Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) Eligibility. NCDPI Exceptional Children Institute Summer 2014

Transcription

1 Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) Eligibility NCDPI Exceptional Children Institute Summer 2014

2 Objectives To gain a foundational framework to being exploring the use of a student s responsiveness to instruction to make eligibility decisions Understand the evidence-based rationale for using a student s responsiveness to instruction within a multi-tiered system of support to determine SLD eligibility Identify data needed to make SLD eligibility decisions Understand how to use data gathered during the problem solving process to make eligibility decisions

3 Activate Prior Knowledge Individually complete the survey.

4 THEN Targeted/intensive services not available unless found eligible Focus on the learner and on internal, unalterable variables NOW Tiered model of service delivery, matching supports to student need, not a label Systems approach to problemsolving; emphasis on the effectiveness of instruction for all students; focus on alterable variables Reliance of assessments that are solely for the purpose of determining the student s current levels to establish discrepancy Use of direct measures of learning over time that inform instruction/intervention, as well as consideration for special education Colorado DOE SLD Guidelines p 12

5 THEN SLD construct of unexpected underachievement indicated by low achievement as compared to a measure of the child s ability (IQ/ achievement discrepancy) NOW SLD construct of unexpected underachievement indicated by low achievement and insufficient response to empirically validated instruction/intervention that works with most students Slow learners not identified as eligible for special education services Recognition that children we may have thought of as slow learners may very well have learning disabilities that result in a flat cognitive profile Colorado DOE SLD Guidelines p 12

6 1. The most important variable in how much a student learns is their IQ. FALSE The most critical components in how much a student learns are: Instruction Curriculum Environment RtI Innovations Presentation by Dr. Dave Tilley and Dr. Dawn Miller

7 Rationale for Change The key to identification is being able to identify kids who are not making progress in a wellfunctioning educational system. Dr. Jack Fletcher

8 SLD Eligibility A state must adopt criteria for determining whether a child has a specific learning disability States may not require LEAs to use a discrepancy model for determining whether a child has a SLD** States must permit a process based on a child s response to scientific, research-based interventions *Preamble discussion in response to comments: States are free to prohibit the use of a discrepancy model pg of the Federal Register

9 North Carolina Policy changes will be made with regard to using an IQ-achievement discrepancy. NCDPI s position, based on existing research is that the use of IQ-achievement discrepancy for identifying students as having a Specific Learning Disability IS NOT an appropriate practice.

10 The overarching purpose of MTSS is improved educational outcomes for ALL students.

11 What is a Specific Learning Disability? Write your personal definition of a learning disability. Collaborate with the person next to you.

12 Prevalence of LD Currently, 70,708 NC students are diagnosed with SLD and receive special education services, representing 40% of all students receiving special education NC IDEA Part B Child Count, 2013

13 Definition of SLD disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in the impaired ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations, includes conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia and developmental aphasia. NC (11)

14 Dyslexia Is a language based reading disability Synonymous with specific learning disability in reading Is not seeing words backwards or seeing shaking letters

15 8 Areas of SLD Listening comprehension Oral expression Written expression Basic reading Reading fluency Reading comprehension Mathematics calculation Mathematics problem solving

16 Suspecting a Disability Good decisions require: A strong MTSS framework Sufficient data collection and documentation Clearly articulated team decisionmaking processes

17 Activity Self-Assessment Suspecting a Disability

18 Suspecting a Disability Questions to Consider Has this student had ample access and opportunity to learn what is expected in the areas of concern? Has this student demonstrated performance persistently below the educational standard? When given intensified opportunity to learn, has this student demonstrated limited progress and response when compared to like peers?

19 Suspecting a Disability Questions to Consider Following provision of intensified instruction, is the student still significantly discrepant from age/grade levels peers or intellectual ability? With general education and supplemental instruction, is the student s performance unique or an outlier from a comparable group? What is the educational need in curriculum, instruction and environment?

20 What if most students in my school are not meeting standards? Tier I Tier II Tier III Target

21 10. If a student has not been in the problem-solving process and receiving interventions, they cannot be referred for an evaluation to determine eligibility for special education. FALSE

22 Special Education Referral

23 IDEA Regulations Regarding the Criteria for Determining SLD 1. Rule out lack of instruction by documenting: Appropriate instruction by qualified personnel Repeated assessments 2. Rule out: Vision, hearing, or motor problems Intellectual Disability Emotional Disturbance Cultural and/or environmental issues Limited English Proficiency 3. Failure to meet age- or grade-level State standards in one of eight areas: Oral Expression Listening Comprehension Written Expression Basic Reading Reading Fluency Reading Comprehension Mathematics Calculation Mathematics Problem Solving 4. RtI: Lack of progress in response to scientifically based instruction ~OR~ Discrepancy: Pattern of strengths and weaknesses, relative to intellectual ability as defined by a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement, or relative to age or grade Exclusionary Inclusionary

24

25 Special Education Referral Collect and Use Data What information do we have? What information do we need? What enables learning? Documenting the performance discrepancy (difference) Documenting rate of learning

26 Special Education Referral Collect and Use Data What information do we have? What enables learning?

27

28 Special Education Referral Identify the Problem What is the problem? Have we identified why the problem is happening? We are redefining the learning problem at this stage. Do we understand where learning is breaking down?

29 Special Education Referral Identify the Problem

30 8. Knowing specifically why students are experiencing learning problems is critical to remediating their skill problems. TRUE Not all students with the same general performance deficits have the same learning needs. Different performance profiles will require different approaches to remediate.

31

32 Special Education Referral Develop Hypothesis(es) Review existing evaluation data, including Evaluations and information provided by the parents Current classroom-based, local or State assessments and classroom-based observations; and Observations by teachers and related service providers; and on the basis of that review, and input from the child s parents, identify what additional data are needed NC

33 Special Education Referral Develop Hypothesis(es) Do we know why the problem is occurring?

34 Special Education Referral Full and Individual Evaluation- Hypothesis Testing Should be based on a convergence of data gathered through the problem solving process Assessed in all areas related to the suspected disability Must be sufficiently comprehensive to identify all the special education needs (whether or not commonly linked to the primary disability)

35 IDEA Regulations Regarding the Criteria for Determining SLD 1. Rule out lack of instruction by documenting: Appropriate instruction by qualified personnel Repeated assessments 2. Rule out: Vision, hearing, or motor problems Intellectual Disability Emotional Disturbance Cultural and/or environmental issues Limited English Proficiency 3. Failure to meet age- or grade-level State standards in one of eight areas: Oral Expression Listening Comprehension Written Expression Basic Reading Reading Fluency Reading Comprehension Mathematics Calculation Mathematics Problem Solving 4. RtI: Lack of progress in response to scientifically based instruction ~OR~ Discrepancy: Pattern of strengths and weaknesses, relative to intellectual ability as defined by a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement, or relative to age or grade Exclusionary Inclusionary

36 SLD Criteria Exclusionary Factors Hypothesis One Lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math Other Exclusionary Factors

37 Lack of Appropriate Instruction Has the student been provided appropriate instruction in all 5 areas of reading? Has the student been provided appropriate instruction in math?

38 Lack of Appropriate Instruction To ensure that underachievement in a child suspected of having a specific learning disability is not due to lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math, the group must consider, as part of the evaluation described in NC through NC (1) Data that demonstrates that prior to, or as a part of, the referral process, the child was provided appropriate instruction in regular education settings, delivered by qualified personnel, and (2) Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, which was provided to the child s parents. NC

39 Disability Determination A child must not be determined to be a child with a disability under this part-- (1) If the determinant factor for that determination is- (i) Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including the essential components of reading instruction (as defined in section 1208(3) of the ESEA); (ii) Lack of appropriate instruction in math NC

40 Lack of Appropriate Instruction the term essential components of reading instruction means explicit and systematic instruction in: phonemic awareness; phonics; vocabulary development; reading fluency, including oral reading skills; and reading comprehension strategies Section 1208(3) of the ESEA

41 Lack of Appropriate Instruction Does the math program include the essential components of math instruction? conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, strategic competence, adaptive reasoning, and productive response. National Research Council (2001)

42 Team Talk Think back to the previous three days. What sources of data would you have available to rule out lack of appropriate instruction?

43 What can we learn from previous interventions? Was the intervention implemented as intended? How do we know? What, if anything, from the previous interventions plan worked? Was the intervention matched to the identified needs? What additions/changes to instructional strategies, curriculum, or environment are needed to accelerate performance?

44 What is appropriate instruction? Diagnostic Assessments can help: Assessments that provide detailed information useful in planning instruction. (McKenna and Stahl, 2008) Answers the question why Possible Diagnostic Data Formative assessment data Error analysis of student products Anecdotal data Historical data Cognitive processing assessments Formal diagnostic assessment

45 Model of Reading Assessment: Grades 3 and above Phonological Awareness Print Concepts Decoding and Sight- Word Knowledge Fluency in Context Vocabulary Automatic Word Recognition Knowledge of Text and Sentence Structures Background Knowledge Language Comprehension Strategic Knowledge Reading Comprehension General Purposes for Reading Specific Purposes for Reading Knowledge of Strategies for Reading McKenna & Stahl

46 Progressions

47 Lack of Appropriate Instruction Discuss with your neighbors how you could use this to test your first hypothesis

48 If we are going to implement interventions, and use data from these interventions to determine a child s eligibility for special education services, we must be confident that the student s outcome (either positive or negative) is a response to the intervention and not a response to someone s failure to implement the intervention. Cochrane & Castle, 2006

49 Lack of Appropriate Instruction Fidelity Checks: Outcomes The general education curriculum (instruction and interventions) has succeeded in bringing a high percentage of students to proficiency. The sufficiency of the general education curriculum should be judged by its outcomes in terms of overall student and subgroup performance.

50 Lack of Appropriate Instruction Instructional Fidelity Check How long has the curriculum been in place? Were teachers adequately trained? Are teachers using the prescribed materials? Is the curriculum being delivered for a sufficient amount of time? How long has the student been taught in this curriculum? Is the curriculum being delivered according to prescribed directions?

51 Lack of Appropriate Instruction Assessing the Provision of Appropriate Instruction Observation of teacher performance Checklists of integrity of instruction completed by teachers as self-check measures Checklists of integrity of instruction completed among teachers as peer-check measures Completion of checklists by content specialists or curriculum supervisors working with teachers

52 Lack of Appropriate Instruction

53 3. If we use researchvalidated reading instructional practices, monitor students progress and make changes to instruction based on what we find, between 95 and 100 percent of students can become proficient readers. TRUE

54 4. The use of research-validated practices is the most important variable in whether individual intervention plans are successful. FALSE There are two keys One is research-validated practices. This gives us the best shot at an improved outcome The other is good problem analysis and MATCH with student need. Powerful interventions are doomed if they are applied to the wrong problems.

55 5. Scientifically research-validated strategies are widely available in reading and mathematics, across K-12, to help us work smarter at remediating student learning problems. FALSE RtI Innovations 2014 Presentation by Dr. Dave Tilley and Dr. Dawn Miller We have the most in early literacy We have less at later literacy We have even less in mathematics We do, however have promising practices that we can implement in most areas

56 IDEA Regulations Regarding the Criteria for Determining SLD 1. Rule out lack of instruction by documenting: Appropriate instruction by qualified personnel Repeated assessments 2. Rule out: Vision, hearing, or motor problems Intellectual Disability Emotional Disturbance Cultural and/or environmental issues Limited English Proficiency 3. Failure to meet age- or grade-level State standards in one of eight areas: Oral Expression Listening Comprehension Written Expression Basic Reading Reading Fluency Reading Comprehension Mathematics Calculation Mathematics Problem Solving 4. RtI: Lack of progress in response to scientifically based instruction ~OR~ Discrepancy: Pattern of strengths and weaknesses, relative to intellectual ability as defined by a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement, or relative to age or grade Exclusionary Inclusionary

57 SLD Criteria Exclusionary Factors Hypothesis Two Lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math Other Exclusionary Factors

58 Exclusionary Factors The disability must not be the primary result of Sensory deficits Motor deficits Intellectual disability Serious emotional disability Environmental influences Cultural factors Limited English Proficiency Economic influences NC (11)(c)

59 IDEA Regulations Regarding the Criteria for Determining SLD 1. Rule out lack of instruction by documenting: Appropriate instruction by qualified personnel Repeated assessments 2. Rule out: Vision, hearing, or motor problems Intellectual Disability Emotional Disturbance Cultural and/or environmental issues Limited English Proficiency 3. Failure to meet age- or grade-level State standards in one of eight areas: Oral Expression Listening Comprehension Written Expression Basic Reading Reading Fluency Reading Comprehension Mathematics Calculation Mathematics Problem Solving 4. RtI: Lack of progress in response to scientifically based instruction ~OR~ Discrepancy: Pattern of strengths and weaknesses, relative to intellectual ability as defined by a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement, or relative to age or grade Exclusionary Inclusionary

60 SLD Criteria Inclusionary Factors Hypothesis Three Level of Learning Rate of Learning Instructional Need

61 Level of Learning Is there a discrepancy (gap) between what is expected (age or grade level standards or intellectual ability) and the student s current performance level? Age/Grade Level Standard or Intellectual Ability Current Level of Performance

62 Level of Learning The child does not achieve adequately for the child s age, intellectual ability, or to meet State-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the following areas, when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the child s age or State-approved grade level standards. NC (11) (iii) (A)

63 Level of Learning A school that has robust procedures for implementing MTSS will have collected during the provision of these supports a wide range of assessment data that not only has informed instruction and intervention, but can also be used as important evidence Kovaleski et al, pg 45

64 Level of Learning What is the grade level content standard or peer group expectation? Do we understand what grade-level performance looks like? What do we want the student to know and be able to do? 64

65 Level of Learning How discrepant must a student be in order to demonstrate inadequate performance/ achievement?

66 Level of Learning Needs to be based on valid and reliable data Needs to be consistently applied Needs to consist of comparing the data collected for the student with what the TEAM determines to constitute proficient performance.

67 Determining Inadequate Achievement Think: Consider what data exists at the LEA and at building level, that can be used to determine inadequate achievement for students make a list of these tools. Pair: share your list with a partner, and add to your list based on your conversation Share: as a team, share your ideas and create a combined list

68 Firmly establishing low achievement should be part of most comprehensive assessments At the same time, there is no point in assessing all eight areas of SLD if the nature of the achievement problem is easily established. Dr. Jack Fletcher, Identifying Learning Disabilities in the Context of Response to Intervention: A Hybrid Model

69 IDEA Regulations Regarding the Criteria for Determining SLD 1. Rule out lack of instruction by documenting: Appropriate instruction by qualified personnel Repeated assessments 2. Rule out: Vision, hearing, or motor problems Intellectual Disability Emotional Disturbance Cultural and/or environmental issues Limited English Proficiency 3. Failure to meet age- or grade-level State standards in one of eight areas: Oral Expression Listening Comprehension Written Expression Basic Reading Reading Fluency Reading Comprehension Mathematics Calculation Mathematics Problem Solving 4. RtI: Lack of progress in response to scientifically based instruction ~OR~ Discrepancy: Pattern of strengths and weaknesses, relative to intellectual ability as defined by a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement, or relative to age or grade Exclusionary Inclusionary

70 SLD Criteria Inclusionary Factors Hypothesis Four Level of Learning Rate of Learning Instructional Need Dual Discrepancy

71 Rate of Learning Does the student demonstrate- a lack of progress in response to scientifically-based instruction OR a pattern of strengths and weaknesses?

72 Rate of Learning does not make sufficient progress to meet age or State-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the areas identified above.. (a) when using a process based on the child s response to scientific, research-based intervention. OR NC (11) (iii) (B)

73 Rate of Learning Exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, relative to age, State-approved grade-level standards, or intellectual development, that is determined by the group NC (11) (iii) (B)

74 Rate of Learning Critical Features of Intervention Documented base of research to support its effectiveness Matched to needs of the students Implemented as designed Continuously evaluated for effectiveness

75 Rate of Learning Intensive Interventions Intensive Intervention is designed to address severe and persistent learning or behavior difficulties. Should be: Driven by data Characterized by increased intensity (e.g. smaller group, expanded time) and individualization of supports

76 Rate of Learning Progress Monitoring A scientifically-based method by which data is regularly and frequently collected in order to determine effectiveness of instruction and identify needed changes. Data is regularly charted and analyzed to inform instruction.

77 Rate of Learning Progress monitoring provides Feedback on how the student is responding to instruction Useful information to assist in making data-based instructional decisions Documentation of inadequate response when high quality instruction and intervention is in place.

78 Sensitive to small increments of growth Quick and easy to use Valid and Reliable Monitor a student s progress over time Easily summarized Multiple forms for repeat assessments Can make comparisons across students Standardized in administration Characteristics of Progress Monitoring Tools Direct relevance to development of needed strategies Norm or criterionreferenced Assess foundational skills that lead to acquisition of state standards

79 Rate of Learning Progress Monitoring Components Target skills Baseline Goal Aimline Data Decision Rules

80 Decision Rules There is no gold standard for determining inadequate response. Instructional response is likely a continuum with no distinct qualitative markers. Handbook of Learning Disabilities, 2 nd Edition, pg 44

81 Decision Rules Response Indicators Response Guidelines Positive Response Questionable Response Poor Response G. Batsche Gap is closing Can extrapolate point at which student will come in range of target, even if this is long range Rate at which gap is widening slows considerably, but gap is still widening Gap stops widening, but closure does not occur Gap continues to widen, with little or no change in rate Continue intervention until student reaches benchmark Fade intervention to determine if student has acquired functional independence Check for fidelity of implementation Increase intensity of current intervention for a short period of time and assess impact. If rate does not improve, return to problem solving. Check for fidelity of implementation, Return to problem solving for new intervention.

82 Decision Rules Instruction or intervention should be changed according to pre-determined decision rules. Changes should be noted on the progress monitoring graph. Graph should indicate the amount of time the student participated in the intervention.

83 Rate of Learning Quantitative Changes Increase intervention length, frequency, or duration Decrease group size Decrease heterogeneity of the intervention group Increase the skill level of the interventionist Note: In many cases, quantitative changes may be necessary, but not sufficient to facilitate progress for students with intensive needs.

84 Rate of Learning Qualitative Changes Qualitative adaptations may also be made to the intervention that alter the way the content is delivered, how students respond, or the amount of adult feedback and error correction they receive.

85 2. The accuracy of decisions around the determination of students with Specific Learning Disabilities depends on the quality with which correct decisions are made based on data. TRUE RtI Innovations Presentation by Dr. Dave Tilley and Dr. Dawn Miller Data driven decision making is critical to making informed decisions about eligibility including: Delivery of appropriate instruction Instruction and interventions matched to student need Use of progress monitoring data to inform decisions

86 6. Grouping students for instruction based on student skill, monitoring their progress over small periods of time, adjusting instruction based on the data and providing kids feedback on their performance is one of the most powerful sets of educational practices that exists. TRUE Treatment/Intervention Effect Size Special Education Placement -.14 to.29 Modality Matched Instruction (Auditory) +.03 Modality Matched Instruction (Visual) +.04 Curriculum-Based Instruction/ Graphing and Formative Evaluation Curriculum-Based Instruction, Graphing, Formative Evaluation and Systematic use of Reinforcement

87 Rate of Learning Key decision in determining eligibility for SLD is establishing the rate of change over time of a student s performance. Intensive interventions for a sustained period of time should have occurred Frequent monitoring of student performance should have occurred Level of growth of student in question is then compared against grade level expectations

88 Table Talk What are the current progress monitoring tools and guidelines you have available? Are the tools providing you the information you need? Are they valid and reliable?

89 Progress Monitoring Resources National Center for Progress Monitoring National Center on Intensive Intervention 89

90 SLD Criteria Inclusionary Factors Hypothesis Five Level of Learning Rate of Learning Instructional Need

91 Instructional Need Does the student need resources (i.e. specially designed instruction) beyond what can be reasonably provided in the general education setting alone? The disability must have an adverse effect on educational performance, and require specially designed instruction. NC (11) (iii) (D)

92 Instructional Need To receive reasonable educational benefit from general education The student continues to need substantial interventions and supports in order to progress The intensity and duration of interventions needed cannot be maintained in general education alone Time and resource level to close the gap

93 Specially Designed Instruction Access Universal Design for Learning Evidence Based Instruction Adaptations of delivery of instruction Adaptations of content, methodology Explicit Systematic Increased opportunity for response and feedback

94 Instructional Need The full intent of special education is to devise a program of instruction that will accelerate the student s progress beyond that which was realized during the provision of multi-tier supports. Kovalski et al, pg 159

95 Table Talk How do you determine a student requires specially designed instruction? What systems do you have in place to ensure that students with disabilities are making progress?

96

97 Discuss and Select Solutions

98 Eligibility Decisions Eligibility process focuses on knowing how to make a student more successful rather than on validating that the student is sufficiently unsuccessful to warrant additional resources What enables learning?

99 When We Think About Eligibility It Is a high stakes, high consequence decision Has potentially lifelong consequences Needs to be based on established standards Requires qualification by virtue of following the established process as defined Should not be done just to help kids Should not be done for the money

100

101 7. If a student is identified as having a learning disability, they are eligible for Special Education services. FALSE A student must meet all criteria for special education- Have a disability Disability must have an adverse effect Need for special education

102 9. Placing children in programs based on their specific disability is permissible by federal law. FALSE The unavoidable consequence of such a labeling practice is to identify and plan to meet each child's educational needs on the basis of what that child has in common with other children similarly identified rather than on the basis of that child's individualized needs. Thus it is the view of this office that any labeling practice that categorizes children according to their disability in order to facilitate the individual determination of any child's appropriate educational needs or services will be presumed to violate the protections accorded under Federal and State Law. Thomas Bellamy, former OSEP Director

103 IDEA Regulations Regarding the Criteria for Determining SLD 1. Rule out lack of instruction by documenting: Appropriate instruction by qualified personnel Repeated assessments 2. Rule out: Vision, hearing, or motor problems Intellectual Disability Emotional Disturbance Cultural and/or environmental issues Limited English Proficiency 3. Failure to meet age- or grade-level State standards in one of eight areas: Oral Expression Listening Comprehension Written Expression Basic Reading Reading Fluency Reading Comprehension Mathematics Calculation Mathematics Problem Solving 4. RtI: Lack of progress in response to scientifically based instruction ~OR~ Discrepancy: Pattern of strengths and weaknesses, relative to intellectual ability as defined by a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement, or relative to age or grade Exclusionary Inclusionary

104 Conditions for Eligibility Discrepancy given equal or enhanced opportunities, the student s current level of performance is significantly lower than typical peers, identified grade level standards or intellectual ability Discrepancy

105 Conditions for Eligibility Educational Progress previous interventions have failed to sufficiently improve a student s rate of learning and additional resources are needed to enhance student learning or the interventions that have sufficiently improved the student s learning are too demanding to be implemented without special education resources Rate of learning

106 Conditions for Eligibility Instructional Needs have been identified that are beyond what can be provided in general education. evident when curriculum, instruction or environmental conditions need to be very different for the student as compared to the needs of other students in the general education environment. Discrepancy Rate of learning Instructional need

107 Now what? Ensure core instruction is providing effective first teaching for all students Evaluate your assessment system Comprehensive Balanced Assessment System Valid and reliable progress monitoring tools Team Structures for Problem Solving Identify Professional Development needs Instruction and intervention integrity Coaching

108

109 Handouts and materials Suspecting a disability LD characteristics Belief survey

110 110 Something is wrong with this student Problem- Solving for all students