FINAL REPORT OF FOCUSED MONITORING OF EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN MARCH 31 - APRIL 2, 2003

Transcription

1 FINAL REPORT OF FOCUSED MONITORING OF EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN BAKER COUNTY MARCH 31 - APRIL 2, 2003 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION BUREAU OF INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

2 This is one of many publications available through the Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services, Florida Department of Education, designed to assist school districts, state agencies which support educational programs, and parents in the provision of special programs. For additional information on this publication, or for a list of available publications, contact the Clearinghouse Information Center, Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services, Florida Department of Education, Room 628, Turlington Bldg., Tallahassee, Florida telephone: (850) FAX: (850) Suncom: cicbiscs@fldoe.org website:

3 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION F. PHILIP HANDY, Chairman JIM HORNE Commissioner of Education T. WILLARD FAIR, Vice Chairman Members SALLY BRADSHAW LINDA J. EADS, ED.D. CHARLES PATRICK GARCÍA JULIA L. JOHNSON WILLIAM L. PROCTOR, PH.D. November 3, 2003 Ms. Paula Barton, Superintendent Baker County School District 392 S. Boulevard East Macclenny, Florida Dear Superintendent Barton: We are pleased to provide you with the Final Report of Focused Monitoring of Exceptional Student Education Programs in Baker County. This report was developed by integrating multiple sources of information including student record reviews; interviews with school and district staff; information from focus groups; and parent, teacher, and student survey data from our visit on March 31-April 2, The report includes a System Improvement Plan outlining the findings of the monitoring team. The final report will be placed on the Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services website and may be viewed at The Bureau has sent Wanda Walker, ESE Director, an electronic copy of the System Improvement Plan for development. Within 30 days of the receipt of this electronic copy, the district is required to submit the completed System Improvement Plan for review by our office. Bureau staff will work with Wanda Walker and her staff to develop the required system improvement measures, including strategies and activities to address the areas of concern and noncompliance identified in the report. We anticipate that some of the action steps that will be implemented will be long term in duration, and will require time to assess the measure of effectiveness. In addition, as appropriate, plans related to the district s continuous improvement monitoring may also relate to action steps proposed in response to this report. After the System Improvement Plan has been approved, it will also be placed on the Bureau s website. SHAN GOFF K-12 Deputy Chancellor for Student Achievement 325 W. GAINES STREET SUITE 514 TALLAHASSEE, FL (850)

4 Ms. Paula Barton November 3, 2003 Page 2 An update of outcomes achieved and/or a summary of related activities, as identified in your district s plan, must be submitted by June 30 and December 30 of each school year for the next two years, unless otherwise noted on the plan. A follow-up monitoring visit to your district will take place two years after your original monitoring visit. If my staff can be of any assistance as you implement the system improvement plan, please contact Eileen L. Amy, ESE Program Administration and Quality Assurance Administrator. Mrs. Amy may be reached at 850/ , or via electronic mail at Eileen.Amy@fldoe.org. Thank you for your continuing commitment to improve services for exceptional education students in Baker County. Sincerely, Shan Goff K-12 Deputy Chancellor for Student Achievement Enclosure

5 Baker County Final Monitoring Report Focused Monitoring Visit March 31-April 2, 2003 Table of Contents Executive Summary...1 Monitoring Process...9 Authority...9 Focused Monitoring...9 Key Data Indicators...9 District Selection...10 Sources of Information...10 On-Site Monitoring Activities...10 Interviews...10 Focus Group Interviews...11 Student Case Studies...11 Classroom Visits...11 Off-Site Monitoring Activities...11 Parent Surveys...11 Teacher Surveys...12 Student Surveys...12 Reviews of Student Records and District Forms...12 Reporting Process...12 Interim Reports...12 Preliminary Report...13 Final Report...13 Reporting of Information...15 Results...15 General Information...15 Administration and Policy...16 Curriculum and Instruction...17 Discipline and Classroom Management...19 Staff Development...19 Parental Involvement...20 Stakeholder Opinions Related to the Indicator...21 Services to Gifted Students...21 Student Record Reviews...21 District Forms Review...22 District Response...23 iii

6 System Improvement Plan Recommendations and Technical Assistance...29 Recommendations...29 Technical Assistance...30 Appendix A: Development of Monitoring Process...31 Appendix B: District Data...37 Appendix C: ESE Monitoring Team Members...49 Appendix D: Survey Results...53 Appendix E: Forms Review...65 Appendix F: Glossary of Acronyms...71 iv

7 Baker County School District Focused Monitoring Visit March 31-April 2, 2003 Executive Summary The Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services, in carrying out its roles of leadership, resource allocation, technical assistance, monitoring, and evaluation is required to oversee the performance of district school boards in the enforcement of all laws and rules (Sections (8) and , Florida Statutes (F.S.)). In fulfilling this requirement, the Bureau conducts monitoring activities of the exceptional student education (ESE) programs provided by district school boards in accordance with Sections and , F.S. Through these monitoring activities, the Bureau examines and evaluates procedures, records, and programs of exceptional student education (ESE); provides information and assistance to school districts; and otherwise assists school districts in operating effectively and efficiently. One purpose of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is to assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities (Section 300.1(d) of the Title 34, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)), and districts are required to make a good faith effort to assist children with disabilities to achieve their stated goals and objectives in the least restrictive environment (34 CFR Sections (a)(2) and ). In accordance with the IDEA the Department is responsible for ensuring that the requirements of IDEA are carried out and that each educational program for children with disabilities administered in the state meets the educational requirements of the state (34 CFR Section (a)(1) and (2)). During the week of March 31, 2003, the Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services, conducted an on-site review of the exceptional student education programs in Baker County Public Schools. Wanda Walker, Director, Exceptional Student Education, served as the coordinator and point of contact for the district during the monitoring visit. In its continuing efforts to focus the monitoring process on student educational outcomes, the Bureau has identified four key data indicators: percentage of students with disabilities participating in regular classes (i.e., spending at least 80% of the school day with their nondisabled peers); dropout rate for students with disabilities; percentage of students with disabilities exiting with a standard diploma; and, participation in statewide assessments by students with disabilities. Baker County was selected for monitoring on the basis of its dropout rate for students with disabilities. The results of the monitoring process are reported under six categories or topical issues that are considered to impact or contribute to the key data indicator. In addition, information related to services for gifted students and the results of records and forms reviews are reported. Summary of Findings General Information The majority of students with disabilities in Baker County who have recently dropped out of school are eligible for programs for students who have specific learning disabilities (SLD) or who are emotionally handicapped or seriously emotionally disturbed (EH/SED), and were 1

8 pursuing a standard diploma at the time that they dropped out. Not enrolling in a school at the beginning of the school year as expected (DNE) was the most common reason given for students with disabilities dropping out of high school, and the number leaving high school to enroll in adult education has increased during the current year. Administration and Policy No formal dropout retrieval activities or data collection procedures related to dropout prevention were reported to be used routinely by the district. The adoption of a single district-wide student code of conduct has been a positive development for the district, but the policies included in the code have the effect, at times, of excluding students from school for repeated minor infractions. Not all policies and procedures, particularly those related to attendance and discipline, are fully understood by all staff or consistently implemented across the district. Child study teams do not appear to be utilized adequately for the development of effective interventions for at-risk students. While there are several effective initiatives in place at individual schools to address attendance and behavior, there is a need for expansion of these programs, and for transition assistance or continued support as students in the alternative programs move to middle school or return to their home school. Lastly, a data quality review is needed to ensure that data reported by the district is accurate. Curriculum and Instruction Lack of academic achievement is seen by many to be a significant contributor to the dropout rate for students with disabilities in Baker County. Instruction was consistently judged to be appropriate in the classrooms observed. The lack of a coordinated curriculum plan across schools and grade levels may contribute to the problem of low achievement. Additional areas of concern include: the lack of alternative educational programs for at-risk students in the middle and high school; the stringent reading requirement for participation in vocational programs; and, the use of ESE teachers to teach general curriculum courses in lieu of serving as consultants or facilitators in order for students with disabilities to be enrolled in regular education courses with nondisabled peers. Discipline and Classroom Management While effective classroom management was noted by the monitoring team in almost all classrooms observed, interviews with administrative staff and school-level data on student suspensions indicate that disciplinary policies and procedures are an area of concern that may be affecting the dropout rate. It does not appear that student- or school-level data are used routinely by child study teams or classroom teachers in the development and implementation of behavior management strategies for individual students or school-wide discipline plans, and there are limited options for interventions other than suspension. Staff Development Ample opportunities for staff development are available through the ESE department, although additional in-service training in reading instruction is seen as a need, especially in the higher grade levels. District-, school-, and classroom-level behavior management and/or discipline policy are areas of concern that call for further evaluation. Steps should be taken to ensure that all teachers who evidence need in a specific area are provided access to appropriate staff 2

9 development. Need should be determined through a review of the available data related to disciplinary referrals and student achievement as well as through self report. Parental Involvement While the district provides a substantial number and range of activities designed to encourage parental involvement in their children s education and provides resources for transportation and stipends to support these activities, parental participation is seen as an area of concern by staff and parents alike. Stakeholder Opinions Related to the Dropout Rate for Students with Disabilities In general, possible causes for, or contributing factors to, the dropout rate for students with disabilities cited by district and school staff fall into the following categories: ineffective disciplinary policies; curricular issues related to a lack of coordination across schools; and, limited access to appropriate vocational programs. In addition, despite demographic data to the contrary, several respondents noted that the level of poverty and the rural nature of the district do not support students remaining in school. Gifted Baker County provides services to gifted students in elementary, middle, and high school, through enrollment in special classes. The district has targeted dropout rate for gifted students in its continuous improvement plan. Record Reviews During the formal record reviews carried out as a part of the focused monitoring procedures, 19 individual educational plans (IEPs) were reviewed for compliance. There were no findings of noncompliance that resulted in a funding adjustment. Five of the IEPs must be reconvened due to a lack of a majority of measurable annual goals. Two educational plans (EPs) for gifted students were reviewed for compliance. One exceeded its duration date, and must be reviewed and revised as needed. Additional information, including identification of the specific student records in question, has been provided to the district under separate cover. Forms Reviews Forms representing the following actions were found to require modification or revision: Consent for Initial Placement Documentation of Staffing/Eligibility Informed Notice of Ineligibility Annual Written Notice of Confidentiality of Student Records The district has addressed these findings; the forms were submitted to the Bureau for review and have been approved. System Improvement Plan In response to these findings, the district is required to develop a system improvement plan for submission to the Bureau. This plan must include activities and strategies intended to address 3

10 specific findings, as well as measurable evidence of change. In developing the system improvement plan, every effort should be made to link the system improvement activities resulting from this focused monitoring report to the district s continuous improvement monitoring plan. The format for the system improvement plan, including a listing of the critical issues identified by the Bureau as most significantly in need of improvement, is provided with this executive summary. During the process of conducting the focused monitoring activities, including daily debriefings with the monitoring team and district staff, it is often the case that suggestions and/or recommendations related to interventions or strategies are proposed. Listings of these recommendations as well as specific discretionary projects and DOE contacts available to provide technical assistance to the district in the development and implementation of the plan also are included as part of this report. 4

11 Baker County School District Focused Monitoring System Improvement Plan This section includes the issues identified by the Bureau as most significantly in need of improvement. The district is required to provide system improvement strategies to address identified findings, which may include an explanation of specific activities the district has committed to implementing, or it may consist of a broader statement describing planned strategies. For each issue, the plan also must define the measurable evidence of whether or not the desired outcome has been achieved. Target dates that extend for more than one year should include benchmarks in order to track interim progress. Findings identified as ESE are those findings that reflect issues specific to ESE students. Findings identified as All are those findings that reflect issues related to the student population as a whole, including ESE students. 5 Category Findings ESE All System Improvement Strategy Evidence of Change and Target Date Administration and A data quality review is needed X Policy to ensure that data reported by the district is accurate. Students are often excluded from X class for repeated minor infractions. Child study teams are not X utilized adequately for the development of effective interventions for at-risk students. Not all policies and procedures, X particularly those related to attendance and discipline, are fully understood by all staff or consistently implemented across the district.

12 6 Category Findings ESE All System Improvement Strategy Evidence of Change and Target Date There is a need for alternative X educational (AE) programs or supports for students transitioning from the AE program at Keller Intermediate School to Baker Middle School. There is a need for alternative X educational programs or supports for students transitioning back to their home school from the Alternative School. Curriculum and There is not a coordinated X Instruction curriculum plan across schools and grade levels. Access to vocational programs is X limited for some students with disabilities who read below grade level. The system in place for ESE X teachers to serve as consultants or facilitators in order for students with disabilities to be enrolled in regular education classes needs to be expanded. Discipline and Student-level data are not X Classroom routinely used by child study Management teams and classroom teachers in the development of behavior management strategies for

13 7 Category Findings ESE All System Improvement Strategy Evidence of Change and Target Date individual students. School-level data are not X routinely used in the development of school-wide discipline plans. Staff Development The district must ensure that X staff participate in appropriate training opportunities. Parental Despite significant efforts by the Involvement district to encourage parental involvement, parental participation continues to be seen as an area of concern by staff and parents alike, particularly at the middle and high school level. Gifted Services No significant findings. Records Reviews Five IEPs for students with X By the time of the disabilities are required to be issuance of this reconvened. report the IEP teams had reconvened; revised IEPs were reviewed and approved by Bureau staff. One EP for a gifted student is required to be reviewed. Findings of noncompliance on IEPs primarily were related to X X

14 8 Category Findings ESE All System Improvement Strategy Evidence of Change and Target Date the content of the present level of educational performance statements, annual goals, and short-term objective or benchmarks. Forms Reviews Forms used to document the X By the time of the following activities must be issuance of this revised: report, all required Consent for Initial Placement forms were revised, Documentation of Staffing/ submitted for Eligibility review, and Informed Notice of approved by the Ineligibility Bureau. Annual Written Notice of Confidentiality of Student Records

15 Monitoring Process Authority The Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Instructional Support and Community Services, in carrying out its roles of leadership, resource allocation, technical assistance, monitoring, and evaluation is required to oversee the performance of district school boards in the enforcement of all laws and rules (Sections (8) and , Florida Statutes (F.S.)). In fulfilling this requirement, the Bureau conducts monitoring activities of the exceptional student education (ESE) programs provided by district school boards in accordance with Sections and , F.S. Through these monitoring activities, the Bureau examines and evaluates procedures, records, and programs of exceptional student education (ESE); provides information and assistance to school districts; and otherwise assists school districts in operating effectively and efficiently. One purpose of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is to assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities (Section 300.1(d) of the Title 34, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and districts are required to make a good faith effort to assist children with disabilities to achieve their stated goals and objectives in the least restrictive environment (34 CFR (a)(2) and ). In accordance with the IDEA the Department is responsible for ensuring that the requirements of IDEA are carried out and that each educational program for children with disabilities administered in the state meets the educational requirements of the state (34 CFR (a)(1) and (2)). The monitoring system established to oversee exceptional student education (ESE) programs reflects the Department s commitment to provide assistance and service to school districts. The system is designed to emphasize improved outcomes and educational benefits for students while continuing to conduct those activities necessary to ensure compliance with applicable federal and state laws, rules, and regulations. The system provides consistency with other state efforts, including the State Improvement Plan required by the IDEA. A description of the development of the current monitoring system in Florida is provided in appendix A. Focused Monitoring The purpose of the focused monitoring process is to implement a methodology that targets the Bureau s monitoring intervention on key data indicators that were identified as significant for educational outcomes for students. Through this process, the Bureau will use such data to inform the monitoring process, thereby implementing a strategic approach to intervention and commitment of resources that will improve student outcomes. Key Data Indicators Four key data indicators were recommended by the monitoring stakeholders workgroup and were adopted for implementation by the Bureau. The key data indicators for the 2003 school year and their sources of data are as follows: percentage of students with disabilities participating in regular classes (i.e., spending at least 80% of the school day with their nondisabled peers) [Data source: Survey 9] 9

16 dropout rate for students with disabilities [Data source: Survey 5] percentage of students with disabilities exiting with a standard diploma [Data source: Survey 5] participation in statewide assessments by students with disabilities [Data sources: performance data from the assessment files and Survey 3 enrollment data] District Selection Districts were selected to be monitored based on a review of data from the school year that was submitted electronically to the Department of Education (DOE) Information Database for Surveys 2, 3, 5, 9, and from the assessment files. This data is compiled into an annual data profile for each district (LEA Profile). The 2003 LEA profiles for all Florida school districts are available on the web at In making the decision to include Baker County in this year s focused monitoring visits, Bureau staff reviewed data related to the dropout rate for students with disabilities from survey 5. This review indicated that Baker County s rate of 8.8% approached the highest dropout rate for students with disabilities for all districts in the state. Baker County School District s LEA profile and the listing of districts rank-ordered on dropout rate for students with disabilities is included in this report as appendix B. Sources of Information On-Site Monitoring Activities The Bureau conducted the on-site focused monitoring visit from March 31 through April 2, Five Bureau staff members, one contracted staff member, and three peer monitors conducted site-visits to the following four schools: J. Franklin Keller Intermediate School Baker County Middle School Baker County High School Baker County Alternative School Peer monitors are exceptional student education personnel from other school districts who are trained to assist with the DOE s monitoring activities. In addition, four University of Miami research staff conducted focus group interviews. A listing of all participating monitors is provided as appendix C. Interviews Interviews with selected district- and school-level personnel are conducted using interview protocols developed specifically to address the key data indicator. In addition to the protocol developed specifically to examine dropout rate for students with disabilities, separate protocols are used to address services to gifted students, services provided in charter schools, and services to students served in DJJ facilities. In Baker County, interviews were conducted with 47 people, including 8 district-level administrators or support staff, 14 school-level administrators or support staff, 10 ESE teachers, and 15 general education teachers. Currently, there are no charter schools or DJJ programs in the district. 10

17 Focus Group Interviews Focus groups for parents, teachers, and students are conducted by the University of Miami to gather information related to the participation rate in statewide assessments. In order to provide maximum opportunity for input about the district s ESE services, a minimum of four separate focus group interviews are conducted. The participant groups include: parents of students with disabilities; teachers and other service providers (ESE and general education); students with disabilities who are pursuing a standard diploma, and students with disabilities who are pursuing a special diploma. Separate sessions are conducted for each participant group. In conjunction with the 2003 Baker County monitoring activities, three parents participated in the parent focus group, representing four students with disabilities in elementary and middle school. Twelve ESE teachers (grades 3-8), a guidance counselor, and a media specialist participated in the teacher focus group. There were 14 participants in the standard diploma student focus group and 12 participants in the focus group for students pursuing a special diploma. Student Case Studies Student case studies are conducted for the purpose of performing an in-depth review of the services a student receives in accordance with his or her IEP. The on-site selection of students for the case studies at each school is based on criteria that have been identified as being characteristic of students at risk of dropping out. As part of this process, the student s records are reviewed, Bureau staff or peer monitors may observe the case study student in class, and teachers are interviewed regarding the implementation of the student s IEP. One in-depth case study was conducted in Baker County. Classroom Visits Classroom visits are conducted in both ESE and general education classrooms. Some visits are conducted in conjunction with individual student case studies, while others are conducted as general observations of classrooms that include exceptional students. Curriculum and instruction, classroom management and discipline, and classroom design and resources are observed during the general classroom visits. A total of 22 ESE and regular education classrooms were visited during the focused monitoring visit to Baker County. Off-Site Monitoring Activities Surveys are designed by the University of Miami research staff in order to provide maximum opportunity for input about the district s ESE services from parents of students with disabilities and students identified as gifted, ESE and regular education teachers, and students with disabilities in grades Results of the surveys are discussed in the body of this report. Data from each of the surveys are included as appendix D. Parent Surveys The survey that is sent to parents is printed in English, Spanish, and Haitian Creole where applicable. It includes a cover letter and a postage paid reply envelope. In addition, the survey to parents of students with disabilities includes a notice regarding the opportunity to participate in a focus group. 11

18 In conjunction with the 2003 Baker County monitoring activities, the parent survey was sent to parents of 539 students with disabilities for whom complete addresses were provided by the district. A total of 36 parents (PK, n=5; K-5, n=16; 6-8, n=8; 9-12, n=7) representing 7% of the sample, returned the survey. Surveys from 189 families were returned as undeliverable, representing 35% of the sample for students with disabilities. For gifted students, the survey was sent to parents of 76 students identified as gifted for whom complete addresses were provided by the district. A total of 15 parents (K-5, n=8; 6-8, n=5; 9-12, n=2) representing 20% of the sample, returned the survey. Surveys from 22 families were returned as undeliverable, representing 29% of the sample. Teacher Surveys Surveys developed for teachers and other service providers were mailed to each school, with a memo explaining the key data indicator and the monitoring process. All teachers, both general education and ESE, were provided an opportunity to respond. Surveys were returned from 154 teachers (59% of all teachers in the district), representing all six of the schools in Baker County. Student Surveys A sufficient number of surveys were provided to allow all students with disabilities, grades 9-12, to respond. Instructions for administration of the survey by classroom teachers, including a written script, were provided for each class or group of students. Since participation in this survey is not appropriate for some students whose disabilities might impair their understanding of the survey, professional judgment is used to determine appropriate participants. Surveys were received from 62 students with disabilities in grades 9-12 in the district, representing 44% of the sample. Data are from both of the district s two schools with students in grades Reviews of Student Records and District Forms Prior to the on-site monitoring visit, Bureau staff conducts a compliance review of student records that are randomly selected from the population of exceptional students. The record of at least one student with a matrix rating of 254 or 255 may be reviewed at each school during the on-site visit, if available. In addition to the compliance reviews, selected student records are reviewed at the school site in conjunction with student case studies and classroom visits. In Baker County, 21 records were reviewed for compliance. In addition, Bureau staff review selected district forms and notices to determine if the required components are included. The results of the review of student records and district forms are described in this report. Reporting Process Interim Reports Daily debriefing sessions are conducted by the monitoring team members in order to review findings, as well as to determine if there is a need to address additional issues or visit additional sites. Preliminary findings and concerns are shared with the ESE director and/or designee through daily debriefings with the monitoring team leader during the monitoring visit. In 12

19 addition, the district ESE director is invited to attend the final team debriefing with Bureau staff and peer monitors. During the course of these activities, suggestions for interventions or strategies to be incorporated into the district s system improvement plan may be proposed. Within two weeks of the visit, Bureau administrative staff conduct a telephone conference with the ESE director to review major findings. Preliminary Report Subsequent to the on-site visit, Bureau staff prepare a written report. The report is developed to include the following elements: an executive summary, a description of the monitoring process, and the results section. A description of the development of the current monitoring system for exceptional student education is included as an appendix. Other appendices with data specific to the district also accompany each report. The report is sent to the district ESE director. The director will have the opportunity to discuss and clarify with Bureau staff any concerns regarding the report before it becomes final. Final Report Upon final review and revision by Bureau staff based on input from the ESE director, the final report is issued. The report is sent to the district, and is posted to the Bureau s website at Within 30 days of the district s receipt of the final report, the system improvement plan, including activities targeting specific findings, must be submitted to the Bureau for review. In developing this plan, every effort should be made to link the system improvement plan for focused monitoring to the district s continuous improvement monitoring plan. In collaboration with Bureau staff, the district is encouraged to develop methods that correlate activities in order to utilize resources, staff, and time in an efficient manner in order to improve outcomes for students with disabilities. Upon approval of the system improvement plan, the plan is posted on the website noted above. 13

20

21 Reporting of Information The data generated through the surveys, focus group interviews, individual interviews, case studies, and classroom visits are summarized in this report. The results from the review of student records and district forms are also presented in this report. This report provides conclusions with regard to the key data indicator and specifically addresses topical issues that may contribute to or impact the indicator. For the dropout rate for students with disabilities, these include the following: administration and policy curriculum and instruction discipline and classroom management staff development parental involvement stakeholder opinion related to the indicator In addition, information related to services for gifted students, the results of the records reviews, and the results of the forms reviews are reported. To the extent possible, this report focuses on systemic issues rather than on isolated instances of noncompliance or need for improvement. Systemic issues are those that occur at a sufficient enough frequency that the monitoring team could reasonably infer a system-wide problem. Findings are presented in a preliminary report, and the district has the opportunity to clarify items of concern. In a collaborative effort between the district and Bureau staff, system improvement areas are identified. Findings are addressed through the development of strategies for improvement, and evidence of change will be identified as a joint effort between the district and the Bureau. Strategies that are identified as long-term approaches toward improving the district s issue related to the key data indicator are also addressed through the district s continuous improvement monitoring plan. Results General Information This section provides demographic and background information specific to the district as well as information regarding the identification of students with disabilities who are most likely to dropout. Baker County School District has a total school population of 4,525 (PreK-12), with 13% identified as students with disabilities (including 5% identified eligible as speech impaired only), and 2% identified as gifted. Baker County is considered a small district and is one of 25 districts in this enrollment group. It was reported that Baker County is essentially a rural community. Based on data reported to DOE, 40% of the students in Baker County are eligible for free or reduced lunch, compared to 44% across the state as a whole. The district is comprised of two primary schools, one intermediate school, one middle school, one high school, and one alternative school. Data provided by the district reveals that 12 students with disabilities were withdrawn from Baker County High School during the school year, with 10 coded as dropouts and 2 15

22 coded as enrolled in an adult education program. Through May 12 of the school year 14 students with disabilities were withdrawn, with 6 reported as dropouts and 8 reported as enrolling in adult education. Of the 16 students with disabilities reported as dropouts during the past two years, 7 were identified as SLD, 5 as EH/SED, and 3 as educable mentally handicapped (EMH). The majority of the students (10) were pursuing a regular diploma. The most commonly recorded dropout withdrawal code was did not enter at the beginning of the school year (8 students). In summary, the majority of students with disabilities in Baker County who have recently dropped out of school are eligible for SLD or EH/SED programs, and were pursuing a standard diploma at the time that they dropped out. Not enrolling in a school at the beginning of the school year as expected (DNE) was the most common reason given for students with disabilities dropping out of high school, and the number leaving high school to enroll in adult education has increased during the current year. Administration and Policy This category refers to school or district policies and procedures that may affect the dropout rate for students with disabilities. There was no procedure reported to be in place to track students who have left school, whether to verify their enrollment in adult education, to determine if they had enrolled in another school district, or to otherwise investigate their reason for leaving. In some cases, students coded as not enrolling at the start of the school year may have enrolled in another district, and should be re-coded to reflect this. While student withdrawal codes may be corrected at any time during the school year, data is disseminated to districts by the DOE twice during the school year, following Survey 2 and Survey 5, through the use of the Student Dropout Match Information Format (additional information is available through the Education and Accountability Services at Districts are encouraged to review this dissemination of records to make corrections for any students who are reported as dropouts but who are actually enrolled in other districts or programs. It may be that data management policies or the lack of dropout retrieval activities have some effect on the reported dropout rate. A data quality review is needed to ensure that data reported by the district is accurate. Several respondents referred to a newly-adopted district-wide student code of conduct. The use of a consistent plan across the districts five schools was considered by many to represent a positive development related to discipline for all students, although the student code of conduct was described by many respondents as a zero-tolerance policy that authorizes stringent procedures for in-school and out-of-school suspension (ISS and OSS). The result is often that students are excluded from school for repeated infractions of what might be considered a relatively minor nature. It was reported that this exclusion from school exacerbates the academic achievement difficulties of students with disabilities, with the result that the students become frustrated and gradually lose their feeling of connection to the school environment. The majority of respondents indicated that attendance policies are effective, and only one teacher reported that attendance is a significant problem. These views are somewhat in conflict with data reported by the DOE in the Florida School Indicators Report (available on the web at which revealed that 20.8% of the students at Baker Middle 16

23 School and 12.2% of the students at Baker High School were absent for 21 or more days during the school year. This absence data includes OSS, which may not be perceived by teachers as an attendance issue. Only one respondent directly referred to the use of child study teams to assist in the development of intervention strategies for attendance or behavior, although referral to the school s child study team for a pattern of absenteeism is required under Section , Florida Statutes. While several teachers reported that students are referred to the office for excessive absences, none indicated that they served on child study teams to address the problem or that they had been advised of prevention or intervention strategies that had been developed for implementation with individual students. The alternative education (AE) program for at-risk students at Keller Intermediate School and the program at the Baker County Alternative School were reported to be effective programs that have had a positive impact on student performance and attendance. This view was supported by class visits to the two programs. However, several respondents indicated that students who are successful in these programs do not receive the amount of support or transition assistance they need as they move on to middle school, or as they transition back to their home school. It is important to note that special policies such as the opportunity to reduce suspension time at Baker Middle School, the system of rewards for behavioral and academic performance at the middle school and at Keller Intermediate School, and the policy in effect in several schools related to attendance phone calls were cited as having a positive affect on dropout rate. In summary, no formal dropout retrieval activities or data collection procedures related to dropout prevention were reported to be used routinely by the district. The adoption of a single district-wide student code of conduct has been a positive development for the district, but the policies included in the code have the effect, at times, of excluding students from school for repeated minor infractions. Not all policies and procedures, particularly those related to attendance and discipline, are fully understood by all staff or consistently implemented across the district. Child study teams do not appear to be utilized adequately for the development of effective interventions for at-risk students. While there are several effective initiatives in place at individual schools to address attendance and behavior, there is a need for expansion of these programs, and for transition assistance or continued support as students in the alternative programs move to middle school or return to their home school. Lastly, a data quality review is needed to ensure that data reported by the district is accurate. Curriculum and Instruction This category refers both to the specific curriculum used (content and/or specific publisher and program) and to the effectiveness or quality of instruction. Many respondents felt that the low level of academic achievement by many ESE students, especially those on standard diploma track, contributes to the dropout rate in Baker County. Students become frustrated with their own lack of progress, and subsequently give up. It was reported in interviews that there is a stringent reading requirement for participation in general education vocational programs, and low achievement in the area of reading limits access 17

24 to vocational courses for some students with disabilities. Despite this, students who participated in the focus groups reported that vocational instruction in cooking, auto shop, nursing, woodshop, and agriculture is available for interested students, and they mentioned a specific staff member at the high school who is available to assist them in finding jobs. While teachers in the focus group reported that there are not sufficient vocational training opportunities available to students in Baker County, due to the rural nature of the community and the difficulties these students encounter with the reading requirement, they praised a grant program that helped provide salaries and transportation for students to work. Many respondents felt that lack of student progress is due, in part, to the manner in which curricular decisions are made in the district. It was reported that there is not a coordinated curriculum plan in place to allow for a smooth instructional transition across schools; rather, principals make unilateral decisions about the curriculum for their schools, and some ESE teachers do the same for their individual classes. Representatives from the ESE department are not included in the decision-making process regarding curriculum. Because the district serves elementary-aged students in two primary schools that feed into an intermediate school, this lack of curricular coordination among schools is particularly significant, and may contribute to depressed levels of student achievement. An area of concern noted by some respondents regarding ESE teachers at the high school, and to a lesser degree at the middle school, was the issue of their qualification to teach general curriculum content to ESE students. These respondents reported that the needs of students with disabilities who are pursuing a standard diploma can best be met through a consultation and facilitation model in which ESE teachers are available to provide supports to students and teachers in the general education setting, rather than through separate classes in which the ESE teacher provides instruction in the general curriculum. It was felt that the use of a more inclusive service delivery model would improve student achievement as well as decrease the likelihood of students with disabilities dropping out of school. The monitors observed instruction in 22 classrooms (9 ESE and 13 general education) across the four schools visited. Teaching activities in all classrooms observed were found to be consistently or generally planned and implemented in ways that promote student learning and ensure access to the appropriate (general or modified) curriculum. It should be noted that staff from the district office and Keller Intermediate School reported that the district s participation in the Florida Reading Initiative (FRI) project has been very effective in improving reading instruction, and holds great promise for the district as a whole. In addition, the programs for at-risk or troubled students in place at the alternative school and the alternative education program at the intermediate school were seen to be effective in motivating students and discouraging them from dropping out. In summary, lack of academic achievement is seen by many respondents to be a significant contributor to the dropout rate for students with disabilities in Baker County. Instruction was consistently judged to be appropriate in the classrooms observed. The lack of a coordinated curriculum plan across schools and grade levels may contribute to the problem of low achievement. Additional areas of concern include: the lack of alternative educational programs for at-risk students in the middle and high school; the stringent reading requirement for 18

25 participation in vocational programs; and, the use of ESE teachers to teach general curriculum courses in lieu of serving as consultants or facilitators in order for students with disabilities to be enrolled in regular education courses with nondisabled peers. Discipline and Classroom Management This category refers to classroom behavior management in general as well as to school or district policies related to discipline. There appeared to be inconsistent implementation of effective school-wide and classroom-based behavior management strategies among the schools visited. In schools where staff reported the collection and analysis of data related to discipline, interviews and classroom observations revealed effective behavior management (e.g., Baker County Alternative School; Keller Intermediate School; the SED classroom at Baker Middle School). In contrast, interviews and observations at other schools and/or programs revealed limited, if any, utilization of behavioral or disciplinary data in the development of effective classroom management or disciplinary procedures at either the school- or the individual-student-level. The majority of school staff interviewed reported that they themselves have few disciplinary problems in their classrooms, although several noted that other more traditional teachers may encounter problems. In contrast, several district-level staff and administrators reported that discipline is a significant problem for students with disabilities at risk of dropping out, as the range and depth of available interventions and consequences is limited. This latter view is supported by a review of the LEA profile district-wide data for Baker County (see appendix A), which reveals that in-school suspension (ISS) rates, out-of-school suspension (OSS) rates, and the alternative placement rate for students with disabilities are at or above the state average. In addition, school-level data reported in the Florida School Indicators Report revealed that 20.2% of all students at Baker County Middle School and 10.6% of all students at Baker County High School received out-of-school suspensions during the school year. It should be noted that, during the course of the 22 classroom observations conducted during this monitoring visit, all teachers consistently or generally implemented effective behavior management strategies. The only exceptions noted were four classrooms in which the teachers did not address the off-task behavior and lack of engagement of a limited number of students. In summary, while effective classroom management was noted by the monitoring team in almost all classrooms observed, interviews with administrative staff and school-level data on student suspensions indicates that disciplinary policy and procedures are an area of concern that may be affecting the dropout rate. It does not appear that student- or school-level data are used routinely by child study teams or classroom teachers in the development and implementation of behavior management strategies for individual students or school-wide discipline plans, and there are limited options for interventions other than suspension. Staff Development This category refers to any staff development activities that directly target interventions to prevent students with disabilities from dropping out. Reflecting the view of many respondents regarding the correlation between low student academic achievement and dropout rate, staff development in the area of reading was cited as being a priority need, most particularly at the middle and high school levels. School staff did not cite a need for training related to discipline or 19