Connecting CCSS to IEPs: Creating a Plan for Implementation

Transcription

1 Connecting CCSS to IEPs: Creating a Plan for Implementation Sarah Celestin Ed.D. Steven Smith M.Ed. Phone: [email protected] Website:

2 Outcomes Understand the WRITES initiative and its goals. Debunk the SBIEP Myths and Misconceptions. Outline the PD Structure for WRITES and its participating districts. How WRITES builds capacity within participating districts. How WRITES participants are scheduled and how the initiative is expanded.

3 WRITES WRITING RIGOROUS IEPs to TEACH EDUCATIONAL STANDARDS

4 SB-IEP - Delaware Context Small state with 19 districts and 24 charter schools that function as independent LEAs Prior IEP training was focused on compliance and used a train-the-trainer model Recent Office of Special Education Programs determination of needs intervention fueled urgency around SB-IEP initiative

5 Vision of the SB IEP Process Students receiving special education services will have IEPs that are Highly individualized and data-driven Standards-based including academic and nonacademic goals (behavior, social, life skills, etc.) Supporting access to the same educational content as their general education peers

6 Goals of the SB IEP Process Outcomes Measure Increasing Student s Academic & Functional Performance Supporting Results Driven Accountability Facilitating increased rigor of curriculum for students with disabilities Fidelity Measure - After 2 years of implementation, 80% of participating schools will achieve fidelity of intervention of implementing standards based IEPs. U.S. Department of Education Grant Performance Report (ED 524B)

7 The Standards-based IEP A standards-based IEP includes goals that promote learning of the state standards. It does not try to include a goal for every state standard in every content area. This would result in a very long document! Instead, it provides goals for the strategies students need to develop to learn the general curriculum content. Sometimes the goals help focus priorities within the general curriculum content for students who take the alternate assessment. (Courtade & Browder, 2011)

8 Debunking the SB-IEP Myths SB-IEPs take individuality away from students by making them learn from the same menu. The CCSS are not a menu for special educators to pick and write from. SB-IEPs focus on the prioritized skills needed for students with disabilities to have ACCESS to the same standards as non-disabled peers. Present levels, accommodations and modifications, etc., are still individualized and designed to bridge the gaps between the student and non-disabled peers within the curriculum.

9 SB-IEP Myths SB-IEPs will be much longer since there are so many standards. SB-IEPs are focused on the specific skills needed to access a particular standard(s).

10 SB-IEP Myths General Education and Special Education will become further separated due to gaps between CCSS and students with disabilities. Creating SB-IEPs is a collaborative process. General Educators will share content with Special Educators providing insight on adaptation and modification. All students can benefit from further diversified specialized instruction (good teaching practice).

11 SB-IEP Myths SB-IEPs are not appropriate for the moderately to severely disabled population. Learning life and functional skills IS important for these students; we must find the balance between these skills and how we can relate them to CCSS access.

12 The Standards-based IEP The IEP is not meant to restate all of these content standards, but should specify skills for the student to acquire that will promote access to this curriculum The IEP is not intended to define all of this instruction, nor does it function as the student s curriculum. Instead, it points the way for you to set priorities for what the student will master and how s/he will access the broader content. (Courtade & Browder, 2011)

13 SB-IEP Key Shifts 1) Data considerations use of data to prioritize needs and identify focus skills 2) Describing student - learning characteristics and present levels of performance 3) Gap analysis instructional level vs. grade level standards 4) Grade level access strategies, skills and supports to engage and increase performance in grade level curriculum

14 Implementing a PD Plan Professional Development Full-day Trainings Coaching Guided Learning/Practice Group Discussion Boards

15 The How Statewide roll-out scheduled over 2.5 school years beginning February Districts determine most suitable implementation schedule (scaffolded schools, full district, etc). Districts will identify school- and district-wide leadership teams to foster collaboration. An IEP Review Rubric will be used to assess the success of creating IEPs based on CCSS.

16 The Rubric Created in conjunction with DDOE utilizing statewide online IEP format. Scores IEP components (0-3) based on content. 3 is reflective of what is considered best practice in the field by researchers and experts. Rubric is shared with School and District teams.

17 Distributed Leadership School Team School Team District Leadership School Team School Team

18 Building Capacity ED or Sp. Ed. Coordinator General Education Teachers School Leadership Team Administration Related Service Providers Special Education Teachers

19 Collaboration District 1 District 4 Summer IEP Institute District 2 District 3

20

21 Pre-Phase 1 Meetings with District Leadership to discuss district structure related to IEP development. Who is involved in process? What does the process look like (responsibilities, timelines, etc.)? What areas of the IEP does District Leadership perceive as strengths and weaknesses? Schedule initial training dates and plan district roll-out through coaching and additional trainings.

22 Initial Training Full-day training on developing Standards-based IEPs. 4 different training structures based on district size and needs. Special Educators and Paraprofessionals from whole district (small, rural district w/ three schools). EDs and selected Special Ed Teachers from all schools (medium sized, urban districts w/ 13 schools). Special and General Ed Teachers, EDs, and Administrators from 6 selected schools (large district). Teams of General and Special Ed Teachers, EDs, and Administrators from 6 schools (large district).

23 Follow-up and Coaching Special Education Coordinators at most districts were responsible for scheduling coaching visits with Coach and school teams (individual, small group, and large group). One district scheduled coaching through Supervisor of Sp. Ed. Services and Supervisor attended all coaching visits.

24

25 Summer Institute All four districts involved (Teachers, Special Education Coordinators, Admins, District Leadership). 71 participants. Presenter shared exemplary samples for specific IEP sections. Data from IEP Rubric Review was shared (aggregated, by district, and by school). Participants shared with each other through Ed-camp styled breakout sessions.

26 Summer Institute Participants listened to an IEP Meeting Facilitation Expert from University of Delaware during lunch. The afternoon allowed school and district teams to action plan for the upcoming school year. Data-driven based on Rubric scoring needs. Coaching visits scheduled. Action Plans were shared between schools, district leadership, and coach.

27 Progress Monitoring Using the IEP Review Rubric 135 IEPs from all Districts and Schools that have received coaching IEPs were scored that were developed after the district-wide 1-day training for each district

28 3 SBIEP AVG Scores (All Districts) StudStr ParentInp AssessVar AssessCont ImpactState OtherNeed XCPart OtherFac GoalELA GoalM GoalOth GoalAVG IEPScore

29 Progress Monitoring 459 Goals were reviewed Goal scores were averaged and put into the IEP score formula Unique Needs, Specialized Instruction, Services/Aids/Modifications, PLEPs, Benchmarks, and SMARTS criteria were factors in scoring goals.

30 3 Reading Goals Breakdown Math Goals Breakdown

31 Phase 2 Coaching Visits focus on building capacity. Shift from coach-led to coach-facilitated. Supporting individuals from district or school leadership team to take on coaching role Providing resources for lead staff to train or coach IEP Review to determine eligibility for graduation.

32 Phase 2 Expansion Replace graduated schools to new schools within district. Replace graduated districts with new districts Additional support of having more knowledgeable district- and school-level personnel speed up the expansion process. New districts will receive different levels of support (coaching or training only) depending on their State-identified support levels.

33 Layers of Learning Districts have taken a variety of ways to approach coaching and learning. District-level (trainings, multiple coaching visits -> deeper knowledge). Team learning (ED and multiple teachers) during group PLC or scheduled PD times. Special Education Coordinator-centered (shared visits, shared knowledge) Coaching during planning times

34 Coach s Responsibilities The Instructional Coach has completed Since February: 8 full-day trainings to a total of 278 staff members from General Education, Special Education, Related Services, and Administration. Since June: 5 supplemental trainings with over 125 participants Monthly: Approximately 11 coaching visits with 74 participants totaling over 15 hours (based on October data). In addition: E-coaching, coaching calls, technical assistance.

35 Expansion Winter Adding two new districts for training, in-person coaching and online support. Adding multiple training and online support-only districts and schools. By end of school year All schools and districts to receive training and/or coaching on SBIEPs school year Support for high need schools and development of resources for sustainability.

36 Questions?

37 The ACCESS Project Sarah Celestin DDOE Project Manager Julie Bowers ACCESS Project Supervisor Steven Smith Lead WRITES Instructional Coach Stephanie DeMayo Instructional Coach Esley Newton Instructional Coach Judi MacBride Parent Liaison

38 Contact Information Steve Smith Instructional Coach- ACCESS Project (302) Sarah Celestin Project Manager DDOE (302)