Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SLD Eligibility Policy
AgendaReview SLD definition
Models of SLD identification
ID’s Revised SLD Eligibility Criteria and Procedures
Questions
SLD DefinitionA specific learning disability means a disorder in one or
more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which may manifest itself in an imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage. (34 CFR Sec. 300.8 (c)(10))
Models of SLD EligibilityRTI only
Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses
Blended model ***
Overview of ID SLD Policy
Federal & State Definition
ID Criteria Procedure
1. Imperfect ability to learn
1. Disorder in a basic psychological process
1. Not a result of other factors
1. Evidence of insufficient progress and achievement
2. Pattern of strengths and weaknesses in psychological processing skills that impacts learning
3. Student’s lack of achievement is not the primary result of other factors
1. Progress Monitoring Data (CBM), ISAT, Achievement Tests
2. Assessment of psychological processing skills
3. Team consideration of other factors (examining evidence when other factors suspected)
Why the change to SLD?
Aligns with the federal definitionConsistent with evidence demonstrating that students can have impairments in very specific areasAllows for evaluation and intervention planning to be more closely aligned to address the particular needs of the student
Why aren’t there magic numbers?
Heterogeneity of SLD
Current research evidence is not sufficient to recommend hard cut scores
Imperfect Ability to Learn
ID Criteria Evaluation Procedures
The student does not make sufficient progress in response to effective, evidence-based instruction and intervention for the child’s age or to meet state-approved grade-level standards in one or more areas
Evidence of insufficient progress in response to effective, evidence-based instruction and intervention indicates the student’s performance level and rate of improvement are significantly below that of grade-level peers.
Grade level performance Verification that appropriate instruction was providedProgress monitoring w/ CBMs Observation
Imperfect Ability to Learn
ID Criteria Evaluation Procedures
The student demonstrates low achievement in the area(s) of suspected disability listed above as evidenced by a norm-referenced, standardized achievement assessment. For culturally and linguistically diverse students, the preponderance of evidence must indicate low achievement.
Evidence of low achievement in one or more of the suspected area(s). This evidence must indicate performance that is significantly below the mean on a cluster, composite, or 2 or more subtest scores of a norm-referenced, standardized, achievement assessment in the specific academic area(s) of suspected disability.
Preponderance of evidence for students who are culturally and linguistically diverse
Guidelines for Students who are Culturally & Linguistically Diverse
Preponderance of Evidence – Multiple sources of data converge to indicate that a student’s learning problems are not due to cultural, linguistic or other factors (Prereferral information)
Compiled socio-cultural information – e.g. parental education level, time in country, time in school, mobility
Parent involvement and input
Targeted interventions – multi-lingual instructional support
Disorder in a Basic Psychological Process
ID Criteria (abbreviated)
Evaluation Procedures
Evidence of a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in psychological processing skills that impact learning.
Assessment is linked to the failure to achieve adequately
Must rely on standardized assessments
Assessments must be conducted by a professional who is qualified to administer and interpret the assessment results
Student’s performance demonstrates a pattern of strengths and weaknesses that help explain why and how the student’s learning difficulties occur
Psychological ProcessesRelated to the area of academic
deficitIn reading, phonological processing,
processing speed (rapid automatized naming), orthographic coding, basic auditory and visual perception skills, semantic & oral language processing
In math, the research is less well defined, but working memory, processing speed, number sense, visual perception and attention skills are emerging as important underlying processes
Psychological ProcessesAssist in Identification
Phonological Processing
Working Memory
Assist in Intervention Planning
Numerous research based interventions target phonological processing deficits, especially for young children
Students with memory issues need structure, repetition, summarization strategies
Exclusionary CriteriaID Criteria Evaluation
ProceduresThe team must determine that the student’s learning difficulty is not primarily the result of:
a)A visual, hearing, or motor impairmentb)Cognitive impairmentc)Emotional disturbanced) Environmental or economic disadvantagee)Cultural factorsf) Limited English Proficiency
The team reviews existing student data to determine whether further evaluation is needed to rule out these factors as primary causes of the student’s learning difficulties.
Implementation Timeline
2009-2010 School YearProfessional development
IEP teams may use either SLD eligibility determination criteria with the expectation that teams will begin to implement the new 2009 SLD criteria
Submit one completed SLD eligibility determination per school using new 2009 criteria to the SDE by May 15, 2010
Submitted eligibility determination documents will be reviewed by a trained team and results for that one student will be placed in the Compliance Tracking Tool by June 30, 2010.
2010-2011 School Year Professional development continues
All items submitted in the Compliance Tracking Tool for the IEP submitted in May, 2010 will be corrected no later than May, 2011
Beginning August 1, 2010, IEP teams will use the 2009 SLD criteria to determine special education eligibility for all new referrals of students suspected of having a specific learning disability.
Additional guidance will be provided for IEP teams to use for three year re-evaluations and other situations where students have already been determined eligible for special education.
2011-2012 School YearProfessional development continues
IEP teams will use the 2009 SLD criteria to determine eligibility for all students suspected of having a specific learning disability.
2020
RTI and SLD Identification RTI and SLD Identification Web ResourcesWeb Resources
Idaho Response to Intervention: Idaho Response to Intervention: www.sde.idaho.gov
IDEA Partnership’s RTI Collection: IDEA Partnership’s RTI Collection: www.ideapartnership.org
National Association of School Psychologists: National Association of School Psychologists: www.nasponline.org
National Association of State Directors of Special Education: www.nasdse.org National Association of State Directors of Special Education: www.nasdse.org
National Center for Learning Disabilities: www.ncld.org National Center for Learning Disabilities: www.ncld.org
National Center on Culturally Responsive Systems: www.nccrest.org National Center on Culturally Responsive Systems: www.nccrest.org
National Center on Student Progress Monitoring: www.studentprogress.org National Center on Student Progress Monitoring: www.studentprogress.org
National Center on Response to Intervention: www.rti4success.org National Center on Response to Intervention: www.rti4success.org
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities: www.ldonline.org/njcld National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities: www.ldonline.org/njcld
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities: www.nrcld.org National Research Center on Learning Disabilities: www.nrcld.org
Office of Special Education Programs, IDEA 2004 Building the Legacy: http://idea.ed.gov/Office of Special Education Programs, IDEA 2004 Building the Legacy: http://idea.ed.gov/
RTI Action Network: www.rtinetwork.org RTI Action Network: www.rtinetwork.org
2121
ReferencesReferences
Klotz, M. B., & Canter, A. (2007). Klotz, M. B., & Canter, A. (2007). Response To Intervention (RTI): A primer forResponse To Intervention (RTI): A primer for
parentsparents, Retrieved July 18, 2008 from , Retrieved July 18, 2008 from www.nasponline.org/resources/handouts/revisedPDFs/rtiprimer.pdf. www.nasponline.org/resources/handouts/revisedPDFs/rtiprimer.pdf.
Lichtenstein, R. (2008). Best practices in identification of learning disabilities. Lichtenstein, R. (2008). Best practices in identification of learning disabilities. Best Practices in Best Practices in School Psychology V, 17, 2, School Psychology V, 17, 2, (pp. 295-317).(pp. 295-317).
National Association of School Psychologists. (2007). National Association of School Psychologists. (2007). Position statement on identification of Position statement on identification of students with specific learning disabilities. students with specific learning disabilities. Retrieved July 18, 2008 from Retrieved July 18, 2008 from www.nasponline.org/about_nasp/positionpapers/SLDPosition_2007.pdf. www.nasponline.org/about_nasp/positionpapers/SLDPosition_2007.pdf.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. Q and A:Q and A:
Response to Intervention (RTI) and Early Intervening Services (EIS).Response to Intervention (RTI) and Early Intervening Services (EIS). Retrieved July 18, 2008 Retrieved July 18, 2008 from http://idea.ed.gov. from http://idea.ed.gov.
