300 likes | 438 Views
Aligning Education Laws to Effective Learning Frameworks. Kim Mendenhall, Ph.D. Policy & Frameworks of Support. Since early parental advocacy, policy has been moving in the direction of educational integration and justice for all.
E N D
Aligning Education Laws to Effective Learning Frameworks Kim Mendenhall, Ph.D.
Policy & Frameworks of Support • Since early parental advocacy, policy has been moving in the direction of educational integration and justice for all. • Frameworks that support learning & achievement align with policy tenets.
Policy Foundations of IDEA 2004 • Raised the bar for assuring access to general education curriculum • MTSS as a framework for academic support and identification for services • Established the National Instructional Materials Accessibility Standard (NIMAS) – greater access to general curriculum through technology • “...shift from focus on access to a focus on learning” (Rose et al., 2009, p. 151) • sets precedence for further research and development in new technology for the benefit of all students • integrate technology with policy and practice • Prepare students for challenges present in a competitive and advancing world. (Gordan, 2009; Karger, 2009; Rose et al., 2009; OSEP, 2007)
Policy Foundations of ESEA Reauthorized (NCLB) & Current • Driven by student performance • Push for greater educational outcomes • Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) – effective forthcoming reauthorization should be built on “the theme of IDEA” (CEC, 2010, pg. 1): • Focus on individual need • Better teachers • Ensure success and high levels of achievement (Forte, 2010; CEC, 2010)
IDEA 2004 & ESEA • Both laws require • states to establish higher and measurable standards and goals for students with disabilities and non-disabled peers • Alignment of assessments with standards • Improvement of teacher leadership • Early intervention services (EIS) • Accountability for struggling readers • Both support goal of providing appropriate education for students with disabilities (D. Fuchs, Fuchs, & Stecker, 2010; Hardman, 2006; Lieberman & Walker, 2007)
Alignment of IDEA 2004 & ESEA • Attend to diverse instructional and individual needs of students in the general curriculum • Greater focus on accountability, progress, and student outcomes • Need for greater alignment with special and general education • “Scientifically-based” research • Allocation of excess funds from IDEA-Part B for schoolwide programs and ESEA activities as determined by LEA • Unified indicators to determine progress towards goals (Hardman, 2006; Hehir, 2009: OSERS, 2007)
Alignment of IDEA 2004 & ESEA cont... • Recommendations: • Find a balance with IDEA • Congress “recognize differing levels of progress toward accountability matched with appropriate supports” (CEC, 2010, p. 11) • Accommodations during instruction and assessment within a UDL framework based on individual need (CEC, 2010; Rose, Hall, & Murray, 2009)
Vision of IDEA & ESEA • Address student needs in a more inclusionary way • Fair and equitable in meeting the needs of all students • Improve outcomes • High quality standards for teachers and learning • Greater opportunity for ALL to learn (including children with disabilities) • Greater collaboration between educators • MTSS and UDL as a joint system of support (CEC, 2010; Blanton et al., 2011; Basham et al., 2010;Strangman et al., 2009)
Instructional Framework of MTSS • “...make general and special education a seamless system” (Division for Lerning Disabilities, 2007 p. 3) • Teacher practices = INTERVENTION • Progress within the intervention = RESPONSE • Provides early intervention and instructional supports for ALL students (Kalberg et al., 2010; Sailor, 2009; Stangman et al., 2009; VanDerHeyden & Burns, 2011)
Benefits/Features of MTSS • Research-validated core curriculum • Framework of supportive tiered interventions • Universal screening and progress monitoring • Use of data for instructional decisions and monitoring progress • 3+ levels of support: • Tier 1 – universal/primary • Tier 2 – supplemental • Tier 3 – tertiary/intense
Instructional Framework of UDL • Encourages flexible learning opportunities & student choice • Eliminate barriers: • Meeting goals • Utilizing materials • Conducting assessment • Provide research-validated options for ALL learners to • Acquire information • Become engaged • Express themselves (Basham et al., 2010; CAST, 2011; Jimenez et al., 2007; Rose & Gravel, 2009; Stangman et al., 2009
Benefits/Features of UDL • Improvement in student productivity, performance, and behavior • More engagement and enthusiasm for learning • Greater focus on student need • More collaboration • Greater enthusiasm for teaching • Reduction in special education referrals • Improved test scores • Curricular enhancement through use of technology (Gordon 2009; Rose, 2009; Sopko, 2009)
Bridging MTSS and UDL • Emphasis of both: • Effective instruction • Research-validated curriculum • Differentiating instruction • Assessment – inform instruction & intervention
Bridging MTSS and UDL cont... • UDL ≈ MTSS • Encouraging flexibility • Research-validated instruction & curriculum • MTSS ≈ UDL • Screening students • Progress monitoring • Decision on course of action • Tiers of support (Stangman et al., 2009)
Bridging MTSS and UDL cont... • Access to learning environments • MTSS = Tiers of support • UDL = modifying curriculum, accommodations • Researchers – effective decision making • Aligning UDL & MTSS • Focus on preventing difficulties • Differentiation • Instruction – engages & motivates (Basham, 2010; Hehir, 2009;Jimenez et al., 2007; Stangman et al., 2009)
Bridging MTSS and UDL cont... • IDEA 2004 – UDL Assistive Technology Act • Rose (2009) • Appropriating educational funds – innovative technology: • Assistive technology • Digital curricula – digital representation displayed in a variety of ways more effectively than print • UDL framework for ALL students • Continuum of funding – advancing assistive & augmentative technology • Innovative technology – accessible for ALL students (Edyburn, 2010; Rose, 2009; Sopko, 2009)
Bridging MTSS and UDL cont... • IDEA 2004 – NIMAS • Further development & alignment of curriculum & assistive technologies • UDL & technologies • Breakdown of barriers • Greater access • MTSS & UDL • Bridge special and general education • Ensure “that all children reach a high level of achievement” (CEC, 2010, p. 1) (CEC, 2010; Rose et al., 2009)
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified MTSS & UDL • IDEA & ESEA united • Access to curriculum • High quality education – bridge between special and general education • IDEA & ESEA separate • Meeting high performance = could overshadow meeting student needs IDEA provides a balance to high standards of ESEA (Hehir, 2009; Karger, 2009; Owen, 2011)
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified MTSS & UDL cont... • IDEA • Identify students with disabilities • Provide fair and appropriate academic experience • ESEA • Provided accountability to carry out “IDEA’s goal of aiding disabled students’ educational achievement” (Owen, 2011, p. 9) at a time when expectations and accountability for their teaching and learning was suffering.
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified MTSS & UDL cont... • Next reauthorization • Cohesion & balance between general & special education • More prepared and stronger workforce of educators • Equal access to assessment and accountability for ALL students • Meeting needs & improving outcomes of ALL students (included gifted learners) • Balancing IDEA & ESEA within a collaborative system of support • Implementing UDL – unbiased assessment tool for students • Accommodations with individual needs in mind • School wide plans – include UDL & MTSS • Increase in ESEA funding for school improvement (OSERS, 2007)
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified MTSS & UDL cont... • Researchers suggest: • Differentiation of research-validated curriculum in unified MTSS & UDL frameworks – • Fewer tiers needed for intervention with an increase in universal student response • Great emphasis on effective instruction and curriculum • Teacher quality maximized • Reduction in special education referrals • Funding reallocated within a collaborative and unified system (Stangman et al., 2009; Levenson, 2011)
Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified MTSS & UDL cont... • UDL supports inclusion & meeting diverse needs • MTSS supports addressing students needs (intervention) & identifying progress through collection of data (response) • Aligned IDEA & MTSS - facilitate successful outcomes through unified MTSS & UDL (Kalberg et al., 2010; Rose, 2009; Sailor, 2009; VanDerHeyden & Burns, 2010)
Conclusion • Common Core State Standards Initiative • Alignment of important components of IDEA & ESEA with effective learning frameworks of MTSS & UDL – can work within this initiative • Funding for ESEA needs to increase (CASE, 2011) = greater success in alignment • An aligned IDEA & ESEA, within a unified MTSS & UDL framework may reshape education in an equitable way for all students.