MI draft of IDEIA 2004 (Nov 2009)

1. MI draft of IDEIA 2004 (Nov 2009) WHAT HAS CHANGED? How LD is identified: • Discrepancy model strongly discouraged • Response To Instruction/Intervention (RTI) strongly encouraged • Patterns of Strength and Weakness (PSW) strongly encouraged if RTI is not in place • The state is simply giving districts time to get a full RTI model in place by offering PSW

2. Major Changes WithRTI / PSW • Requirement of research based instructional strategies and scientific, research based interventions • Requirement of universal screening assessment and progress monitoring of instructional / intervention effectiveness • System must be in place for reliable and valid measures to assess instruction and intervention prior to SE • Instructional / intervention effectiveness data must be available prior to referral for Special Education

3. Benefits of RTI / PSW • Special ed has historically been responding to failure • More inclusive and immediate response to all student needs • Preventative: the identification of at-risk students allows intervention prior to significant learning gaps • Increase student achievement for a broader range of students (not just SE) • additional personnel not required • Reallocation of roles and resources required

4. Without RTI / PSW • 28% of all students within special education are Learning Disabled • Students will not qualify for Special Education with a Learning Disability without the full implementation of a RTI or PSW model in place (Fall 2010).

5. Is FPS Ready for RTI? • Do we have research based interventions at Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III levels for:  Reading Fluency  Basic Reading Skills  Reading Comprehension  Math Calculations  Math Reasoning  Written Expression  Listening Comprehension  Oral Expression • Do we have research based instructional strategies with data to support effectiveness for individual “At-Risk” students?  Reading Fluency  Basic Reading Skills  Reading Comprehension  Math Calculations  Math Reasoning  Written Expression  Listening Comprehension  Oral Expression • Probably not, so for now default model is PSW

6. Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses

7. We are required to use PSW, so here’s the Key Components that we need to know: Universal screening assessments Individualized research based instructional strategies and interventions Progress monitoring assessments Problem solving teams to evaluate individualized instructional strategies and interventions

8. Universal Screening Assessments • Universally administered (3 times per year: fall, winter, spring) Benefits: • Establish local norms • Measure instructional effectiveness • Quick and easy • Has a clear cutoff criteria / benchmark to direct intervention • At-risk students = <20% • Identified students move to problem solving team to identify appropriate intervention and instructional strategies • “reasonable” reliability and validity to identify students at-risk (r > .70)

9. Progress Monitoring Assessments • Used only for At-Risk students • Purpose is to inform instruction and measure the effectiveness of your intervention • Change instruction and intervention if data indicates the need • Assessment data collected frequently (2x per week up to monthly) for progress monitoring for at-risk students • Extremely sensitive to small changes in student achievement • High degree of reliability and validity (r > .85)

10. Research Based Instructional Strategies & Interventions §9101(37) of ESEA: Scientifically based research involves the application of rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education activities and programs. Strategies and Interventions implemented within and outside of the classroom, individualized for the At-Risk student

11. Research Based Instructional Strategies & Interventions Fidelity - Strategies and Interventions must be implemented exactly as they were designed to ensure the Strategy and Intervention has had an impact. Problem solving teams must continually consult and follow-up on Strategy and Intervention progress.

12. Problem Solving Teams to EvaluateInstructional Strategies & Interventions • Team specifically narrows down the problem to a skill deficit that can be targeted with an individualized intervention and strategy. • Team matches intervention to a skill deficit identified through additional assessment data: • Functional academic assessment, instructional assessment, etc.

13. Problem Solving Teams to EvaluateInstructional Strategies & Interventions • Core function of the problem solving team is to monitor the fidelity of instructional strategies and evidence based interventions Fidelity means: • Interventions and instructional strategies are implemented as they were designed within the problem solving model

14. How to action steps Student Support Team & teacher reviews screening data & identifies instructional strategies / group intervention for Daisy Student Support Team & teacher reviews screening data & identifies instructional strategies / group intervention for Daisy Daisy participates in the general classroom instruction Daisy isn’t doing well Change strategies / group intervention Daisy doesn’t improve Daisy improves Student Support Team & teacher designs individual intervention Determined by progress monitoring data Change individual intervention Continue intervention for another cycle & monitor progress Resumes general instruction Daisy doesn’t improve Daisy improves Improvement is good and other factors are suspected as cause Determined by progress monitoring data Intervention is so intense, LD is suspected Special Education referral is initiated Parents Notified