Upload
abram
View
24
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Bridgeport’s Data on Students With ID. Michelle LeBrun-Griffin [email protected] Kim Mearman [email protected]. PJ Settlement Goals. Increase in the % of students with MR (ID) who are placed in regular classes (80% or more of day with nondisabled peers) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
PJ Settlement Goals
Increase in the % of students with MR (ID) who are placed in regular classes (80% or more of day with nondisabled peers)
Reduction in the disparate identification of students by LEA, race, ethnicity, gender
Increase in the mean and median % of the school day spent with nondisabled peers
PJ Settlement Goals
Increase in the % of students who attend their “home school” (school they would otherwise attend if not disabled)
Increase in the % of students who participate in school-sponsored extracurricular activities with nondisabled students
Goal #1
An increase in the percent of students with mental retardation or intellectual disability who are placed in regular classes, as measured by the federal
definition (i.e. 80% or more of the school day with non-disabled
students).
Goal #3
An increase in the mean and median percent of the school day that students with mental retardation or intellectual disability spend with non-disabled
students. (TWNDP)
Education Location of Students With ID
RESC2.4%
Hospital/ Homebound
0.0%Parochial or Private Non-Special Education
0.0%
Private Special Education
2.0%
Group Home/Shelter
0.0%
Quasi-Public0.0%
Out of State0.0%
Other Agency0.8%
Local School District93.7%
Other Public School Districts
1.2%
2001-2002 School Year Data
Education Location of Students With ID
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Bridgeport 93.6% 1.2% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0%
Connecticut
Local School
Other Public
RESCParochial or Private
Quasi-Public
Private Special
Group Home/
Other Agency
Hospital/ Home-
Out of State
2001-2002 School Year Data
Average Percentages of Time For Students With ID With Non-
Disabled
24.5%
41.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
Bridgeport Connecticut
2001-2002 School Year Data
Percentages of Time For Students With ID With Non-
Disabled
72.2%
26.6%
1.2%
79%-100% (Regular Classroom)
40%-79% (Resource Room)
0%-40% (Separate Special Education)
2001-2002 School Year Data
Percentages of Time For Students With ID With Non-
Disabled
1.2%
26.6%
72.2%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
Bridgeport Connecticut
79-100% (Regular Classroom)40-79% (Resource Room)0-40% (Separate Sp. Ed. Classroom)
2001-2002 School Year Data
Percentages of Time For Students With ID With Non-
Disabled
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
90.01
-100
%
80.01
-90%
70.01
-80%
60.01
-70%
50.01
-60%
40.01
-50%
30.01
-40%
20.01
-30%
10.01
-20%
0-10
%
2001-2002 School Year Data
Percentages of Time For Students With ID With Non-
Disabled
0.0%
16.3%
0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%
10.0%12.0%14.0%16.0%18.0%
100% Time with Non-DisabledPeers
0% Time with Non-DisabledPeers
Bridgeport Connecticut
2001-2002 School Year Data
Goal #2
A reduction in the disparate identification of students with mental retardation or intellectual disability by
LEA, by racial group, by ethnic group or by gender group.
Prevalence Rate of Students With ID By Gender
43.3%
56.7%
42.3%
57.7%
43.5%
56.5%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
Female Male
Bridgeport ERG I State
2001-2002 School Year Data
Prevalence Rate of Students With ID By Racial/Ethnic Group
Other0.0%
Native American
0.0%Asian
American1.6%
White14.3%
Black46.8%
Hispanic37.3%
2001-2002 School Year Data
Prevalence Rate of Students With ID By Racial/Ethnic Group
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
Students with ID 0.0% 1.6% 46.8% 37.3% 14.3% 0.0%
All students withdisabilities
0.0% 0.1% 43.3% 44.3% 11.2% 0.2%
Total school population 0.2% 3.4% 43.1% 42.5% 10.8% ---
Native America
Asian America
Black Hispanic White Other
2001-2002 School Year Data
Prevalence Rate of Students With ID By Racial/Ethnic Group
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
Bridgeport 0.0% 1.6% 46.8% 37.3% 14.3% 0.0%
Connecticut 0.4% 1.3% 28.5% 21.3% 48.2% 0.4%
Native American
Asian American
Black Hispanic White Other
2001-2002 School Year Data
Prevalence Rate of Students With ID By English Proficiency
Proficient91.7%
Non-Proficient
7.1%
Proficiency Unknown
1.2%
2001-2002 School Year Data
Prevalence Rate of Students With ID By English Proficiency
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Bridgeport 91.7% 7.1% 1.2%
All students withdisabilities
90.5% 6.7% 2.8%
Total school population 39.4%
ProficientNon-
ProficientProficiency Unknown
Students with non-English
2001-2002 School Year Data
Prevalence Rate of Students With ID By English Proficiency
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Bridgeport 91.7% 7.1% 1.2%
Connecticut
Proficient Non-Proficient Proficiency Unknown
2001-2002 School Year Data
Goal #4
An increase in the percent of students with mental retardation or intellectual disability who attend the school they would attend if not disabled (“home
school”).
Goal #5
An increase in the percent of students with mental retardation or intellectual disability who participate in school-
sponsored extracurricular activities with non-disabled students.
Other Data
Prevalence Rate of Students With ID Within Total Enrollment
1.1%
1.4%
0.7%
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
1.0%
1.2%
1.4%
1.6%
% of Students with ID
Bridgeport ERG I State
2001-2002 School Year Data
Prevalence Rate of Students With ID Within Special
Education
9.7% 9.3%
5.3%
0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%7.0%8.0%9.0%
10.0%
% of Students with ID
Bridgeport ERG I State
2001-2002 School Year Data
Students With ID Reported As Exiting Special Education
Deceased0.0%
Reached Maximuun Age
0.0%
Moved-Contiunued Education
35.8%
Moved-Unknown if Contiunued Education
26.4%
Returned to Regular
Education3.8%
Dropped Out0.0%
Graduating with Certificate of Completion
11.3%
Graduating with Diploma22.6%
2001-2002 School Year Data
Students With ID Reported As Exiting Special Education
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
Students with ID 22.6% 11.3% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 0.0% 35.8% 26.4%
All students with disabilities 11.4% 1.9% 2.2% 17.1% 0.2% 1.7% 40.4% 25.1%
Graduating with
Diploma
Graduating with
Certificate
Dropped Out
Returned to Regular
EducationDeceased
Reached Maximuun
Age
Moved-Contiunued Education
Moved-Unknown if Contiunued
2001-2002 School Year Data
Students With ID Reported As Exiting Special Education
22.6%
11.3%
0.0%3.8%
0.0% 0.0%
35.8%
26.4%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
Graduatingwith Diploma
Graduatingwith
Certificate ofCompletion
Dropped Out Returned toRegular
Education
Deceased ReachedMaximuun
Age
Moved-ContiunuedEducation
Moved-Unknown ifContiunuedEducation
2001-2002 School Year Data
Staffing Ratios Per 1,000 School District Students
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
Bridgeport 7.70 0.50 1.20 1.10 1.40 2.00 4.80
ERG I 10.47 1.49 1.76 1.18 1.76 1.73 10.97
State 8.77 1.53 1.91 1.42 1.12 2.23 11.64
Sp. Ed. Teachers
Speech Pathologists
School NursesSchool
PsychologistsSchool Social
WorkersSchool
CounselorsSp. Ed. Aides
2001-2002 School Year Data