Maine’s Approach for College
and Career Readiness for
Students with Disabilities
State Personnel Development Grant
Maine Department of Education
Overview of Sustainable Bi-directional
Convergent EBP PD Model
1
Our Charge: Improving Learning for All
Students Statewide
Build a Comprehensive evidence-based
professional development plan that is:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Evidence-based
Partnership driven
Definitive in roles & responsibilities
Statewide accessible
Sustainable
Leverages federal, state and local resources
Meets the PD needs at the state, regional and local
level
2
A Systems Approach
National Center on Educational Outcomes
1. Moving from isolated to layered: Integrating the
work highlights similarities without committing
to a unified approach
2. Work at all levels to improve capacity at other
levels (coherence)
3
A Systems Approach
National Center on Educational Outcomes
3. Designing state/regionally developed products
and tools for universal access and applicability
(accessible)
4. Intentional usage by all regional providers for a
consistent process and connected set of
state/regionally developed tools (focused
approach)
4
15 BIG IDEAS to Improve Initiatives
Beth A Steenwyk CCSSO/ASES
1. Leadership: HARD skills and Soft skills to get
the job done
2. Shared Vision & Purpose: Establish & Revisit
continuously
3. Communication: Need an intentional Plan
4. Selection Process: Structured process to select
the practice that is connected to the need
5. Leveraging: Awareness of context & opportunity
5
15 BIG IDEAS to Improve Initiatives
Beth A Steenwyk CCSSO/ASES
6. Readiness: Adoption & Implementation Process
7. Identify Critical Components: What it IS & What
it is NOT
8. Complexity of Implementation: If you can’t
explain it, they can’t do it
9. Demonstrations & Scaling: Know the difference
10. Capacity Building: Continuously assess
personnel growth to performance standards
6
15 BIG IDEAS to Improve Initiatives
Beth A Steenwyk CCSSO/ASES
11. Role and Function Change: This will happen, it
can’t be avoided
12. Measurement & Progress: If not measuring
progress you are not implementing
13. Feedback & Support: Can’t improve or change
without it
14. Aligned & Integrated: Activities at one level can
derail activities at another level
15. Braiding Initiatives: Relationship between
practices not competition
7
State Policies
• Law: LD 1422 is a legislative document outlining
the expectation for a proficiency based diploma
for all students by January 2018
• Expectation: All standards in all content
areas (Maine law, Title 20-A, section 4722-A)
as set forth in Chapter 131 & 132
• Charge: MAINE DOE charged to develop
assistance to the local units (technical
assistance plan)
8
Local Control
• How students are taught is a local decision
• Decisions regarding curricula and
instructional practices are local decisions
Challenges
1. What does the State do to provide the level
of EBP PD & TA that is embraced by the LEA?
2. How do does the State ensure accessibility
to the EBP PD & TA?
9
10
Credibility: Finding Local Leadership
• Credibility (State’s, designers, coaches,
implementers)
• Finding implementers and building
implementation teams
• Identifying the right practice, approach to
implementation
• Alignment of feedback and supports
• Resources: state, local, and regional
11
ALIGNMENT OF
FEEDBACK & SUPPORTS
Feedback and Support Loops
should address the following:
1. Status/Stage of innovation
implementation;
2. Competencies needed for
innovation fidelity;
3. Leadership supports necessary for
innovation sustainability;
4. Systems necessary to support
innovation implementation;
5. Consistent cycles of improvement
to insure the elimination of barriers
and optimize system to improve
implementation.
12
Differentiated EBP PD & TA
Intensive
Priority: SAUs
Focused: Targeted SAUs
Universal: All SAUS
13
Infrastructure Implementation
Universal Approach
Stage I: (All SAUs, partner
agencies, SPPS, Private
Academies)
• Maine Autism Leader
Teams (MALT)
• EBP PD to meet
Compliance: LRE,
CCSS & Postsecondary
• District level
• MAINE DOE TA
Implementation Timeline
September 2012
January 2013
Ongoing
February 2013
14
Stages of EBP PD
Stage II: (All SAUs,
targeted SAUs, partner
agencies, SPPS, Private
Academies, Parents)
• Effective
Implementation
• Better Outcomes for
students
• Monitoring, PD & TA
• Capacity Building
•
•
•
•
•
•
Implementation
Timeline
CCSS: June 2013
MALT I &II: August 2103
Post-Secondary
Transition: October
2013
Regional PD January
Cohort & Content
specific Ongoing
15
Infrastructure Implementation
Stage III: All SAUs,
partner agencies, SPPS):
Capacity Building
• State, IHE, SAU:
District/Building
Regional EBP PD
Centers
• State, Regional, Local
Team Leaders/Experts
Implementation
Timeline
• Spring 2014
• Fall 2013
16
17
So, what happens
at
the local Level?
18
Integrating the Common Core
State Standards with Special
Education:
Igniting the change process
from within Maine’s school
districts
Jess Yates
Maine SAU #17 19
Kindling the Fire
Phase 1: In the classroom
20
Setting the Scene
• Day Treatment Program at Medomak Middle
School in Waldoboro, ME
– Most intensive special education service offered in
public school setting
• Designed to serve students with emotional disabilities in
grades 7 and 8
– Self-contained academic program with therapeutic
components:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Small group/individual instruction in all subjects
Developmental therapy approach
Access to mainstream dependent on student readiness
High staff to student ratio (13 students, 4 staff)
Weekly social skills group, individual therapy sessions
Behavior modification system
21
Lighting the Match…
• Standards Referenced Grading System Pilot
– Collaborated with general education teacher/admin
– Proficiency based learning approach
• Progress based on mastery
– Started with area of instructional strength – Math
– Selected Common Core State Standards
• State requirement for instructional alignment by July 2012
– Created crosswalks from Connected Math Program to
CCSS
– Identified and obtained supplemental materials to
address missing topic areas
– Translated standards into learning targets - Student will…
22
Two instructional techniques
• 8th grade:
– Students with similar academic abilities
• Students progress as a group through the standards
• Aha! moments happen together
– Group instruction, leading from the front
• 7th grade:
– Students with extremely disparate academic abilities
– Students frequently absent due to hospitalizations
• Students progress individually through the standards
– Checklists, leading from behind
23
Individualized Programming Options
24
Results:
• Both instructional approaches focus on student
mastery:
– Multiple means of presentation and demonstration of
knowledge
• CCSS aligned instructional programming put
Day Treatment students on par with, or above,
the instruction in general education classrooms:
– Student pride
– Student mastery of content
• Increase in test scores, proficiency demonstrations
– Ease of mainstreaming/inclusion
25
Adding Fuel to the Fire
Phase 2: The IEP
26
The next logical step…
• Instruction aligned to the Common Core State
Standards necessitates IEP goals aligned to the
Common Core State Standards:
– Students should be held accountable for mastering
grade level content as part of their special education
programming.
• Focus on their instructional level just doesn’t make sense…
• College and career readiness….
– Little precedent for this on local or state level
• Research AND Common Sense
• Identify essential components of goal writing process
• Develop approach and format
27
IEP Goal Writing Process
•
•
•
Know the student
Detail student’s present level of performance
Identify critical areas of need
–
•
•
•
•
Recognize students cannot reasonably have huge numbers of goals
Identify, and unpack, appropriate grade level clusters/standards
– Clusters vs. Grade specific standards in Math
– Anchor Standards vs. Grade specific standards in ELA
Highlight essential “conditions” necessary to foster access and progress
– Accommodations: change materials, procedures, alternate response formats
– Assistive Technology: calculators, dictation software, etc.
– Specially designed instruction
– Instructional strategies and supports: graphic organizers, prompts, wait time
– Modifications: change the standards (for those 1% of students with significant
cognitive disabilities)
Focus on student independence
– Level of independence associated with mastery
• Conditions can include tools to develop independent skills in regards to
content
Create a goal
–
Use language from the standards when possible
28
Aligned IEP Goal Components
29
Sample Goal
• Given base-ten blocks and a hundreds chart, the
student will generalize place value
understanding to read, write (with a computer),
and verbally compare multi-digit whole numbers
with 100% independence as measured by
classroom-based assessments, IXL progress,
and NWEA scores by May 2014 (CCSS: Math,
4.NBT.1, 2, 3).
30
Dylan’s Story
•
Strengths:
– Sense of humor, creative, complex tinfoil crafting projects, extensive scientific
knowledge
•
Disability:
– Emotional Disturbance
•
Math:
– NWEA: 7th percentile
– Life Skills Math Program: multiplication and division (3rd grade level)
•
Reading:
– NWEA: 1st percentile
– Beginning Reader
– Life Skills Reading Program: Reading Milestones (1st grade level)
•
Social/Emotional:
– Withdrawn and ignored peers
– Significant Issues with personal hygiene
– Hyper-focused on crafting
•
Behavioral:
– Frequent somatic complaints and absences
– Frequent refusals, “shutting down” behaviors
– Needed constant cues, check ins, and one-on-one assistance during work time
31
Dylan’s Story
•
•
Integrated into 8th grade math class in the Day Treatment classroom
Could access grade level, CCSS content with appropriate accommodations:
– Provision of human reader, peer supports, or text to speech device
– Use of scribe
– Clarification of directions
– Option for oral exams/alternative demonstrations of knowledge
– Use of assistive technology (calculator, etc.)
•
IEP included CCSS aligned goals in Expressions/Equations, Functions
•
Results:
– Participation in class equal to or exceeding that of his peers
– Social connections
– Academic progress:
– Math: NWEA, Fall to Spring, 7th percentile to 27th percentile
(growth of 20 points)
– Mastered standards with accommodations
32
Catching on…
• Resulted in visible student successes
– Students, parents, regular educators, administrators
• Efforts addressed major issues with special education:
– Eliminated instructional focus on lower level content
– Mandated exposure to grade level content
– Devised supports to scaffold from instructional level
– Ensured ALL students receive education based on high
standards
• Enhanced opportunities for collaboration with regular education
teachers
– Used same standards in IEPs as those used in classroom
– Fostered increased opportunities for inclusion
• Focused on college and career readiness
33
From the classroom to the district
level…
• Enrolled in Educational Leadership Program
– Internship with my Special Education Director
• Assigned project of researching and linking the CCSS to special
education and providing staff with related professional development
• Spreading the word:
–
–
–
–
–
Presentation to district special education staff
Presentation to district regular education staff
Presentation mid-coast regional directors group
Presentation to staff in other local districts
Presentation at Maine Association of Directors of Special
Education conference
• Local knowledge sharing led to the development of
connections with the Maine Department of Education
34
Flare Up
Phase 3: An Administrative Perspective
35
Setting the Scene
• Assistant Director of Special Services
– Maine’s Oxford Hills School District
• 8 Elementary Schools, 1 Middle School, 1 High School
• Approximately 3500 students
– Approximately 500 special education students (14%)
– Programs available to serve students at multiple
levels of restrictiveness
• Resource rooms, social skills programs, applied academics
programs, life skills programs, day treatment programs
• Uncharted territory
– With Director’s permission, set the integration of
Common Core and Special Education as top priority
for professional development.
36
The Change Process…
• District Level
– Basic familiarity with Common Core
• Classroom instruction - pilots
• Special Education = Leaders of change
• Key Components of Change Process:
– Start with the IEP
– Maintain constant focus on CCSS
• Monthly staff meetings, individualized supports
– Provide time
• Frequent opportunity for discussion
• Shift in expectations and purpose
– Increase expectations as skill level increases
37
Action Steps
• Step 1:
– Professional Development:
• “Know the student” work
• Construct detailed Present Levels statements
• Step 2A:
– Professional Development:
• Aligned IEP Goal Instruction/Guidance
– Identify and prioritize student’s critical needs in areas of skill
deficit
– Identify, and unpack, appropriate grade level
clusters/standards
– Identify the conditions necessary to support access/progress
» Modifications vs. Accommodations
• Required, at minimum, at least one aligned goal on every IEP
» Varying responses
38
Action Steps
• Step 2B:
– The “GAP” kids
• Address the needs of those students who fall
within the “gap” in implementation
–Students without the benefits/rigor of the
CCSS since K
» CCSS assumes students possess foundational
skills and mandates access to grade level
content
• Supplemental Goals and Integrated Goals
39
Action Steps
• Supplemental Goals:
• Address skill deficits (decoding, phonics, reading fluency,
math fluency, etc.) with concurrent instruction/goals
– Not necessarily tied to grade level
• Example:
– Given guided instruction and daily opportunities to
practice, the student will develop a bank of 50 known
high frequency words that he/she can both read and
write independently with at least 90% accuracy in 4
out of 5 trials as measured by informal assessments,
word vocabulary assessment, and student writing
samples by February 2014.
40
Action Steps
• Integrated goals
• Link instruction in areas of skills deficit with grade
level aligned goal as “conditions.” (careful!)
• Example:
– Given daily practice with multiplication facts and oral
response formats or dictation software, the student
will solve real-world and mathematical problems
using numerical and algebraic expressions and
equations with 100% independence in 4 out of 5
opportunities as measured by formal and informal
classroom assessments, teacher observation, and a
growth of 7 points from fall to spring on the NWEA by
May 2014 (CCSS: Math, 7.EE.3, 4, 4a, 4b).
41
Action Steps
• Step 3:
– Continued Professional Development
• Exploring available resources
• Goal measurement tools
• Transition plans
– Monitoring for compliance
– Individualized staff supports
– Tough conversations
• What is appropriate? (FAPE)
• Instructional Level vs. Grade Level Expectations
• General ed instruction is not aligned.. Now what?
– Celebrations/Exemplars
42
Action Steps
• Step 4:
– Unpacking the standards
• Use common language
• Identify essential understandings
• Increase accessibility for all
stakeholders
• Collaborate with general educators,
specialists to develop district-wide
resource
• Central location (Google Docs)
Ongoing…
43
Results:
The Paperwork Perspective (IEP Goals)
• THEN:
– The student will meet 3rd grade expectations in the
area of fluency.
• NOW:
– Given small group instruction in word patterns and
daily opportunities to practice, the student will use
combined knowledge of all letter-sound
correspondences, syllabication patterns, and
morphology to read accurately unfamiliar multisyllabic words in context and out of context with 90%
accuracy as measured by running records and word
lists by February 2014 (CCSS: Reading, 5.RF.3).
44
Results:
The Paperwork Perspective (IEP Goals)
• THEN:
– The student will increase her math skills to the mid
second grade level.
• NOW:
– Given small group instruction and resources such as
multiplication tables, the student will analyze
proportional relationships and use them to accurately
solve real-world and mathematical problems in 4 out of
5 opportunities, as measured by unit assessments,
student work samples, math journal, and teacher
observation by May 2014 (CCSS: Math, 7.RP.1, 2, 3).
45
Results:
The Paperwork Perspective…
• Now, IEP goals are …
– Aligned with a student’s grade level.
– Longer.
– Directed towards specific skills/content in the
Common Core State Standards.
• (vague, subject based goals are no longer
appropriate).
– Greater in number.
46
Results:
The teachers’ perspectives
•
“The best part of the CCSS is the flexibility of assessment. Rather than remain tied
to the traditional written or arithmetic assessments the students on my caseload
tend to flounder on, we can assess standards-mastery through verbal, graphic, and
kinesthetic tasks.”
– Matt McGreevy, Oxford Hills Comprehensive High School
•
“Having students access common core standards has presented its challenges, but
with modifications and accommodations in place, I’ve been able to deliver
instruction to students in a slower manner, which allows me, as a teacher, to delve
into content deeper.”
– Christina Ferreira, Guy E. Rowe School
•
“As the mainstay, though, IEP goals for this instruction are written to address grade
level Common Core State Standards for learning… These IEP goals remain key
components of a student’s program … across school settings. With this in mind, the
ultimate purpose of elementary resource instruction is to support each student’s
increased success in the regular classroom.”
– Margaret Templeton, Paris Elementary School
47
Results:
Anticipated
• Increased levels of student inclusion
• Increased collaboration between special
educators and regular educators
– Co-teaching opportunities
– Cohesive student population
• Increased likelihood students will be
college and career ready
– Proficiency-based diplomas
Time Will Tell…
48
Resources
• PLAAFP Statement Hints
• Aligned IEP Goal Writing Process
• IEP Goal Writing Hints
• Designing Proficiency-Based IEPs
• Action Plan (suggested)
49
Questions?
50
Contact Information
Debrajean Scheibel, SPDG Coordinator
debrajean.scheibel@maine.gov
Jessica Yates, jessica.yates@maine.edu
51
52