SLD Guidelines
S CHOOL P SYCHOLOG IST P LC
JAN UA RY 1 6 , 2 0 1 5
U P DAT E A N D OP P ORTU NITI ES FOR I N P U T
Thank you!
We would like to thank and credit the hard, on-going work of the
members of the SLD Guidelines Committee:
Kimberly Wyse
Nancy Theis
Michelle Rigsby
Libby Vince
Eileen McKee
Brian Lloyd
Tonya Stokes
Erin Rappuhn
Sara Leggett
Michelle Urbanek
Marcia O’Brien
WHO ARE YOU AND WHERE ARE YOU FROM??
Overview of the morning
8:30 – 9:25
Setting the stage
Share overall update
Discussion
Report out…Positives…Challenges…Questions
9:25 – 10:15
Presentation of content
10:15 – 10:30
Break
10:30 – 10:45
Presentation of content continued
10:45 – 11:45
Response to challenges/questions and discussion of additional supports
needed by districts Communication planning and next steps
“Special Education can't change the whole system by
itself. It's got to be all hands on deck.”
Setting the Stage
Daphne Pereles - Executive Director, Office of Learning Supports,
Colorado Department of Education
• A committee was formed during the 2013-2014 school year to look into
revising our 2010 SLD Guidelines document.
• The PSW identification model was a bridge to RTI in 2008-2010.
• A model is needed that is legally defensible and evidence-based.
• With advances in the field, research supports the use of RTI to identify Specific
Learning Disabilities. This method is also supported by many professional
organizations including:
•
•
•
•
National Center for Learning Disabilities
RTI Action Network
National Association for School Psychologists
American Institute of Research
Listening to You!
Listening
SLD Update (as shared with Curriculum Directors and SE Directors)
Read Curriculum Director Update
Highlight any positives and challenges that stand out to you
Record your individual thoughts re:
1.
2.
3.
Things you like
Challenges you see for your district
Questions you may have
Number off from 1-5
Go to your table
Look for common themes
Report out
New Great Resource…RTI
Action Network Tool Kit
This Toolkit provides…
◦ Vision: Focus on clear vision of best practice related to an RTIbased SLD Identification process
◦ Systems& Structures: Focus on school systems to develop
structures to facilitates instructional decision making
◦ National Perspective: all states make mention of RTI in their
regulations and a growing number include the collection and
analysis of screening, progress-monitoring, and instructionaladequacy data as a required step in identifying whether a student
has SLD
Practical
Guidance
Layout of draft
Ingham ISD SLD Guidelines
Chapter 1 – Overview of Ingham ISD’s Specific Learning Disabilities Rule
Chapter 2 – The Special Education Evaluation Process
Chapter 3 – Criteria for Determining SLD Eligibility During Initial Evaluation
Chapter 4 – Required Data Sources for Evaluation Activities
Chapter 5 – Exclusionary Factors and Special Topics
Chapter 6 – Determining the Need for Special Education and Next Steps
Chapter 7 – Reevaluation Criteria
References and Appendices
Chapter 1 - Overview
Provides the context for identifying SLD eligibility using student response to RTI within an Multi-Tiered
System of Supports
Chapter 2 - The Special Education
Evaluation Process
New and Improved
 Problem Solving Model
o Not a how-to. Reference to Ingham ISD Problem Solving Meeting: Facilitator's Guide
 Pre-referral Process
1. Has the student received evidence-based intervention that is targeted to the student’s area of need, in addition to
being provided with core instruction?
2. Is there sufficient, reliable data for decision-making?
3. Does the student demonstrate inadequate progress, and inadequate classroom achievement below the level of samegrade peers?
4. Have exclusionary factors been discussed or addressed?
 Data Needed at REEDS (see next slide for example)
Chapter 2 – Data
Needed at
REEDs
Just an
example!
Chapter 3-Criteria for Determining SLD Eligibility
During Initial Evaluation
Evidence-based
Interventions
Establishing
Insufficient Progress
GAP analysis
Consideration of
professional judgment
John Maynard Keynes
Insufficient Progress
IMPAIRMENT?
NEED FOR
SPECIAL
EDUCATION?
Inadequate
Classroom
Achievement
December 2013
17
Inadequate
Classroom
Achievement
Focus on the Core!
To get to "all"
we must pay attention
to "every“.We must pay
attention to the "System", first,
and then,we move to small
groups and individuals.
--Dave Tilly
Is there evidence that the
student received appropriate
instruction in the area of
concern?
Core instruction
provided
regularly?
Core instruction
delivered
according to
design and
methodology by
qualified
personnel?
Differentiated
instruction in
the core
curriculum was
provided?
Inadequate Classroom Achievement
Existing data from a variety of sources, to determine the gap between the
student’s current performance and age- or grade-level state standards, at a
minimum should include the following:
Performance on state assessment i.e. state’s general assessments
Universal screening.
Formative and progress-monitoring assessments
Classroom-based observation(s)
Norm-referenced assessments of academic achievement,
Information provided by the student’s parents
Insufficient Progress
Insufficient Progress
IMPAIRMENT?
Inadequate
Classroom
Achievement
NEED FOR
SPECIAL
EDUCATION?
A Little Discussion!
1.Consider what factors should be
considered in looking at insufficient
progress ? Write it down on a yellow
sticky.
2. Put the stickys in the middle of the table.
3.Discuss the ideas on the stickys and pick
the best ideas at your table….
When is Progress Insufficient?
1. Insufficient response to intensive evidence-based interventions (EBIs)
◦ Progress monitoring data from at least 2 EBIs in each area of concern
2. Progress is the same or less than same-age peers OR
3. Progress is greater than same-age peers but will not result in reaching
the average range of achievement in a reasonable period of time OR
4. Progress is greater than same-age peers but the intensity of resources
necessary to obtain this rate of progress cannot be maintained in
general education
Establishing Insufficient Progress:
The Quick Version
Establish baseline
Begin and document evidence based intervention that is aligned to student
need
Collect weekly or bi-weekly progress monitoring (PM) data using probes
Use baseline and subsequent PM data to analyze progress using a standard
that measures a student’s progress against that of peers
EBIs should be implemented before a SE referral, but may be as a part of the
evaluation
Foundational Concepts!
EBIs and ROI
Evidence Based
Interventions and Rate of
Improvement
What is an EBI…Evidence-based
intervention?
Take two minutes and talk with the person next
to you about this.
What is an EBI?
How would you explain it to a
parent/administrator?
What are some sources you use to find an
evidence based intervention?
An EBI is…
Used with individual or small groups
Focused on single or small number of discrete skills closely
aligned to individual learning needs (area of concern)
Culturally responsive
Provides substantial number of instructional minutes beyond
what is provided to all students
Implemented with adequate fidelity
Yields successful responses and outcomes from other students
with similar and/or identical skill deficits.
Rate of
Improvement
(ROI)
◦ Identify the rate of growth necessary to
meet grade-level expectations (norms or
benchmarks based on age- or grade-level
state standards ( i.e., close the gap with
typical peers),
◦ Analysis is based on research based
norms or criterion‐referenced
benchmarks and
◦ Compare the student’s actual growth
against rate of growth expected or
required.
More to come!
The guidelines will allow for
professional judgment with the use of
a variety of tools. Data collection will
be key.
More time will be spent on this when
the guidelines are rolled out.
First, a professional judgment is data driven. Neither bias nor tradition are reasons for judgment that
are professional. Data collected through the RTI-based process provide the foundation for this
significant decision.
Second, a professional judgment is a competent application of the expertise, experience, and
training of those making the judgment. Commitment to collaborative problem-solving and optimism
about student outcome gives the judgment the best chance of having a positive effect.
Third, and most importantly, a professional judgment is student centered and not made based on
the needs of the educators and/or parents. Student-centered judgments provide the best chance for
improving educational outcomes.
(Kukic, personal communication, April 12, 2014)
Chapter 4 - Required Data Sources for
Evaluation Activities
No big changes here – just a bigger push for data!!
Chapter 5 - Exclusionary Factors and
Special Topics
Not a lot that is new in this chapter…but the highlights are:
Drum roll please....
http://free-loops.com/7907-drum-roller-122.html
Insufficient Progress
IMPAIRMENT?
NEED FOR
SPECIAL
EDUCATION?
Inadequate
Classroom
Achievement
December 2013
33
Defining Exclusionary Factors
•Environmental or economic
disadvantage, or cultural factors.
•Lack of appropriate instruction in
reading, math or any other areas
of SLD being considered.
•Limited English proficiency.
•Other impairments.
Applying Exclusionary Factors
E
x
c
l
u
s
i
o
n
a
r
y
F
a
c
t
o
r
s
The IEP team may not
identify a student with SLD if
inadequate classroom
achievement or insufficient
progress is primarily due to
an exclusionary factor.
Special Topics
Speech and Language Concerns
 RTI also used for SLD areas of Oral Expression and Listening Comprehension
Evaluation of Young Children
 Be careful and make sure you consider exclusionary factors.
Parentally Placed Private School and Home-schooled Students
 Use same guidelines and criteria.
Transfer Students (Both in-state and out-of-state)
 Consider all data and need for more.
Applying the Rule: MET/IEP Team Discussion of Special Topics
 Helpful suggestions.
Insufficient Progress
Insufficient Progress
IMPAIRMENT?
Inadequate
Classroom
Achievement
NEED FOR
SPECIAL
EDUCATION?
Chapter 6 - Determining the Need for Special
Education and Next Steps
1. What are the student’s needs that cannot be met through
general education as structured at the time of evaluation?
2. What accommodations, if any, can be made in the general
education program to meet the student’s identified needs
that will allow the student to access the general education
curriculum and meet the educational standards that apply
to all children?
3. What additional instruction does the student need that is
not currently provided through the general education
curriculum?
Chapter 7 - Reevaluation Criteria
The BIG CHANGE in this chapter is that for a reevaluation, the process
does not require the same criteria as for an initial.
WHY?? Because we can’t take Special Education away because it’s
working! There is more focus on whether the student continues to
need specialized instruction to make adequate progress.
For a reevaluation, we more simply consider the overarching need for
continued services. (That said, if a student has caught up with his/her peers, consider
exit of eligibility with the appropriate supports).
What is our role as School Psychologists
in the roll out of the new guidelines?
We’re all in this together!
Dr. Klotz
Dr. Mary Beth Klotz has served as the National Association of
School Psychologists’ (NASP) Director of IDEA Projects and Technical
Assistance since 1999. She is NASP’s primary liaison for numerous
coalitions and grant projects including, NCLD’s RTI Action Network,
the National Center on Response to Intervention, the IDEA
Partnership Project, the National Center on Student Progress
Monitoring, and the Learning Disabilities Roundtable.
Roll out and
Strategic Communication Plan
SE Directors have been updated monthly regarding the new guidelines
Curriculum Directors were updated on January 6, 2015
Curriculum Directors and SE Directors have requested a joint meeting to discuss implications of these
guidelines for GE and SE staff/students. This is a BIG YAY and has been scheduled for February 25.
It has been recommended that we consider an advisory group when considering a strategic plan
which includes a GE Teacher, a SE Teacher, a Principal, a School Psych, a Curriculum Director and a SE
Director.
We have connected with a national presenter from Kansas, Dawn Miller, to help foster continuing
MTSS Implementation and consideration of the supports needed for SLD Guideline Changes.
We want to include:
 Global plan for all
 Customized plan for each district based on their current level of MTSS implementation and specific needs
THOUGHTS??
Dialogue regarding challenges/questions
and discussion of additional supports
needed by districts
Additional Feedback Wanted
DISCUSS AT YOUR TABLE THE FOLLOWING. SELECT ONE PERSON
TO BE THE RECORDER AND TYPE INPUT INTO
https://todaysmeet.com/january16plc If you would like to add
something personally/anonymously, the room will be open all
next week.
1. Challenges that you anticipate in your district
2. Things you will need from the ISD to support this change in
your district
3. Other Suggestions/Comments/Questions