Upload
others
View
42
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
EVALUATION BEYOND ELIGIBILITY: Using Formative and Summative Assessments &
Standards Based IEPs
Lenore Knudtson
PingoraConsulting.com
2016
THREE LINKS
2016 2
SPECIAL EDUCATION EVALUATIONS
What do we want evaluations
to tell us?
3
IDEA’S PURPOSE
IDEA Disability
Educational Needs
ComprehensiveEvaluation
4
INITIAL EVALUATION34 C.F.R. §300.301
• The school must conduct a “full and
individual evaluation” before the provision
of special education and related services.
• The evaluation must consist of procedures
• To determine if the child is a child with a
disability; and
• To determine the educational needs of the child.
5
REEVALUATION34 C.F.R. §300.305(a)
• After review of existing data, determine
what, if any additional data is needed to
determine
• Whether the student continues to have a
disability; and
• The educational needs of the student.
6
REEVALUATION34 C.F.R. §300.303(a)
• A school must ensure that a reevaluation of
each child with a disability is conducted
• If the school determines that the educational or
related services needs, including improved
academic achievement and functional
performance, of the child warrant a reevaluation;
or
• If the child’s parent or teacher requests a
reevaluation. 7
COURT INTERPRETATION
• The "Summary of Existing Data" prepared in response to a guardian's request for an updated psychological assessment did not fulfill the district's obligation to reevaluate the student.
• Explaining that the IEP team needed more extensive information about the student's needs, the District Court ordered the district to provide and fund a comprehensive psychological evaluation.
James v. District of
Columbia, 116 LRP
26933 (D.D.C. 2016).
8
COURT INTERPRETATION
• The parents of a high schooler who believed that a district's examination of their son's report cards, an earlier evaluation, and teacher observations wasn't sufficient to identify his needs didn't have the right to seek a publicly funded IEE on that basis.
• The District Court held that the district's review of existing data didn't constitute an "evaluation" with which the parents disagreed.
• An "evaluation" under the IDEA includes not only a review of existing data, but other steps as well, such as using "a variety of assessment tools and strategies" to gather relevant information. Thus, the district's review wasn't an evaluation, the court held.
F.C. v. Montgomery
County Pub. Schs., 116
LRP 27740 (D.C. Md.
2016).
9
COURT INTERPRETATION
• The IDEA requires a district to
conduct a "full and individual"
initial evaluation of a student
suspected of having a disability;
the district must use a variety
of assessment tools and
strategies to gather relevant
information about the student's
functional, developmental, and
academic needs.
A.W. v. Middletown
Area Sch. Dist., 65
IDELR 16 (M.D. Pa.
2015).
10
COURT INTERPRETATION
• The district only sought
consent for a psychiatric
evaluation of the student.
"Absent from the evaluation
was information from which the
District could develop a positive
behavior plan, craft IEP goals, or
rule out a specific learning
disability.”
A.W. v. Middletown
Area Sch. Dist., 65
IDELR 16 (M.D. Pa.
2015).
11
COURT INTERPRETATION
• The court found that the district
knew from the outset that the
psychiatric evaluation would not
address educational matters. The
district should have known that it
would need to conduct
additional assessments to
determine the full scope of the
student's needs.
A.W. v. Middletown
Area Sch. Dist., 65
IDELR 16 (M.D. Pa.
2015).
12
COURT INTERPRETATION
• The court pointed out that the evaluator collected relatively little data about the consequences of the child's aggression.
• The IEP team needed information about the aftermath of the child's tantrums to identify the function of his behaviors.
• "Without this information, the district cannot determine [the child's] educational needs or develop an effective IEP."
Cobb County Sch. Dist.
v. D.B., 66 IDELR 134
(N.D. Ga. 2015).
13
RELATION TO AN IEE
• When an evaluation is conducted in accordance with 34 CFR §§300.304 through 300.311 and a parent disagrees with the evaluation because a child was not assessed in a particular area, the parent has the right to request an IEE to assess the child in that area to determine whether the child has a disability and the nature and extent of the special education and related services that child needs.
Letter to Baus, 65
IDELR 81 (OSEP
2015).
14
FORMATIVE & SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENTS
Relate back to the general
curriculum.
15
FORMATIVE
• Scholars have characterized formative
evaluation as data collected before
instruction occurs as compared to
summative evaluation, which occurs after
instruction (Linn & Gronlund, 2000; Salvia et
al., 2007).
16
FORMATIVE
• While this temporal definition likely holds
true, the essential attribute of formative
evaluation is that the data are used to
identify student needs and to plan
instruction that will better meet those
needs (William, 2006 and Burns 2010).
17
EVIDENCE BASED
Many IEPs measure
progress using
“teacher
observation.”
18
SUMMATIVE
• Summative evaluation has been defined as
the collection of data after instruction
occurs to make judgments about the
instruction such as “grading, certification,
evaluation of progress, or research on
effectiveness” (Bloom et al., 1971, p. 117).
19
SUMMATIVE
• Thus, any assessment that examines what a
child has learned or did not learn from
previous instruction could be
conceptualized as part of a summative
evaluation. (Burns, 2010).
20
21
FORMATIVE & SUMMATIVE
• Both are tied to instruction.
• Ask: What instruction is this special
education student receiving?
• Ask: Can we expect the student to perform
well on assessments if instruction is missing?
22
SPECIAL EDUCATION
EVALUATION?
Formative or
Summative?
2016 23
STATE & DISTRICT WIDE
ASSESSMENTS?
Formative or
Summative?
2016 24
25
STANDARDS BASED IEPS
The top three reasons to
develop them.
26
#1IT’S THE LAW
• IDEA relates back to the
general curriculum.
• Instruction in the general
curriculum supports mastery
of the core standards
expected for all students.
• Therefore, IDEA expects a
connection between IEPs and
the state’s core standards.
Kind of. Really, it is.
I’ll explain.
27
LET’S TAKE A CLOSER LOOK
28
34 C.F.R. §300.39
• Specially designed instruction means adapting, as appropriate to the needs of an eligible child under this part, the content, methodology, or delivery of instruction—
• To address the unique needs of the child that result from the child's disability; and
• To ensure access of the child to the general curriculum, so that the child can meet the educational standards within the jurisdiction of the public agency that apply to all children.
29
34 C.F.R. §300.320(a)
• IEP means a written statement for each child with a disability that is developed, reviewed, and revised in a meeting in accordance with §§ 300.320 through 300.324, and that must include—
• A statement of the child's present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, including—
• How the child's disability affects the child's involvement and progress in the general education curriculum (i.e., the same curriculum as for nondisabled children)
30
34 C.F.R. §300.320(a)
• A statement of measurable annual goals, including
academic and functional goals designed to—
• Meet the child's needs that result from the child's disability to
enable the child to be involved in and make progress in
the general education curriculum; and
• Meet each of the child's other educational needs that result
from the child's disability;
31
34 C.F.R. §300.320(a)
• A statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child, and a statement of the program modifications or supports for school personnel that will be provided to enable the child—
• To advance appropriately toward attaining the annual goals;
• To be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section, and to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities; and
• To be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and nondisabled children in the activities described in this section;
32
34 C.F.R. §300.530(d)
• Disciplinary removals:
• Services. (1) A child with a disability who is removed from the
child's current placement pursuant to paragraphs (c), or (g) of
this section must—
• Continue to receive educational services, as provided in § 300.101(a),
so as to enable the child to continue to participate in the
general education curriculum, although in another setting, and to
progress toward meeting the goals set out in the child's IEP.
33
EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT (ESSA)
• (A) IN GENERAL.--Each State, in the plan it files under subsection
(a), shall provide an assurance that the State has adopted challenging
academic content standards andaligned academic achievement
standards (referred to in this Act as 'challenging State academic
standards'), which achievement standards shall include not less than 3
levels of achievement, that will be used by the State, its local
educational agencies, and its schools to carry out this part. A State
shall not be required to submit such challenging State academic
standards to the Secretary.
34
ESSA
• (B) SAME STANDARDS.--Except as provided in subparagraph
(E), the standards required by subparagraph (A) shall--
• (i) apply to all public schools and public school students in the State; and
• (ii) with respect to academic achievement standards, include the same
knowledge, skills, and levels of achievement expected of all public school
students in the State.
35
ESSA
• (E) The State may, through a documented and validated standards-setting process, adopt alternate academic achievement standards for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, provided those standards--
• "(I) are aligned with the challenging State academic content standards under subparagraph (A);
36
ACCESS TO THE GENERAL CURRICULUM
IS NOT THE SAME AS
INCLUSION
General Curriculum Inclusion
37
#2OSEP GUIDANCE
…we write to clarify that
an IEP for an eligible child
with a disability under
IDEA must be aligned
with the State's academic
content standards for the
grade in which the child
is enrolled.
Dear Colleague Letter,
66 IDELR 227
(OSERS and OSEP
2015).
38
STANDARDS BASED IEPS
• The Department interprets "the same
curriculum as for nondisabled children" to
be the curriculum that is based on a State's
academic content standards for the grade in
which a child is enrolled.
39
STANDARDS BASED IEPS
• Based on the interpretation of "general education curriculum" set forth in this letter, we expect annual IEP goals to be aligned with State academic content standards for the grade in which a child is enrolled.
• This alignment, however, must guide but not replace the individualized decision-making required in the IEP process.
40
STANDARDS BASED IEPS
• Based on the interpretation of "general
education curriculum" set forth in this letter,
we expect annual IEP goals to be aligned
with State academic content standards for
the grade in which a child is enrolled.
41
#3CLOSING THE
GAP
• Base IEP team decisions
on individualized student
needs with the provision
of special education and
related services to
support achievement in
the Utah Core Standards
in the Least Restrictive
Environment (LRE).
USOE SSIP 2013.
Kids with disabilities
experience better
outcomes!
42
IDEA & THE GENERAL CURRICULUM
The vast majority of special education
students (80–85%) can meet the same
achievement standards as other students
if they are given specially designed instruction,
appropriate access, supports, and
accommodations, as required by IDEA.
Meeting the Needs of Special Education Students: Recommendations for
the Race to the Top Consortia States (2015).
43
WHAT IS HAPPENING IN UTAH?
Check out the 2015 SAGE results.
45
10.3%14.6% 16.0%
Students
with
Disabilities
46
TEST!
47
EXPOSURE TO THE GENERAL CURRICULUM
• Half of you will be exposed to the general
curriculum.
• Half of you will be exposed to a special
education curriculum.
• Now, answer the following question:
48
SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT
Explain how a square root is related to the
square of that root.
49
PONDER THIS:
• If we don’t expose and
immerse students with
disabilities in the general
curriculum, how can we
expect them to perform
well on grade-level
summative assessments?
Turn to the next slide
for the answer.
50
WE CAN’T!
52
CLOSING THE GAP
1. Have a clear understanding of the
student’s educational needs through
comprehensive evaluations.
53
CLOSING THE GAP
2. Instruct students in the general curriculum
(to the maximum extent appropriate).
54
CLOSING THE GAP
3. Use formative and summative assessments
to inform instruction and measure
progress.
55
CLOSING THE GAP
4. Keep students on the path toward
achieving state core standards.
56
CLOSING THE GAP
5. Remain laser focused on
improving outcomes for
students with disabilities.
57
IN CLOSING
2016 58
FOLLOW THE LINKS
Evaluations
Formative &Summative
Assessments
Standards Based IEPs
59
QUESTIONS
Thank you.