bidders conference - university of south florida · 1 bidders conference floridarti.usf.edu advance...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Bidders Conference
FloridaRtI.usf.edu
Advance Organizer
• Overview of Problem Solving / Responseto Intervention
• Relationship between this initiative andother federal and state efforts
• Overview of Statewide PS/RtI Traininginitiative
• Mini-grant application procedures
2
Brief Project Description
Purposes of PS/RtI Project
Statewide training in PS/RtI
Evaluate the impact of PS/RtI on district,building, and student outcomes(Demonstration Site Minigrants)
Change Model
Consensus
Infrastructure
Implementation
3
Problem Solving
A systematic and structured process thatuses the skills of professionals fromdifferent disciplines to develop, implementand evaluate intervention plans that resultin the significant improvement of schoolperformance of students
Problem Solving
• Can be applied to district, building, grade,classroom, and/or student level problems District- over-/under-representation Building- bullying, attendance Grade- reading performance Classroom- discipline, returning homework Student-academic and/or behavior problem
4
Traditionalvs.
Response to Intervention
Intervention
Intervention
Consider ESETraditional
Intervention
Intervention
Intervention Consider ESEIf
necessaryResponse
RegularEducation
MonitorProgress
MonitorProgress
5
Academic Systems Behavioral Systems
1-5% 1-5%
5-10% 5-10%
80-90% 80-90%
Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•High Intensity•Of longer duration
Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•Intense, durable procedures
Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response
Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response
Universal Interventions•All students•Preventive, proactive
Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive
Horner & Sugai
Step I. What’s the problem?
Is this anindividualstudentproblem or alargersystemicproblem?
Decision Making Rubricfor use with
School-Wide Screening
adapted from:
Heartland AEA 11,Improving Children’sEducational Results
Develop small group
intervention
Go to problem definition
Go to intervention evaluation
Step I. What’s the problem?
Are over 20% of students
struggling?
Are between 5% and 20% of Are 5% or fewer
studentsstruggling?
studentsstruggling?
and developgroup
intervention
Examine instruction,
curriculum, and environment for
needed adaptations
6
Step I. What’s the problem?
P = E - O
A problem is the difference between what isexpected and what is observed.
The problem is occurring because ________________.
If ____________ would occur, the problem would be reduced.
Step 2. Why is it occurring?
Goal: The development of hypotheses about probable causesfor the identified problem.
Assessments are then conducted to gather informationto determine which are most / least likely
Prediction statement:
7
Step 3- What are we going todo about it?
• Effective teaching strategies considerboth what to teach and how to teach it.
• Making good decisions will increasestudent progress.
• It is critical that the instruction bematched to the problem.
Howell & Nolet, 2000
Step 4- Is it working?
GoalClassroom
Intervention I
Making instructional decisions based on the review and analysis of student data
Progress monitoring always includes graphing
Progress Monitoring
ClassroomIntervention 2
8
Tiers of Problem Solving
I
II
III
Problem Identification
Problem Analysis
Intervention Design
Responseto
Intervention
Why is itoccurring?
Grade Level Intervention
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Progress=
Percent MakingProgress
Percent MakingProgress
Percent MakingProgress
0%
30%
55%
03/04
60%
45%
69%
04/05
9
Almost 30 years of research has demonstratedthat the education of children with disabilitiescan be made more effective by
• Having high expectations & ensuring access togeneral education curriculum in the regularclassroom, to the maximum extent possible
• Providing special education services and supportsin the regular classroom whenever appropriate
(and)
IDEA 2004 - Congressional Findings20 U.S.C. § 1400 sec.601(c)(5)
• Providing incentives for whole-school approaches,scientifically based early reading programs,positive behavioral interventions and supports,and early intervening services to reduce the needto label children as disabled in order to address thelearning and behavioral needs of such children
IDEA 2004 - Congressional Findings20 U.S.C. § 1400 sec.601(c)(5)
10
(b) To ensure that underachievement in a child suspected of havinga specific learning disability is not due to lack of appropriateinstruction in reading or math, the group must consider, as part ofthe evaluation described in §§ 300.304 through 300.306—
(1) Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as a part of, the referralprocess, the child was provided appropriate instruction in regulareducation settings, delivered by qualified personnel; and
(2) Data-based documentation of repeated assessments ofachievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessmentof student progress during instruction, which was provided to thechild’s parents.
IDEA 2004 - Final Regulations§ 300.309(b)
Early intervening services(a) General. An LEA may not use more than 15 percentof the amount the LEA receives under Part B of the Actfor any fiscal year, … to develop and implementcoordinated, early intervening services, … for students inkindergarten through grade 12 (with a particularemphasis on students in kindergarten through gradethree) who are not currently identified as needingspecial education or related services, but who needadditional academic and behavioral support tosucceed in a general education environment.
IDEA 2004 - Final Regulations§ 300.226
11
NCLB• Accountability
Adequate Yearly Progress• (Data based decision making)
• Proven Educational Methods No Child Left Behind puts special emphasis on
determining what educational programs and practiceshave been proven effective through rigorous scientificresearch
Emphasis on Teacher Quality
• (Effective General Education Curriculum and Instruction)
Florida Rules
Rule 6A-6.0331 It is the local school board’s responsibility to address
through appropriate interventions and, to the extentpossible, resolve a student’s learning or behavioralareas of concern in the general educationenvironment….
The initial conference with the parents must includediscussion of the student’s learning or behavioralareas of concerns, the general educationinterventions planned and the anticipated effects ofthe interventions.
12
Florida Rules
Rule 6A-6.0331 (cont.) Other conferences must include discussion of the
student’s responses to interventions…
For students with academic learning problems, thegeneral education interventions must include an AIP(PMP)
Pre-and post-intervention measures of the academicand/or behavioral areas of concern must be conductedto assist in identifying appropriate interventionsand measuring their effects.
New Florida EBD Rule
6A-6.03016. Exceptional Student Education for Studentswith Emotional or Behavioral Disabilities.
• Definition. A student with an emotional/behavioraldisability (E/BD) has persistent (is not sufficientlyresponsive to implemented evidenced basedinterventions) and consistent emotional or behavioralresponses that adversely effect performance in theeducational environment that cannot be attributed to age,culture, gender or ethnicity.
13
New Florida EBD Rule
(5) Characteristics not indicative of a student withan emotional/behavioral disability:
• (a) normal temporary (less than 6 months) reactions tolife event(s) or crisis, or
• (b) emotional/behavioral difficulties that improvesignificantly from the presence of evidenced-basedimplemented interventions or
• (c) social maladjustment unless also found to have anemotional/behavioral disability.
(effective July 1, 2007)
hmmm….
How does all this fit together?
14
PS/RtI Integrates Efforts
PS / RtI
Statewide PS/RtI Training
• 4 sites X 3 Regions• Begin Fall 2007• 3-1-1 annual curriculum
Three year sequence Initial training focused on Tier One
15
Statewide PS/RtI Training
• General components Problem Solving Process Data-Based Decision Making Tiered System of Intervention Delivery Progress Monitoring Criteria for Intervention Effectiveness
Mini-GrantDemonstration Sites
I. Services Provided to Demonstration Sites byStatewide Project Staff
Funding for up to two Coaches Training, T/A for Coaches & Building Administrators Training, T/A for School-based Teams T/A in use of Technology and Data
16
Mini-GrantDemonstration Sites
II. Expectations of Demonstration Districts and Pilot Sites -Appendix B Collaboration between General Ed, Special Ed, and other
projects
People with expertise - district and school level teams
Funds/Resources - evidenced based instruction and intervention,
Professional Development - support and attend
Policies and Procedures
Technology/Data Systems
Making changes when the data indicate
Mini-GrantDemonstration Sites
III. Funding Up to $100,000 per year - three year maximum
• To support employment of district-based coaches and trainingactivities
Three year commitment - reapply annually
Years two and three contingent upon fulfillment ofexpectations during previous year
17
Role of Coaches
• Mentor for School-Based Teams
• Technical Assistance in PS/RtI
• Data Collection
• Data Analysis
• Dissemination of Student Outcome Data
Coach Skills & Attributes• Must be
excellent teachers (foremost) strong communicators
• Should be: flexible in terms of developing schedules highly skilled at building trusting relationships ambitious about the change process respectful of teachers and the demands of the classroom skilled at working with data have effective problem-solving skills
18
Coach Skills & Attributes
"Effective coaches embody...a 'compelling combinationof personal humility and professional will.' They areaffirmative, humble, and deeply respectful ofclassroom teachers, but they are unwilling to restunless they achieve significant improvements inteaching and learning in their schools.”
• (Instructional Coaching/The School Administrator, April 2006)
Mini-Grant Application
1. District and Pilot Schools Commitment2. District, Pilot, and Comparison Schools
Demographic Data3. Statement of Need and Objectives4. District and Pilot Schools Experience with
Initiatives and Programs5. District Personnel Resources and
Technology
19
Mini-Grant Application
1. District and Pilot Schools CommitmentLetters of Commitment from:a) District Superintendentb) Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instructionc) Director of Elementary Educationd) Director of Exceptional Student Educatione) Director(s) of district/school-wide Reading First and Positive
Behavior Support Programs (if applicable)f) Principal of each of the proposed pilot schoolsg) Principal of each comparison school to provide data
requested by Project Staff
Content from Appendix B
Mini-Grant ApplicationEvaluation
1. District and Pilot Schools Commitment
Evaluation Scoring - 50 points*
Letters demonstrating Administrative Commitment Programmatic Commitment Fiscal Commitment
*District - 20*Mean across pilot schools - 30
20
Mini-Grant Application
2. District, Pilot, & Comparison School Data
a) District Demographic Data - Appendix C
b) Proposed Pilot School Demographic Data - Appendix D
c) Comparison School Demographic Data - Appendix E
Mini-Grant Application
Appendix C - District Demographic Data
Number 4, bullet 4Analysis of disproportionality in the identification
of students eligible for special education, ifavailable
Supply any analysis of differential rates of referraland/or eligibility for different subgroups
21
Mini-Grant Application
Appendix D - Pilot School Demographic Data
Number 4, bullet 4 - Analysis of disproportionality in the identificationof students eligible for special education, if available
-same as district
Number 6 - Educational environment/least restrictive environmentdata for students with disabilities
Number/percent of SWD in regular ed settings, pullout programs, selfcontained, special school
Number 7 - Title I status of school
Is your school designated non-Title I, Title I delivering service toonly Title I eligible students, schoolwide Title I?
Mini-Grant Application
Appendix E - Comparison School Demographic Data
Number 5, bullet 4 - Analysis of disproportionality in the identificationof students eligible for special education, if available
-same as district and pilot school
Number 7 - Educational environment/least restrictive environmentdata for students with disabilities
-same as pilot school
Number 8 - Title I status of school-same as pilot school
22
Mini-Grant ApplicationEvaluation
2. District, Pilot, & Comparison School Data
Evaluation Scoring - 30 points*
• Detailed and Current Demographic Data for District Pilot Schools Comparisons Schools
*District - 10*Mean across pilot schools - 15*Mean across comparison pilot schools - 5
Mini-Grant Application
3. Statement of Need and Expected OutcomesFor each pilot school:
a. Describe the school’s needs to be addressed throughPS/RtI efforts
b. Indicate how implementing PS/RtI would impactacademic and/or behavioral outcomes for students
c. Specifically, identify measurable student and schooloutcomes, related to identified needs
d. Identify outcomes for specific target populations
23
Mini-Grant ApplicationEvaluation
3. Statement of Need and Expected Outcomes
Evaluation Scoring - 35 points*
• Each Pilot School’s need addressed through PS/RtIInitiative
• Specifies projected student and school outcomes Measurable Linked to identified need Increased capacity of general ed to support student
performance
*Mean across pilot schools - 35
Mini-Grant Application
4. District and Pilot Schools’ Experience withInitiatives and Programs
For District and each pilot school:
Describe current and/or previous level of involvement &extent of implementation of any academic and/orbehavioral initiatives and programsany reading initiatives in the past five yearsany CBM - e.g., DIBELS, CBM-Math, etc.data collection tools - e.g., PMRN, SWIS, AIMSweb©
24
Mini-Grant Application
4. District and Pilot Schools’ Experience withInitiatives and Programs (cont.)
For District and each pilot school:
FLDOE projects/initiativesCIMReading FirstJust Read FloridaVoluntary PKPositive Behavior SupportsPS/RtI
Mini-Grant ApplicationEvaluation
4. District and Pilot Schools’ Experience withInitiatives and Programs
Evaluation Scoring - 20 points*
• Detail of district and school involvement in academicand/or behavioral initiatives
*District - 10*Mean across pilot schools - 10
25
Mini-Grant Application5. Personnel Resources and Technology
Identify personnel assigned to this initiative:• at the district level and pilot school level• % FTE each will be assigned• experience/qualifications to support PS/RtI initiative
Identify one coach for every three schools• include brief vita for potential coaches• explicit commitment to identify and hire individual with the
characteristics described
Briefly describe any data management/technology systemsthat will be used to support this initiative
Mini-Grant ApplicationEvaluation
5. District Personnel Resources andTechnology
Evaluation Scoring - 15 points*
• Assigned individuals are clearly identified• Technology/Data Management resources described
*District - 6*Mean across pilot schools - 9
26
Mini-Grant Application
6. Inclusion of D or F schools
Evaluation Scoring - 25 points*
Project goal is to obtain a diverse sample of schoolsacross the six districts and 36 schools.
Mini-Grant ApplicationEvaluation
Total Points will be an important consideration indistrict selection.-also important to have a diversity of students,schools, and districts
Additional factors will be considered:• Size of districts (small, medium, large)• Geographic location• Student population demographics• Inclusion of D/F schools
27
Mini-Grant Application
Application PacketApril 1, 2007
Questions & Answers
• Answers to important and frequently askedquestions will be posted on the FloridaRtIwebsite at:
FloridaRtI.usf.edu/biddersconference
28
RegionalCoordinators /Trainers
• Beth Hardcastle - [email protected]
• Denise Bishop - [email protected]
• Kelly Justice - [email protected]
Contact
Contact
Clark [email protected]
FloridaRti.usf.edu