plato Math Assessment MCA Data Math Score Data 6-9 Student Performance in Class High Risk 102 Special Education Services 287 TIER 3

  24. Pilot Outcomes • Math Department pilot continues • Team teaching • Flexible group intervention • Testing within department • Collaborates on curriculum development • Supports PLATO • Liaison between case managers and Dept. • Includes non-special ed. Students in interventions

  25. Pilot Outcomes • Language Arts pilot adjusted • Reduction to half time role • Cont. Collaborative teaching role • Challenges faced: • Differences in perceived need within department • No shared vision resulted in confusion • Slow change process and continue development

  26. Special Education • Restructured Service Delivery Model next steps: • Develop action plan to embed teacher into Science department and teacher into History department • Reduce number of resource sections by combining 11th and 12th grade students. (reduction of 24 to 18 teacher hours a day) • Align special ed teachers by departments • Reduce math labs from 3 sections to 2 per day • Add a site based program for students with mild to moderate DCD • Open teacher time for intervention and progress monitoring • Reduce time spent on paperwork

  27. Building capacity for RTI Problem Solving/Organization Assessment RTI Instruction

  28. Steps of Problem-Solving 2. Problem Analysis Why is the problem occurring? 1. Problem Identification What is the discrepancy between what is expected and what is occurring? 3. Plan Development What is the goal? What is the intervention plan to address this goal? How will progress be monitored? 5. Plan Evaluation Is the intervention plan effective? 4. Plan Implementation How will implementation integrity be ensured?

  29. A journey to excellence begins with people who care…. Care about our school, our students, and each other. • Rigor • Relevance • Relationships

More Related