Transcript - The Center on School Turnaround

Time for Change:
Examining Data Relating to Student Performance
and
Implementing a Plan to Improve Student
Outcomes
Glenna Gallo
Director of Special Education
[email protected]
Beliefs Regarding Utah’s Students
with Disabilities
What do we want for Utah’s students?
Each student should have education and career
goals that will prepare them to experience fulfilling
lives, actively participate as educated citizens, and
thrive in a particularly competitive and global
marketplace.
College and Career Ready
What don’t we want for Utah’s students?
• Disengagement
• Leaving K-12 education
unprepared for life,
without:
• Academic proficiency
• Social skills
• Civic responsibility
• “Good enough” attitude
• Perpetuating inequities
How is that different for Utah’s
students with disabilities?
Vision of Leadership
State, LEA, School, and IEP Team Levels
Stakeholder Review and Feedback
The usual stakeholders, who
either pay for, provide,
receive, participate in, or
collaborate on IDEA services
and issues, and/or provide
expertise, plus…
• Special Education staff of other State
Educational Agencies (SEAs)
• Other LEA staff, as invited by the Special
Education Director (e.g., Superintendent,
Asst. Superintendent, Directors, and Title
I Directors)
• Utah Parent Teacher Association (PTA)
• Utah Assessment Policy Advisory
Committee (PAC)
• Institutes of Higher Education (IHEs)
teacher preparation, leadership, and
math departments
• Broader stakeholder group needed as many of the
identified improvement needs impact the greater
educational and business community, not just
students with disabilities.
• Stakeholders deferred providing input to other
individuals perceived as having special knowledge
and expertise regarding students with disabilities,
rather than considering how the needs of all
students align with and support the needs of
students with disabilities who access Tier I Core
instruction in addition to their specialized
instruction.
• These behaviors unintentionally contributed to
the current state of wide-spread separate and
reduced expectations for students with
disabilities in comparison with non-disabled
peers in Utah, especially in regards to IEP team
decisions concerning the supports needed for
students with disabilities to access and progress
in the grade-level state mathematics standards.
Utah
Students with Disability Data
ID
4%
MD
BD
2%
3%
AU
7%
SLD
42%
OH
8%
DD
9%
SLI
24%
A Collective Responsibility
The problem human beings face is
not that we aim too high and fail, but
that we aim too low and succeed.
Michelangelo
Systems Change
for Students with Disabilities
Previous
Current
• Silos
• Collaboration
• Replace general education with
special education
• Tier 1 Instruction for all with
additional tiered support, as
needed
• Teams with specialties
• IEP content driven by special
educator and parents
• Off-grade-level instruction and
assessments
• PLCs and cross-disciplinary teams
• IEP content driven by informed
team, based on data
• On-grade-level instruction and
assessment
Complete document may be found at http://www.schools.utah.gov/sars/Instruction.aspx
What do we do
WITH each other,
instead of TO each
other, to improve
student
outcomes?
Parents
Leadership
Educators
Strategies & Lessons Learned
Strategy 1: Align State-Level Improvement
Plans and Efforts
• State Systemic Improvement
Plans (SSIP)
• ESEA Flexibility Waiver
• Education Excellence (Equity)
Plan
• Professional Learning
• Coaching
• Fiscal
• Preservice Preparation
• Identified:
• Root causes of current
performance
• Areas of alignment across USOE
personnel
• Repurposing USOE activities to
comprehensively address all root
causes, regardless of section
• Determine beliefs of Utah
stakeholders regarding students
with disabilities
• Common PD with support added
from Special Education, Title I
Root Causes
Inclusion in grade level core
content, assessment,
graduation requirements,
and CCR Plans.
Leadership
IEP Team Decisions
Partnerships and Collaboration
Preservice and Inservice Professional
Learning
Active Engagement of All School
Personnel
Data Driven Decision Making
Evidence-Based Practices
Fiscal Support
Math content and
pedogogy to provide
effective instruction through
UDL and evidence-based
interventions.
Infrastructure, Scale, Fidelity
Strategy 2: Remind LEAs of Existing
Professional Standards (Which Support Plans)
Utah Educational
Leadership Standards
Utah Effective
Teaching Standards
• Advocate for students
• Continuous evidence-based
improvement
• Eliminate barriers to learning
• Every student learning/hold high
expectations for students
• Recognize personal and
professional biases
• Create appropriate and challenging
learning experiences
• Know and uses the Core in planning
and instruction
• Use data to determine educational
impact and adjust instruction
In addition to
being responsible
for Utah Teaching
Standards,
special educators
are also
responsible for CEC
Professional
Standards
• Maintaining challenging
expectations to develop the
highest possible learning
outcomes
• Exercising professional judgement
to benefit students with
disabilities
• Promoting meaningful inclusion
• Using evidence, data, research,
and professional knowledge to
inform practice/
Strategy 3: Review, Discuss, and Act on the
Data
• Extensive review of state data by subgroup and placement
• LEA data drills, examining state trends and LEA results by subgroup
• Ongoing follow-up and analysis of LEA data
• Include parents and families in the conversations and utilize parent
meetings effectively
Then:
• Make decisions that target the area of need
• Change processes and procedures as a result of the data and
feedback
• Follow up, collect data, and ensure change impacted as
“Students with
disabilities
spend the
majority of the
school day in
the general
education
classroom.”
Have you ever
heard this?
Environments – Ages 3-5
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
AU
2014-2015
BD
CD
DB
DD
HI
Regular Early Childhood Program
ID
MD
OH
OI
SL
Special Early Childhood Program
TB
Other
VI
Access to General Education – By Grade
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
2014-2015
80-100% GenEd
40-79% GenEd
0-39% GenEd
6-8th Grade Math Proficiency
Non- students with Disabilities
SY 2014
100%
90%
80%
70%
75%
75%
74%
71%
60%
50%
40%
47%
42%
47%
47%
47%
41%
41%
48%
43%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Ratios and Proportional The Number System
Expressions and
Geometry & Statistics
Relationships (Grade 6- (Grade 6-7) / Geometry Equations (Grade 6-7) / and Probability (Grade
8)
and The Number System Functions (Grade 8)
6) / Statistics and
(Grade 8)
Probability (Grade 7-8)
Non-SWD 6th Grade Math
Non-SWD 7th Grade Math
Geometry (Grade 7)
Non-SWD 8th Grade Math
6-8th Grade Math Proficiency
Students with Disabilities
SY 2014
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
31%
29%
32%
30%
20%
10%
0%
11%
13%
7%
8%
12%
9%
12%
15%
10%
Ratios and Proportional The Number System
Expressions and
Geometry & Statistics
Relationships (Grade 6- (Grade 6-7) / Geometry Equations (Grade 6-7) / and Probability (Grade
8)
and The Number System Functions (Grade 8)
6) / Statistics and
(Grade 8)
Probability (Grade 7-8)
SWD 6th Grade Math
SWD 7th Grade Math
SWD 8th Grade Math
Geometry (Grade 7)
Strategy 4: Consider the Interconnectedness
of College and Career for All Students
The Purpose of IDEA
IEP &
State/Alternate
Standards
Regular Diploma
or Certificate of
Completion
College and
Career Ready
To ensure that all students with disabilities have available to them a free
appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related
services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for
further education, employment, and independent living.
Strategy 5: Don’t Reinvent; Repurpose
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
IEP Team
PLC
Student Support Team
Teacher Assistance Team
Leadership Team
Parent/Teacher Team
School Community Council
School Improvement Plan
LEA Improvement Plan
Equity Plan
State Systemic Improvement Plan
Lessons Learned
When feeling overwhelmed or unknowledgeable, people revert back to what is know
and comfortable. Who will carry the charge for change?
Time to Reflect?
• Do you, and your stakeholders, believe that each and every student
can be ready for college and career?
• Are your policies and actions reflecting this belief?
• Have you considered how to leverage the interconnectedness of your
stakeholder groups?