Results Driven Accountability
Assuring Compliance
Improving Results
Office of Special Programs
WV Department of Education
September 9, 2014
RDA
Results Driven Accountability
General Supervision
Day 2
GENERAL SUPERVISION
Policies, Procedures and Effective Implementation
 Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of
Students with Exceptionalities
 WV Procedures Manual for the Education of
Students with Exceptionalities
 IDEA 2004
 WV Code 18-20-1 et. seq. Education of Exceptional
Children
 West Virginia Advisory Council for the Education of
Exceptional Children
General Supervision – Policies,
Procedures, and Effective
Implementation
Pat Homberg, Executive Director
Office of Special Programs
Policies, Procedures and Effective
Implementation
 Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education
of Students with Exceptionalities
 WV Procedures Manual for the Education
of Students with Exceptionalities
 IDEA 2004
 WV Code 18-20-1 et. seq. Education of
Exceptional Children
 West Virginia Advisory Council for the
Education of Exceptional Children
Policy 2520.161
Next Generation Alternate Academic
Standards for English Language Arts
Policy 2520.162
Next Generation Alternate Academic
Standards for Mathematics
Annette Carey, Coordinator
Effective August 11, 2014
Previous
• Linked to Common
Core and crossed walked to
NxGen
• Developed by educators
(special education) and
content specialist from the 12
states
• Instructional Achievement
Level Descriptors (IALDs)
– Describe performance at four
achievement levels based on
essential elements with
examples
• Grades K-5, 6-8, 9-12
Revised
• Linked to Common Core
• Previous work in connection
with the developed Learning
Maps
– Representation of how
academic skills are acquired
(research-based)
• Alignment to previous EE
• Clusters not IALDs
– Claims (important knowledge)
and Conceptual Areas (how it is
acquired)
• Grades K-12
The Common Core Essential
Elements
DYNAMIC LEARNING MAPS ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS FOR FIRST GRADE
First Grade Mathematics Domain: Operations and Algebraic Thinking
CCSS Grade-Level Standards
DLM Essential Elements
CLUSTER: Represent and solve problems involving addition and subtraction.
1.OA.1. Use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of
adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all
positions, e.g., by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown
number to represent the problem.
1.OA.2. Solve word problems that call for addition of three whole numbers whose sum is less
than or equal to 20, e.g., by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the
unknown number to represent the problem.
EE.1.OA.1.a. Represent addition and subtraction
with objects, fingers, mental images, drawings,
sounds (e.g., claps), or acting out situations.
EE.1.OA.1.b. Recognize two groups that have the
same or equal quantity.
EE.1.OA.2. Use “putting together” to solve
problems with two sets.
CLUSTER: Understand and apply properties of operations and the relationship between addition and subtraction.
1.OA.3. Apply properties of operations as strategies to add and subtract.1 Examples: If 8 + 3 =
11 is known, then 3 + 8 = 11 is also known. (Commutative property of addition.) To add 2 + 6
+ 4, the second two numbers can be added to make a 10, so 2 + 6 + 4 = 2 + 10 = 12.
(Associative property of addition.)
Not applicable.
See EE.6.EE.3 and EE.N-CN.2.
1.OA.4. Understand subtraction as an unknown-addend problem. For example, subtract 10 – 8
by finding the number that makes 10 when added to 8.
Not applicable.
See EE.1.NBT.4 and EE.1.NBT.6.
1
Students need not use formal terms for these properties.
Susan Beck, Assistant Director
Ghaski Browning, Assistant Director
JoDonna Burdoff, Coordinator
Annette Carey, Coordinator
Lorraine Ciambotti-Elswick, Coordinator
Kathy Knighton, Coordinator
Michael Knighton, Coordinator
Vickie Mohnacky, Coordinator
Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education
of Students with Exceptionalities
Summary of Revisions
Office of Special Programs
WV Department of Education
September 2014
Policy 2419:
Regulations for the Education of
Students with Exceptionalities
Summary of Revisions
Legislature
• Senate Bill 209
Graduation with
Modified Diploma
• House Bill 4384
Teachers Sign and Read
IEP
• House Bill 4608
Dyslexia and Dyscalculia
Legislature
IDEA 2004
Revisions to IDEA Part B
Regulations Related to
Parental Notice and
Consent to Access Public
Insurance (Medicaid)
Blindness, Low Vision,
Deafblindness
WVBE Policies
American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic
and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth
Edition DSM-5
• Autism Spectrum Disorder
• Communication Disorder
• Specific Learning Disorder
Timeline
April 4
April 24-25
April 28-29
May 14
May 19, 20, 22
July 13
August 13
September 15
Webinars
West Virginia School Psychologists’ Conference
Special Education Administrators’ Conference
WVBE puts on public comment (60 days)
3 Public Hearings – 37 participants
Public comment closes
• 20 individuals provided 39 comments
• 21 revisions were warranted
WVBE approval
Effective date for Policy 2419
Adoption by County Boards of Education
Legislation
Senate Bill 209
 Requiring county boards to allow a student with a disability whose
individualized education program provides for a modified diploma to
participate in graduation ceremonies with their same grade
classmates when requested by parents in writing.
 Prohibits county boards from denying continuing special education
services to the student with a disability working toward a modified
diploma due to participation in graduation ceremonies.
 Special education may be continued for a student working toward a
modified diploma until the student reaches twenty-one (21).
Legislation
House Bill 4384
 Teachers in whose class or program a student with exceptional needs is
enrolled shall read and sign a copy of the student’s individualized
education program acknowledging that he or she has read and
understands it.
 Teachers in whose class or program a student with exceptional needs is
enrolled shall make accommodations and modifications for the student, if
needed or identified, to help the student succeed in the class or program.
 Teachers include, but are not limited to, teachers of music, musical
education, art and driver education.
Legislation
House Bill 4608
 Expands definition of specific learning disabilities (SLD) to include the
alternative terms of dyslexia and dyscalculia as defined by the DSM-5.
 Dyslexia is an alternative term used to refer to a pattern of learning
difficulties characterized by problems with accurate or fluent word
recognition, poor decoding, and poor spelling abilities.
 Dyscalculia is an alternative term used to refer to a pattern of learning
difficulties characterized by problems processing numerical information,
learning arithmetic facts, and performing accurate or fluent calculations.
 Ensure all students receive necessary and appropriate screenings,
evaluations and early assessments for SLD.
 Require provision of ongoing information and education to parents
regarding SLD and the services available to students.
Legislation
Sunrise Board of Examiners Speech-Language
Pathology and Audiology – Evaluation Overview
 The West Virginia Department of Education’s Continuing Education
Requirements for Speech and Hearing Professionals Are Deficient
January 2013
 The Legislative Auditor has determined the DOE’s continuing
education requirements to be deficient and be given two years to
improve the requirement.
 If the DOE chooses not to make the adjustments, the Legislature
should consider amending West Virginia Code §30-32 to require
speech and hearing professionals employed through DOE to be
licensed by the West Virginia Board of Examiners of SpeechLanguage Pathology and Audiology.
Medicaid
34 CRF §300.154(d)
 The new regulations, effective on March 18, 2013 amend 34 CFR
§300.154(d)(2)(iv) that were published in the Federal Register on August 14,
2006.
 The new regulations have two basic requirements:
1) The public agency must notify parents in writing of a number of
safeguards to protect their rights before the public agency accesses the
child’s or parent’s public benefits or insurance to pay for services under IDEA
for the first time and annually thereafter. (34 CFR §300.154(d)(2)(v).
2) The public agency must obtain a one-time written consent from the
parent that meets the requirements of 34 CFR §99.30 and §300.622, and
also specifies that the parent understands and agrees that the public agency
may access the child’s or parent’s public benefits or insurance to pay for
special education or related services. (34 CRF §300.154(d)(2)(iv)
• Annually notify
• When county changes must secure consent
Policy 2510: Assuring the Quality of Education:
Regulations for Education Programs
 This legislative rule establishes the regulations for all education programs
that are designed to prepare students for a global society by improving the
quality of teaching and learning in the public schools and ensuring that
equal education opportunities exist for all students, including, but not
limited to: rigorous high-quality curriculum, engaging instructional
strategies, experiential learning programs, support programs, personnel,
instructional resources, supplies, equipment, technology integration, and
facilities.
 This policy provides the basic structure for all education programs and
student support services necessary for a thorough and efficient system of
education to be available to all students.
 Given the demands of the global marketplace, it is essential that all
students become lifelong learners prepared for successful entry into
postsecondary education or the workplace.
Policy 5202: Minimum Requirements for the
Licensure of Professional/Paraprofessional
Personnel and Advanced Salary Classifications
 Policy 5202 outlines the minimum requirements for the various
licenses approved by the WVBE and issued by the State
Superintendent of Schools, to educators and paraprofessionals who
wish to work in West Virginia’s public schools.
 Licensure requirements established in Policy 5202 provide a means
of ensuring that persons employed in WV public schools have the
necessary knowledge and skills to meet the responsibilities of their
professional assignments in instruction, student support,
administration, and any other areas of responsibility for which
licensure is required.
Policy 4373: Expected Behavior in
Safe and Supportive Schools
 Policy 4373 sets the requirements for the development of safe and
supportive schools that provide optimum learning conditions for both
students and staff.
 These regulations require county boards of education to design and
implement procedures to create and support continuous school
climate/culture improvement processes within all schools that will ensure
an orderly and safe environment that is conducive to learning.
 These regulations also set forth unacceptable behaviors that undermine a
school’s efforts to create a positive school climate/culture. These
unacceptable behaviors are prohibited on all school property and school
sponsored events.
Policy 2444.4: Issuance of the State of West
Virginia High School Equivalency Diploma
The purpose of the State of West Virginia High
School Equivalency Diploma is to provide appropriate
recognition of educational attainment to those
individuals who have demonstrated that they have
attained academic skills equivalent to those at the high
school completion level by satisfactorily passing the
high school equivalency assessment approved by the
West Virginia Department of Education.
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders Fifth Edition (DSM-5)
 Communication Disorder
Includes language disorder which combines DSM-IV expressive & mixed
receptive-expressive language disorders, speech sound disorder a new
name for phono-logical disorder, and childhood-onset fluency disorder a
new name for stuttering. Also included is social (pragmatic)
communication disorder, a new condition for persistent difficulties in the
social uses of verbal and nonverbal communication. Social communication
deficits are one component of ASD, it is important to note that social
communication disorder cannot be diagnosed in the presence of restricted
repetitive behaviors, interests, and activities.
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders Fifth Edition (DSM-5)
 Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
Autism Spectrum Disorder is the new DSM-5 name that reflects a
scientific consensus that four previously separate disorders are a
single condition with different levels of symptom severity in two
core domains. ASD encompasses the previous autistic disorder,
Asperger’s disorder, childhood disintegrative disorder, and
pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified.
ASD is characterized by 1)deficits in social communication and
social interaction and 2) Restricted repetitive behaviors, interests,
and activities (RRBs). Because both components are required for
diagnosis of ASD, social communication disorder is diagnosed if no
RRBs are present.
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders Fifth Edition (DSM-5)
Specific Learning Disorder
Specific learning disorder combines the DSM-IV diagnoses of reading disorder,
mathematics disorder, disorder of written expression, and learning disorder
not otherwise specified. Because learning deficits in the areas of reading,
written expression, and mathematics commonly occur together, coded
specifiers for the deficit types in each area are included. The text
acknowledges that specific types of reading deficits are described
internationally in various ways as dyslexia and specific types of mathematics
deficits as dyscalculia.
SUMMARY OF REVISIONS TO
POLICY 2419:
REGULATIONS FOR THE
EDUCATION OF STUDENTS WITH
EXCEPTIONALITIES
Page
Title 126 Legislative Rule
1
3
§126-16-2.2.1 Date for full educational opportunities revised.
Title of CIFMS revised to Compliance System Procedures (CSP) and Results
System Procedures (RSP).
Introduction. West Virginia Procedures Manual for the Education of Students
with Exceptionalities added. Removed references to special education forms.
Page
4
5-6
7
Chapter 1 – Free Appropriate Public Education
Sec. 2.A.3. Clarifies student with a disability whose IEP provides for a modified
diploma shall be allowed to participate in graduation ceremonies with same
grade classmates when requested by parents in writing and shall be allowed to
continue to receive services until twenty-one years of age. (Policy 2510, SB 209)
Sec.2.C. Medicaid parental consent documentation revised. Provide written
notice to parents prior to accessing Medicaid and annually thereafter even if
services have not changed. For initial billing or when district changes obtain
parental consent. (IDEA Regulations)
Sec.3. High School Diploma includes alternative means to earn high school
credit through Optional Pathways and replaces GED. (Policy 2444.4)
Page
Chapter 2 – Child Find
9
Sec.3.C. Title of Policy 2510 revised to Assuring the Quality of Education:
Regulations for Education Programs. (Policy 2510)
Page
Chapter 3 – Evaluation/Reevaluation
12-13
18
Sec.2.A.3. Clarifies when districts closed due to state of emergency
determined by WV Governor or when districts closed due to weather
conditions determined by county superintendent and during summer break the
80 day timeline for initial evaluations extended directly proportional to state
of emergency, weather, or summer break.
Sec.4.C. Clarifies when written evaluation report(s) provided to Eligibility
Committee (EC) and parent.
Page
22-23
Chapter 4 – Eligibility
Sec.3.A. Eligibility criteria for autism revised to reflect American Psychiatric
Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth
Edition (DSM-5).
Learning Objectives
 Become familiar with changes to autism eligibility
criteria in DSM-5 and Policy 2419
 Effectively transition from specific categories of
Pervasive Development Disorders to a single
broad Autism Spectrum Disorder category
o i.e., be able to reclassify previously eligible students
who maintain a more specific label under DSM-IV
 Gain familiarity with resources for autism
evaluation, eligibility and frequently asked
questions
Setting the Context
 In West Virginia, school
age children with autism
comprise 0.62% of the
overall state student
enrollment, as compared
to the 0.99% across the
nation (IDEA data).
 Today, there are nearly
1,750 children with
autism ages 3-21 in West
Virginia
The essential features of
autism are persistent
impairments in reciprocal
social communication and
social interaction, and
restricted, repetitive
behaviors interests or
activities.
Setting the Context
DSM-IV-TR (old criteria)
Pervasive Developmental Disorders
Autism
Asperger’s
Pervasive Developmental Disorders NOS
Childhood Disintegrative Disorder
Rett’s Syndrome
DSM-5 (current criteria)
Autism Spectrum Disorders
• DSM-5 consists of a single,
broad category of Autism
Spectrum Disorder.
• However, students with a
“well-established DSM-IV
diagnosis” of autism,
Asperger’s, PDD-NOS should
be given a diagnosis of
Autism Spectrum Disorder
(DSM-5; p. 51)
Terminology
Retained IDEA Definition
IDEA Definition: Autism is a developmental
disability, generally evident before age
three, significantly affecting verbal and
nonverbal communication and social
interaction and adversely affecting
educational performance. A student who
manifests the characteristics of autism after
age three could be diagnosed as having
autism if the criteria in this section are
satisfied. Other characteristics often
associated with autism include, but are not
limited to, engagement in repetitive
activities and stereotyped movements,
resistance to environmental change or
change in daily routines, and unusual
responses to sensory experiences.
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Terminology
For the purpose of this training, the words
autism and ASD will, hereafter, be used
synonymously. However, they will refer to
the single, broad category of ASD as
outlined in the DSM-5 and WVBE Policy
2419, effective September 2014.
Source for criteria now cited
An eligibility committee will determine that
a student is eligible for special education
services as a student with autism when all of
the following American Psychiatric
Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria
(1 through 5) are met:
DSM-IV and Policy 2419
Prior to September 2014
Reciprocal Social
Interaction
Communication
(at least 2)
(at least 1)
Restricted,
Repetitive and
Stereotyped
Patterns of
Behavior
(at least 1)
Crosswalk
Reciprocal Social
Interaction
Communication
(at least 1)
(at least 2)
Restricted,
Repetitive and
Stereotyped
Patterns of
Behavior
(at least 1)
Social
Communication
and Social
Interaction
(all)
Restricted,
Repetitive Patterns
of Behavior,
Interests of
Activities
(at least 2)
Autism
(Policy 2419)
Autism Spectrum
Disorder (DSM-5)
Autism
Policy 2419: Effective Date
September 2014
Criteria 1
Social
Communication
and Social
Interaction
(all)
Restricted,
Repetitive Patterns
of Behavior,
Interests of
Activities
(at least 2)
Autism
(Policy 2419)
Criterion 1 Section A: Social
Communication and Social Interaction
Persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction across
multiple contexts, as manifested by the following, currently or by history:
 Deficits in social-emotional reciprocity, ranging, for example, from
abnormal social approach and failure of normal back-and-forth
conversation; to reduced sharing of interests, emotions, or affect; to
failure to initiate or respond to social interactions.
 Deficits in nonverbal communicative behaviors used for social
interaction, ranging, for example, from poorly integrated verbal and
nonverbal communication; to abnormalities in eye contact and body
language or deficits in understanding and use of gestures; to a total lack
of facial expressions and nonverbal communication.
 Deficits in developing, maintaining, and understanding relationships,
ranging, for example, from difficulties adjusting behavior to suit various
social contexts; to difficulties in sharing imaginative play or in making
friends; to absence of interest in peers.
Criterion 1 Section B: Restricted
Repetitive and Stereotyped Patterns
of Behavior, Interests and Activities
Restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and
activities, as manifested by at least two of the following:
 Stereotyped or repetitive motor movements, use of objects, or speech
(e.g., simple motor stereotypies, lining up toys or flipping objects,
echolalia, idiosyncratic phrases).
 Insistence on sameness, inflexible adherence to routines, or ritualized
patterns or verbal nonverbal behavior (e.g., extreme distress at small
changes, difficulties with transitions, rigid thinking patterns, greeting
rituals, need to take same route or eat food every day).
 Highly restricted, fixated interests that are abnormal in intensity or focus
(e.g, strong attachment to or preoccupation with unusual objects,
excessively circumscribed or perseverative interest).
 Hyper- or hypo-reactivity to sensory input or unusual interests in sensory
aspects of the environment (e.g., apparent indifference to
pain/temperature, adverse response to specific sounds or textures,
excessive smelling or touching of objects, visual fascination with lights or
movement).
Criterion 1 Section C of Policy 2419:
Symptomology and Lifespan
“Symptoms must be present in the early
developmental period (but may not become fully
manifest until social demands exceed limited
capacities, or may be masked by learned strategies
later in life)” DSM-5
Also note the IDEA regulations states “A child who
manifests the characteristics of autism after age three
could be identified as having autism,” if all other
criteria are satisfied.
Criterion 1 Section D of Policy 2419 :
Clinically Significant Impairment
Aligns to IDEA’s adverse
“Symptoms cause
impact and needs special
clinically significant
education criteria
impairment in social,
occupational, or other
important areas of current
functioning” DSM-5
Criterion 1 Section E of Policy 2419 :
These disturbances are not better
explained by intellectual disability
or global developmental delay
DSM-5
 Comorbid diagnoses of ASD and
ID can be made if:
social communication is below that
expected for general developmental
level. DSM-5
 If more than one exceptionality is
found, the EC must determine
the student’s primary
exceptionality. If consensus is
not reached, the district
administrator makes the decision
and provides PWN of
determination. Policy 2419
Autism Policy 2419 Criteria 2 through 5
2) The student is diagnosed as having autism by a
psychiatrist, physician, licensed psychologist or
school psychologist.
3) The student’s condition adversely affects
educational performance.
4) The student needs special education.
5) The student’s educational performance is not
adversely affected primarily because the student
has an emotional/behavioral disorder as defined in
this chapter.
More about the diagnosis…
Criteria 2: The student is diagnosed as having
autism by a psychiatrist, physician, licensed
psychologist or school psychologist.
More about adverse affect…
Criteria 3: The student’s condition adversely affects
educational performance.
• Maintain an appropriate conversation and joint attention?
• Demonstrate sufficient social skills to be successful in life?
• Adapt to environmental changes and a variety of sensory
stimuli?
QUESTIONS ABOUT AUTISM
CRITERIA AND WVBE POLICY 2419
How does Social (Pragmatic)
Communication Disorder relate to an
Autism Diagnosis?
If a student has significant social
communication deficits but not other
symptoms (or history of symptoms),
the student should also be considered
for social communication disorder.
Social
Communication
and Social
Interaction
(all)
Restricted,
Repetitive Patterns
of Behavior,
Interests of
Activities
(at least 2)
Autism
(Policy 2419)
If a student is suspected of having
social communication disorder, then
the student should also be evaluated
to rule out ASD.
Social
Communication
(Pragmatics)
Evaluation
Autism
Spectrum
Disorder
Think about FAPE……...If student qualifies for both, autism should be
considered primary.
Should the DSM-5 severity level
specifiers be incorporated in eligibility
determinations?
DSM-5 Specifiers
• Both social communication and restricted,
repetitive behavior include severity level
specifiers in the DSM-5 (p. 52).
– Level 1: Requiring Support
– Level 2: Requiring Substantial Support
– Level 3: Requiring Very Substantial Support
• These specifiers should not be used to
determine eligibility or provision of services.
• Hence, they are not incorporated into the autism
diagnosis under Policy 2419.
Other DSM-5 specifications which
contribute to a comprehensive
evaluation
With or without accompanying
intellectual impairment
With or without
accompanying language
impairment
Associated with a known
medical condition
EC
consideration
of ID, CD and
OH as
appropriate
Comprehensive
Evaluation
AUTISM EVALUATION
Comprehensive Evaluation
“The evaluation shall be sufficiently
comprehensive to identify all of the
student’s special education and related
service needs whether or not commonly
linked to the suspected exceptionality”
(Policy 2419; Chapter 3)
Social
Communication
and Social
Interaction
(all)
Restricted,
Repetitive
Patterns of
Behavior, Interests
of Activities
(at least 2)
Autism
(Policy 2419)
Who conducts the evaluation?
District staff will vary from county to county and
by student needs.
– School Psychologist, Educational Diagnosticians,
Specialists, Special Educators, Speech/Language
Pathologists, Occupational Therapists, etc.
• Districts may also receive evaluations from a variety
of external evaluators.
• The student is diagnosed as having autism by a
psychiatrist, physician, licensed psychologist or school
psychologist. (Policy 2419, Chapter 4, Section 3).
Components of Evaluation
Should include multiple measures and sources of
information including:
• Interview
– Review with parents early developmental and current
concerns or target behaviors
– Include teachers and other caregivers as well as
students if possible
•
•
•
•
Record Review
Direct Observation / Interaction with Child
Rating Scales
Direct Assessment
Diagnostic Interview
The role of the diagnostic interview in autism
assessment is significant. It reveals developmental
history and symptoms which may have existed
previously but are no longer evident.
Example Instrument:
Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R)
– A semi-structured interview for caregivers that
addresses early and current development.
Observational Instruments
• The Autism Diagnostic
Observation Schedule –
Second Edition (ADOS2)
– “Gold Standard”
observation tool
– Semi-structured
assessment of
communication, social
interaction, and play
• One ADOS with second
edition update is
available per RESA for
LEA loan
• Approximately 150
school psychologists,
SLP, OTs, and other
educators trained
through multi-agency
partnership
Rating Scales
• CARS-2 ( Childhood Autism Rating Scale)
– Tool that can be used to structure observations of children
over the age of two.
– Often the CARS is used incorrectly as an interview checklist.
• GARS-2 ( Gilliam Autism Rating Scale)
– Matches the current DSM criteria. Children 3-22
– Most frequently used
– Poor validity
• Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS). Children 4-18
– Distinguishes autism spectrum conditions from other child
psychiatric conditions by identifying presence and extent of
autistic social impairment
• Autism Spectrum Rating Scale. Children 2-6 and 7-18
Other Types of Assessment
Teams must consider on a case-by-case basis
– Cognitive / ability measures
– Adaptive behavior*
– Speech and language*
– Achievement / performance measures
– Motor and/or sensory
– Reinforcer / preference assessment
– Perspective taking task
• E.g., Sallie-Anne Task
Sallie-Anne Task
1. Where was Sally’s ball in
the beginning?
2. Where is Sally’s ball now?
3. Where does Sally think
her ball is?
Children with Intellectual
Disabilities/ Down
Syndrome outperform
peers with autism
– Only approximately 14-20%
of students with autism pass
perspective question
Perspective Taking and Joint Attention
Tasks
• Mean Monkey
– http://www.youtube.co
m/watch?v=TJkB6nrk1C
A&feature=related
• Crayon Box
– http://www.youtube.co
m/watch?v=FLV2bGGRr
IY&feature=related
• Scary Robot
– http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=tif4U3OjT2M&fea
ture=related
ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATIONS AND
POINTS OF INTEREST REGARDING
AUTISM IDENTIFICATION
IN WEST VIRGINIA
District Reported Challenges …
1. Doctors send scripts indicating an autism
diagnosis but provide no concrete data to
support decision
2. Doctors provide prescriptions with autism
diagnoses when students do not need
specially designed instruction
Doctor Prescriptions
Scripts
Specially Designed Instruction
• Ask parent, medical
doctor or
psychologists to
provide supporting
documentation and
evaluation
• Has the EC team
considered more
than just academics?
– Social/emotional
context of disability
– Sensory /
environmental needs
If a child ages 3-5 meets criteria for
both autism and developmental
delay, what is the most appropriate
disability category?
Considerations
• Policy 2419 does not stipulate a right or wrong answer
• Eligibility committee considers criteria, data and ultimately decides
• There is a special consideration clause under Developmental Delay stating
for students with vision / hearing impairments, the more specific disability
(i.e., not DD) is the appropriate decision
• Access to additional services and best practice interventions for autism
• Is the EC team delaying a difficult discussion with parents?
• Is case manager certification an issue?
• Which staff results in the best student-teacher match for intervention
efficacy?
Can a district require all school
psychologists to use the ADOS 2 when
a student is suspected of having
autism?
WV Board of Examiners Licensure
• A salaried school psychologist is not required
to hold licensure under the West Virginia
Board of Examiners of Psychologists to make
an autism diagnosis under Policy 2419.
• The WV Autism Insurance Reform Bill
requires a medical diagnosis, as do services
from the Marshall University – Autism
Training Center.
Identification, Placement and Testing
An autism diagnosis should not result in any
specific school environment or an automatic
placement on the Alternate Test. Placement
and test assignment must be made by the IEP
team on an individual, case-by-case basis.
Assessment for Intervention
In contrast to viewing the referral problems…as
diagnostic problems, one could also
conceptualize their referrals as
questions….Which strategies would be likely to
improve student skills (Shapiro, 1996)
Page
23-24
24
Chapter 4 – Eligibility
Sec.3.B. Eligibility criteria for Blindness and Low Vision revised to include
cortical visual impairment and functional vision loss. (IDEA 2004)
Sec. 3.C. Eligibility criteria for Deafblindness defines primary eligibility.
(IDEA 2004)
Blindness and Low Vision
 Criteria 1 (documented visual impairment)
 a – c no change: acuity (20/70), visual field (20°) or
deteriorating condition
 d added: “characteristic behaviors associated with
cortical visual impairment”
e is new: when the acuity is better that 20/70
TVI conducts FVA and determines:
 Limited ability to accessing educational and media materials with
out modifications
 Limited ability to accessing educational and media materials with
out accommodation's (including posture, body movements, etc.)
 Demonstrates variable visual ability due to environment, or
 Experiences reduced or variable visual ability due to fatigue
 Criteria 2 and 3 remain the same
Functional Vision Assessment
•
Conducted by a teacher of the visually impaired
–
–
–
•
Focus
–
–
–
–
•
•
determines what they can see
how they use their vision (including sustainability of use),
under what conditions
accessing educational materials without modifications and accommodation
posturing, fatigue
all environments: glare, weather
variability
Identifies adverse impact and specially designed instruction
After the initial comprehensive FVA
–
–
–
–
–
Annual updates, or
Change in vision, environments or educational materials
Considered a rolling assessment
Typically not done with children who are totally blind or have light
perception
Children with cortical vision impairment(s), the FVA encompasses the ten
characteristic behaviors associated with CVI
The Perfect Storm: November Training
• Changes in Eligibility: FVA
– Update of teachers skills
– Comprehensive FVA kits
• Text-to-Braille Technology for Smarter
Balanced Assessment
– $15,000 per student (approximately)
– AT grant
– Technology training
• Unified English Braille
Deafblindness
 Definition does not change
 Clarification added:
Deafblindness should be the primary eligibility for a student
who meets the above criteria. In addition, a student meeting
the above criteria and who also has additional impairments
contributing to the student’s severe educational needs may
be determined eligible for deafblindness.
• Rationale:
– Federal Regs: Multiple Disabilities definition does not
include deaf-blindness.
– National issue
– Better alignment
– Not a certification issue
– WV 110 vs. 10
Page
28
Chapter 4 – Eligibility
Sec.3.G. Personalized Education Plan (PEP) replaced Individualized
Student transition Plan (ISTP). (Policy 2510)
Page
30
31-33
34
33-36
36
Chapter 4 – Eligibility
Sec.3.L. Eligibility criteria for Specific Learning Disability revised to define the
alternative terms dyslexia and dyscalculia to reflect the DSM-5. (HB 4609)
Date for phasing in response to intervention removed.
Sec.3.L. Emphasized need for screenings and early assessments for specific
learning disabilities. (HB 4608)
Sec.3.L. Added universal design for learning (UDL) to multi-level approach.
Sec.3.L.Added to Parent Notice Requirements 3. Information and education
regarding specific learning disabilities and services available. (HB 4608)
Sec.3.L. Revised Standard 2 to include two options Rate of Learning or Pattern
of Strengths and Weaknesses which is consistent with the federal regulations.
Sec.3.L. Clarified documentation of Standard 1 – Level of Learning, Standard 2 –
Rate of Learning, Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses, and student response to
Multi-Level Instruction.
Sec.3.L. Removed references to Severe Discrepancy Model which was phased
out June 30, 2012.
SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY
(SLD) CRITERIA AND WVBE
POLICY 2419: REGULATIONS FOR
THE EDUCATION OF STUDENTS
WITH EXCEPTIONALITIES
How Are Students With
Disabilities Doing?
Compared to other students, students with disabilities
are performing poorly in school. They aren’t graduating
from high school at the same rates. They aren’t going to
college and getting jobs at the same rate either. Students
with learning disabilities (LD) and other disabilities are
leaving high school unprepared to go to college or join
the workforce. In fact, fewer than 10 percent of 8th grade
students with a disability are proficient in reading and
math on the nation’s report card, the National
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). This is a
problem because we know most kids with disabilities can
and should do better.
How Do We Know Students With
Disabilities Can Do Better?
Students with LD are the largest group of
students receiving services under IDEA. Many
students with LD spend the majority of their day
in the regular classroom and participate in the
same learning activities as general education
students. Students with LD, when provided with
evidence-based instruction and appropriate
supports, can be successful. They are often
some of the highest-achieving students in the
classroom.
Policy & Guidance
Policy 2419: Regulations for the
Education of Students with
Exceptionalities September 2014
• Elements of multi-level instruction
• Problem-solving model
Specific
Learning Disabilities
• SLD Standards/Criteria
Guidance for West Virginia Schools and
Districts
• “Standard operating procedures”
• Decision-making considerations
• Resources
Terminology
Retained IDEA Definition
IDEA Definition: SLD is a disorder
in one or more of the basic
psychological processes involved
in understanding or in using,
language, spoken or written, that
may manifest itself in the
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 Disorder
Dyslexia Note in DSM-V and Policy 2419
• Dyslexia is an alternative term used to refer to a
pattern of learning difficulties characterized by
problems with accurate or fluent word recognition,
poor decoding, and poor spelling abilities. If dyslexia is
used to specify this particular pattern of difficulties, it
is important also to specify any additional difficulties
that are present, such as difficulties with reading
comprehension or math reasoning.
Dyscalculia Note in DSM-V and Policy 2419
• Dyscalculia is an alternative term used to refer to a
pattern of difficulties characterized by problems
processing numerical information, learning arithmetic
facts, and performing accurate or fluent calculations. If
dyscalculia is used to specify this particular pattern of
mathematic difficulties, it is important also to specify
any additional difficulties that are present, such as
difficulties with math reasoning or word reasoning
accuracy.
Policy 2419 Prior to September 2014
Criteria
Standard 1Level of
Learning
Standard 2Rate of
Learning
Standard 3Exclusionary
Factors
Specific
Learning
Disability
Policy 2419: Effective Date
September 2014
Criteria
Standard 1-Level
of Learning
Standard 2-Rate
of Learning
(existing SPL
data) OR Pattern
of Strengths and
Weaknesses
Standard 3Exclusionary
Factors
Specific Learning
Disability
Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)
July 2012
Eligibility Standards:
September 2014
Eligibility Standards:
• Standard 1-Level of Learning
• Standard 2-Rate of Learning
• Standard 3-Exclusion Factors
• Standard 1-Level of Learning (no
change)
• Standard 2-Rate of Learning or
Pattern of Strengths and
Weaknesses
• Standard 3-Exclusion Factors (no
change)
• Pattern of Strengths and
Weaknesses (optional)
Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)
July 2012
September 2014
•
•
Standard 2-Rate of Learning
Eligibility Criteria
The second element in identifying a student with a
specific learning disability is whether the student has
made sufficient progress to meet age or state-approved
grade-level standards in one of the areas identified in
Standard 1 in response to carefully planned and explicitly
delivered instruction. The data used to determine if this
standard has been met are developed through ongoing
progress monitoring of the student’s performance during
an intervention period.
This standard is met when the student’s learning rate or
growth toward target skills is substantially below gradelevel peers and, based on progress monitoring data (i.e.,
charting), a reasonable rate of progress cannot be
projected even when the student is provided
supplemental intervention instruction of reasonable
intensity and duration.
Standard 2-Rate of Learning or
Pattern of Strengths and
Weaknesses
The second element in identifying a student with a
specific learning disability may be met by
determining insufficient rate of learning or a pattern
of strengths and weaknesses in cognitive and
academic abilities.
Rate of Learning
The data gathered through ongoing progress
monitoring of the student’s performance during an
intervention period is used to determine if rate of
learning has been met.
Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)
July 2012
September 2014
•
•
Standard 2-Rate of Learning
Eligibility Criteria (continued)
This standard is met when the student’s learning rate
or growth toward target skills is substantially below
grade-level peers and, based on progress monitoring
data (i.e., charting), a reasonable rate of progress
cannot be projected even when the student is
provided supplemental intervention instruction of
reasonable intensity and duration.
Standard 2-Rate of Learning or Pattern of
Strengths and Weaknesses Eligibility
Criteria (continued)
This standard is met when the student’s learning rate or
growth toward target skills is substantially below grade-level
peers and, based on progress monitoring data (i.e., charting),
a reasonable rate of progress cannot be projected even when
the student is provided supplemental intervention instruction
of reasonable intensity and duration.
Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses
In addition to not achieving adequately on age or Stateapproved grade-level achievement standards, a specific
learning disability may be confirmed if the student exhibits a
pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance,
achievement, or both, relative to age, State-approved gradelevel standards, or intellectual development, that is
determined by the EC to be relevant to the identification of a
specific learning disability, using appropriate assessments.
Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)
July 2012
September 2014
• Rate of Learning
Documentation:
• Rate of Learning
Documentation includes:
•
•
•
Progress monitoring data collected before,
during and after the provision of at least one
nine weeks of Targeted instruction and one nine
weeks of Intensive instruction; and
Records indicating specific instruction provided,
including frequency and duration (e.g.,
instructional plan, WVEIS on the Web
Intervention Tab, daily lesson plan).
•
Progress monitoring data collected before,
during and after the provision of Targeted
instruction and Intensive instruction (suggested
minimum nine week period of each); and
Records indicating specific instruction provided,
including frequency and duration (e.g.,
instructional plan, WVEIS on the Web
Intervention Tab, daily lesson plan).
Standard 1 – Level of Learning
The first element in identifying a student with a learning
disability addresses the student’s mastery of grade-level
content in one or more of the following areas:
• oral expression;
• listening comprehension;
• written expression;
• basic reading skill;
• reading fluency skills (area added in 2004 revisions to
IDEA);
• reading comprehension;
• mathematics calculation; or
• mathematics problem solving.
Standard 1 – Level of Learning
Possible Verification Sources for Level 1 *Check new words
– Screening and assessment results that include a minimum of 3 data
points that reflect at least 9 weeks of TARGETED instruction and at least 6
data points that reflect at least 9 weeks of INTENSIVE instruction that are
at or below the 8th percentile are considered significant. Confidence
intervals should be considered.
– An individually administered norm-referenced achievement test score at
or below the 8th percentile is considered significant. Confidence levels
for each test administered should be considered.
– Student performance relative to State-approved grade-level standards is
an essential component of determining the existence of severe
underachievement.
– CSOs are available in electronic format on the West Virginia Teach 21
website at http://wveis.k12.wv.us/Teach21/public/ngcso/NGSCO.cfm
Standard 2 – Rate of Learning
The second element in identifying a student with
a specific learning disability is whether the
student has made sufficient progress to meet
age or state-approved grade-level standards in
one of the areas identified in Standard 1 in
response to carefully planned and explicitly
delivered instruction. The data used to
determine if this standard has been met are
developed through ongoing progress monitoring
of the student’s performance during an
intervention period.
Standard 2 – Rate of Learning
This standard is met when the student’s learning
rate or growth toward target skills is
substantially below grade-level peers and, based
on progress monitoring data (i.e., charting), a
reasonable rate of progress cannot be projected
even when the student is provided
supplemental intervention instruction of
reasonable intensity and duration.
OR
Standard 2 – Patterns of Strengths
and Weaknesses (PSW)
• Assessment results need to be able to advance an
understanding of how the student’s academic and cognitive
domains interact to increase the diagnostic utility of the
multidisciplinary evaluation and provide guidance for
instructional strategies
• This method of evaluation, as it relates to eligibility
determination, is described within IDEA as “the use of other
alternative research-based procedures for determining
whether a child has a specific learning disability.”
• This method has been known as “the third approach” and
may be more commonly referred to as the Pattern(s) of
Strengths and Weaknesses approach (PSW).
What is a Pattern of Strengths
and Weaknesses?
Actual cognitive area of
weakness is significantly
lower than expected
based on overall
cognitive ability
Cognitive deficit(s) is
specific, not general or
pervasive, because
overall cognitive ability is
at least average
Cognitive
Weakness/Deficit
Cognitive Ability or
Processing Disorder
Cognitive Strengths
Average or better overall
ability
Supported by strengths in
academic skills
Actual academic area of
weakness is significantly
lower than expected based
on overall cognitive ability
Academic deficit(s) is
unexpected because overall
cognitive ability is at least
average (and other factors
were ruled out, such as
inadequate instruction)
Academic
Weakness/Failure
Performance approximately
1SD below the mean or lower
Academic
(cognitive and academic areas Skills/Knowledge Deficits
of weakness are related
empirically and relationship is
ecologically valid)
Sotelo, Flanagan, and Alfonso (2011). Overview of SLD Identification. In D.P. Flanagan & V.C. Alfonso, Essentials of Specific
Learning Disability Identification. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; Flanagan, Fiorello, and Ortiz (2010); Hale, Flanagan, and Naglieri
(2008)
Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses
• Assessing PSW is important because it may
establish links between specific cognitive processes
and academic areas of concern.
• These links have the potential to subsequently
inform supplemental instruction and/or specially
designed instruction.
• The identification of processing deficits can lead to
more effective instructional and compensatory
strategies for students who have not responded
adequately to TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction
within the SPL approach.
Three Research-Based Models of PSW
1. Aptitude-Achievement Consistency ModelProposed by Flanagan, Ortiz & Alfonso (2007)
2. Consistency-Discrepancy Model-Proposed by
Naglieri (1999)
3. Concordance-Discordance Model-Proposed
by Hale & Fiorello (2004)
Four General Principles Followed by the
Three Major Research-Based PSW Models
• First, the Full Scale IQ is irrelevant except for
Intellectual Disability (ID) diagnosis.
• Second, children classified as SLD have a pattern in
which most academic skills and cognitive abilities
are within the average range. However, they have
isolated weaknesses in academic and cognitive
functioning.
• Third, each model demands that we “match”
deficits in specific cognitive processes to the
specific area of academic concern without testing
children with numerous measures in an attempt to
find a deficit.
• Fourth, most cognitive abilities that do not relate to
the area of academic concern are average or above.
Advantages of PSW
• Addresses the “psychological processing” component of
the SLD definition that is not identified by SPL
• Constructs are scientifically based
• Provides information about cognitive abilities that are
relevant to the identification of a learning disability
• Helps teams meet the requirement for a comprehensive
evaluation
• Allows for differential diagnosis
• May guide more effective interventions than SPL alone
• Can explain what functions can be remediated versus
what functions require accommodations
• May provide more convincing information in court cases
that end in litigation (Feifer & Della Toffalo, 2007)
Advantages of PSW continued
• PSW helps teachers, parents and students know
why an academic problem exists.
• It helps them know why a student does not
respond to intervention.
• This information can be emotionally as well as
educationally relevant. Suhr (2008)
Suhr (2008) writes,
Identification of (children’s) overall pattern of cognitive strengths and weaknesses
is in itself therapeutic, especially when coupled with exploration of their feelings
about their particular information processing weaknesses…and in my clinical
experience has been crucial to the academic and psychological health of those
whom I assessed.
Standard 3 – Exclusion Factors
The third standard by which the EC determines the
presence of a specific learning disability is the
assurance that the student’s underachievement is
not primarily the result of any of the following:
• A visual, hearing, or motor disability;
• Intellectual disability;
• Behavioral/emotional disorder;
• Cultural factors;
• Environmental or economic disadvantage; or
• Limited English proficiency.
Considerations for Validating Exclusion Factors
Factor or Condition
Screening Procedure
Further Comprehensive Assessment
Options
Vision
Check vision records
Optometric/ophthalmology exam
Hearing
Check hearing records
Audiological exam
Motor
Check school health
records
Medical exam
Intellectual Disability
Review school records
Cognitive assessment and adaptive
behavior tests
Emotional/
Behavior disorder
Behavior checklists
Behavior rating scales, other behavioral
assessments
Cultural factors
Assess cultural status
Family interview
Environmental or
economic disadvantage
School records
Social worker interview with family (e.g.,
abuse, poor nutrition, lack of sleep, foster
care placement, parent incarceration)
Limited English
proficiency
Home language screening
Primary language assessment
Considerations for Validating
Underachievement
 Appropriate instruction in reading,
written expression and mathematics
 Student’s primary language
 Limited English proficiency
 Environmental and cultural factors
 Excessive absences and patterns of
attendance
 Interruptions in schooling
Documentation
• Documentation requirements include but are not
limited to:
– a chronology of the student’s educational history;
– progress monitoring data;
– specific documentation of the nature and intensity of
general classroom instruction;
– comprehensive documentation of the nature,
frequency and duration of multi-leveled instruction
results;
– additional achievement/performance data; and
– formal evaluation reports.
SLD Team Report
• Includes all areas in which a SLD may be manifested
(e.g., reading, mathematics, written expression)
• Includes IDEA requirements
• Is completed when a student is suspected of having a
SLD
• Accompanies the Eligibility Committee Report
• An electronic version of the SLD Team Report is
available on the Office of Special Programs website at
http://wvde.state.wv.us/specialeducationcompliance/re
sources.html.
Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)
Previous
Eligibility Standards:
Revision
Eligibility Standards:
• Standard 1-Level of Learning
• Standard 2-Rate of Learning
• Standard 3-Exclusion Factors
• Standard 1-Level of Learning (no
change)
• Standard 2-Rate of Learning or
Pattern of Strengths and
Weaknesses
• Standard 3-Exclusion Factors (no
change)
• Pattern of Strengths and
Weaknesses (optional)
Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)
Previous
Revision
•
•
Standard 2-Rate of Learning
Eligibility Criteria
The second element in identifying a student with a
specific learning disability is whether the student has
made sufficient progress to meet age or state-approved
grade-level standards in one of the areas identified in
Standard 1 in response to carefully planned and explicitly
delivered instruction. The data used to determine if this
standard has been met are developed through ongoing
progress monitoring of the student’s performance during
an intervention period.
This standard is met when the student’s learning rate or
growth toward target skills is substantially below gradelevel peers and, based on progress monitoring data (i.e.,
charting), a reasonable rate of progress cannot be
projected even when the student is provided
supplemental intervention instruction of reasonable
intensity and duration.
Standard 2-Rate of Learning or
Pattern of Strengths and
Weaknesses
The second element in identifying a student with a
specific learning disability may be met by
determining insufficient rate of learning or a pattern
of strengths and weaknesses in cognitive and
academic abilities.
Rate of Learning
The data gathered through ongoing progress
monitoring of the student’s performance during an
intervention period is used to determine if rate of
learning has been met.
Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)
Previous
Revision
•
•
Standard 2-Rate of Learning
Eligibility Criteria (continued)
This standard is met when the student’s learning rate
or growth toward target skills is substantially below
grade-level peers and, based on progress monitoring
data (i.e., charting), a reasonable rate of progress
cannot be projected even when the student is
provided supplemental intervention instruction of
reasonable intensity and duration.
Standard 2-Rate of Learning or Pattern of
Strengths and Weaknesses Eligibility
Criteria (continued)
This standard is met when the student’s learning rate or
growth toward target skills is substantially below grade-level
peers and, based on progress monitoring data (i.e., charting),
a reasonable rate of progress cannot be projected even when
the student is provided supplemental intervention instruction
of reasonable intensity and duration.
Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses
In addition to not achieving adequately on age or Stateapproved grade-level achievement standards, a specific
learning disability may be confirmed if the student exhibits a
pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance,
achievement, or both, relative to age, State-approved gradelevel standards, or intellectual development, that is
determined by the EC to be relevant to the identification of a
specific learning disability, using appropriate assessments.
Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)
Previous
Revision
• Rate of Learning
Documentation:
• Rate of Learning
Documentation includes:
•
•
•
Progress monitoring data collected before,
during and after the provision of at least one
nine weeks of Targeted instruction and one nine
weeks of Intensive instruction; and
Records indicating specific instruction provided,
including frequency and duration (e.g.,
instructional plan, WVEIS on the Web
Intervention Tab, daily lesson plan).
•
Progress monitoring data collected before,
during and after the provision of Targeted
instruction and Intensive instruction (suggested
minimum nine week period of each); and
Records indicating specific instruction provided,
including frequency and duration (e.g.,
instructional plan, WVEIS on the Web
Intervention Tab, daily lesson plan).
Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD)
The passing of HB 4608 prompted the following changes:
• To include a description of Dyslexia and Dyscalculia as
alternative terms that may be used for Specific Learning
Disability when discussing Reading/Language and Math
disabilities.
• To ensure all students receive necessary and appropriate
screenings and early assessments for specific learning
disabilities.
• To provide information and education to parents regarding
specific learning disabilities including dyslexia and
dyscalculia and the services available to students.
Page
37-41
Chapter 4 – Eligibility
Sec.3.M. Eligibility criteria for Speech-Language Impairment revised to reflect
the DSM-5.
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
Definition
Previous
Revision
•
•
•
Definition: A speech/language
impairment means a speech/language
impairment such as stuttering,
impaired articulation, a language
impairment or a voice impairment that
adversely affects a student’s
educational performance. See
Appendix B for Documentation of
Adverse Effects on Educational
Performance for Students with
Speech/language Disorders.
•
•
•
•
IDEA Definition
•
Added the communication disorders definition as
defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders Fifth Addition (DSM-5)
Language:
form, function and use of a
conventional system of symbols in a rule-governed
manner for communication.
Speech: expressive production of sounds and
includes an individual’s articulation, fluency, voice
and resonance quality.
Communication includes any verbal or nonverbal
behavior that influences the behavior, ideas or
attitude of another individual.
Assessments
of
speech-language
and
communication abilities must take into account the
individuals cultural and language context,
particularly for individuals growing up in bilingual
environments.
Standardized measures of language development
and of nonverbal intellectual capacity must be
relevant for the cultural and linguistic group.
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
LANGUAGE DISORDER CRITERIA
Previous
Revision
•
•
Changed word “Impairment” to
“Disorder”
•
Omitted the previous language and added
the following from DSM-5:
Language Disorder: Diagnostic Criteria
Language Impairment: A
language impairment is a disorder
or delay in the development of
comprehension and/or the uses of
spoken or written language and/or
other symbol systems. The
impairment may involve any one
or a combination of the following:
•
•
•
– Form (morphological and
syntactic systems);
– Content (semantic systems);
and/or
– Function (pragmatic systems).
Persistent difficulties in the acquisition and use of
language across modalities (i.e. spoken, written, sign
language , or other) due to deficits in comprehension
or production that include the following:
–
–
–
•
Reduced vocabulary (word knowledge and use).
Limited sentence structure (ability to put words and
word ending together to form sentences based on the
rules of grammar and morphology).
Impairments in discourse (ability to use vocabulary
and connect sentences to explain or describe a topic
or series of events or have a conversation).
Onset of symptoms is in the early developmental
period.
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
LANGUAGE CRITERIA
Previous
Revision
•
Eligibility Criteria for Language
Impairment
•
Changed to “Language Disorder “
•
An
eligibility
committee
will
determine that a student is eligible
for special education and/or related
services as a student who has a
language impairment when all of
the following criteria are met:
•
An
eligibility
committee
will
determine that a student is eligible
for special education and/or related
services as a student who has a
language
disorder
when
the
following criteria are met:
– Two or more procedures, at
least one of which yields a
standard score, are used to
assess receptive language
and/or expressive language.
– Two or more procedures, at
least one of which yields a
standard score, are used to
assess both expressive and
receptive modalities (change
language to align with DSM-5).
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
LANGUAGE CRITERIA
Previous
Language - A student with a language
impairment exhibits:
–
Language abilities significantly
below expected language
performance for the students'
chronological age and cognitive
stage of development; and
–
–
A language quotient (LQ) of at least
1.5 standard deviations (SD) below
the mean; or
A severe deficit in receptive,
expressive or pragmatic language
which prevents functional
communication in school and/or
social situations as measured by
formal and/or informal diagnostic
procedures.
Revision
Language - A student with a language
disorder exhibits:
• Revised and Expanded Statement
–
Language abilities are substantially and
quantifiably below those expected for the
students’ chronological age and cognitive state of
development, resulting in functional limitation in
effective communication, social participation,
academic
achievement,
or
occupational
performance, individually or in any combination.
•
Expanded characteristics for reporting
and interpreting scores and revised
statement.
–
Norm referenced language tests which yield two
subtest or total test scores with the following
characteristics: 1.5 or more standard deviations
(SD)
below
the
mean,
a
language
quotient/standard score of 78 (mean of 100), a
stanine of two and/or a percentile of 8.
–
Non-standardized/informal
assessment
indicates that the student has difficulty
understanding and/or expressing ideas and/or
concepts to such a degree that it interferes with
the student’s social/educational progress.
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
LANGUAGE CRITERIA
Previous
Revision
•
•
Added the following criteria addressing
preschool students:
•
For a preschool child to be considered for
language intervention, the child’s language
should be determined to have a negative
impact on social-communicative
interactions and one or both of the following
characteristics must exist:
Policy 2419 language criteria did not
specifically address preschool.
–
Norm referenced language tests which yield
two subtest or total test scores with the
following characteristics: 1.5 or more
standard deviations below the mean, a
language quotient/standard score of 78
(mean of 100), a stanine of two and/or a
percentile of 8.
–
Non-standardized/informal assessment
indicates that the student has difficulty
understanding and/or expressing ideas
and/or concepts to such a degree that it
interferes with the student’s
social/educational progress.
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
LANGUAGE CRITERIA
Previous
Revisions
•
•
Repeated the “The student’s disability
adversely affects educational performance”
statement.
•
Expanded language to clarify the difference
between primary disability and related
service.
– A communication disorder is not
considered the primary disability when
the symptoms are attributable to
hearing or other impairments that are
more appropriately defined under
another eligibility category.
– A
communication
disorder
is
considered a related service when
required to assist an eligible student
with an exceptionality to benefit from
special education.
•
The student’s disability adversely affects
educational performance. See Appendix B
for Documentation of Adverse Effects on
Educational Performance for Students with
Speech/Language Disorders.
The student needs special education.
(Speech/language therapy can be special
education or a related service.)
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
Speech Sound CRITERIA
Previous
Revision
•
•
This section was omitted and replaced with
a new section aligning with DSM-5.
•
“Speech Sound Disorder” replaced
“Speech Impairment”
•
Speech Sound Disorder
(Articulation/Phonology) :
Diagnostic Criteria
Speech Impairment: Speech Impairments include
articulation/phonology disorders, voice disorders, or
fluency disorders. The following eligibility criteria
and minimum assessment procedures have been
established for all three types of speech
impairments.
•
Definition for Articulation/Phonology
Disorder:
•
Articulation disorders are incorrect productions of
speech sounds including omissions, distortions,
substitutions, and/or additions that may:
1)
2)
3)
4)
•
Interfere with communication;
Draw unfavorable attention to the speaker;
Adversely affect the speaker or listener; or
Are inappropriate to the age of the speaker.
–
Persistent difficulty with speech sound production that
interferes with speech intelligibility or prevents verbal
communication of messages.
–
The difficulties cause limitations in effective
communication that interfere with social participation,
academic achievement, or occupational performance,
individually or in any combination.
–
Onset of symptoms is in the early developmental
period.
Phonology disorders are errors involving phonemes, sound
patterns and the rules governing their combinations that may:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Interfere with communication;
Draw unfavorable attention to the speaker;
Adversely affect the speaker or listener; or
Are inappropriate to the age of the speaker.
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
Speech Sound CRITERIA
Previous
Revision
•
•
An eligibility committee will determine that a
student is eligible for special education and
related services as a student who has an
articulation/phonology disorder (speech
impairment) when all of the following criteria
are met:
–
At least two procedures are used to
assess the student, one of which is a
standardized measure.
– Application of developmental norms
from diagnostic tests verifies that
speech sounds may not develop without
intervention.
– The student’s disability adversely affects
educational performance.
– The student needs special education.
(Speech/language therapy can be
special education or a related service.)
•
•
An eligibility committee will determine that a student is
eligible for special education and/or related services as a
student who has an articulation/phonology disorder when
the following criteria are met:
– “All” omitted from statement.
At least two procedures are used to assess the student,
one of which is a standardized measure.
– Language was omitted and replaced with
strengthened, specific
criteria to reflect age
appropriate placements in speech therapy.
For a student to be considered for articulation/phonology
intervention the student’s speech should be determined to
have a negative impact on academic, social and/or
vocational functioning, and one of the following
characteristics exists:
– Two or more phonemic errors not expected at the
student’s current age or developmental level are
observed during direct testing and/or conversational
speech;
– Two or more phonological processes not expected
at the student’s current age or developmental level
are observed during direct testing and/or in
conversational speech;
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
Speech Sound CRITERIA
Previous
• Preschool criteria not
specifically addressed.
Revision
•
Criteria for preschool was addressed.
•
For a preschool student to be considered for
articulation/phonology therapy the student’s
speech should be determined to have a negative
impact on social-communicative interactions and
one of the following characteristics exists:
–
Multiple phonemic errors that significantly
reduce the student’s speech intelligibility and
are not expected at the student’s current age or
developmental level are observed during direct
testing and/or conversational speech.
–
Two or more phonological processes that
significantly reduce the student’s speech
intelligibility and are not expected at the
student’s current age or developmental level are
observed during direct testing and/or in
conversational speech;
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
Speech Sound CRITERIA
Previous
Revision
•
The student needs special
education. (Speech/language
therapy can be special education
or a related service.)
•
The student’s disability adversely
effects educational performance.
(Retained Statement)
•
•
•
The student needs special
education. (Retained Statement)
.
Application of developmental norms from
diagnostic tests verifies that speech sounds
may not develop without intervention. (See
Articulation Development Chart in Appendix)
–
Added Articulation Developmental Chart in
Appendix
Expanded language to clarify the difference
between primary disability and related service.
–
A communication disorder is considered
a related service when required to assist
an eligible student with an exceptionality
to benefit from special education.
–
A communication disorder is not
considered the primary disability when
the symptoms are attributable to hearing
or other impairments that are more
appropriately defined under another
eligibility category.
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
Fluency Disorder
Previous
Revision
•
•
Previous language omitted and aligned
with DSM-5
•
Childhood-Onset Fluency Disorder
(Stuttering): Diagnostic Criteria:
•
Disturbances in the normal fluency and time patterning of
speech that are inappropriate for the individual’s age and
language skills, persist overtime and are characterized by
frequent and marked occurrences of one (or more) of the
following:
•
•
Fluency Disorder: A fluency disorder
consists of stoppages in the flow of speech
that are abnormally frequent and/or
abnormally long. The stoppages usually take
the form of repetitions of sounds, syllables,
or single syllable words; prolongations of
sounds; or blockages of airflow and/or
voicing in speech.
A fluency disorder exists when an abnormal
rate of speaking, speech, interruptions,
repetitions, prolongations, blockages of
airflow and/or voicing interferes with
effective communication.
A fluency disorder does not exist when
developmental dysfluencies are part of
normal speech development and do not
interfere with educational or developmental
performance.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
•
•
Sound and syllable repetitions.
Sound prolongations of consonants as well as vowels.
Broken words (e.g. pauses within a word).
Audible or silent blocking (filled or unfilled pauses in
speech).
Circumlocutions (word substitutions to avoid problematic
words).
Words produced with an excess of physical tension.
Monosyllabic whole-word repetitions.
The disorder causes anxiety about speaking or limitations
in effective communication, social participation, or
academic or occupational performance, individually or in
any combination.
The onset of symptoms is in the early developmental
period.
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
Fluency Disorder
Previous
Revision
•
Eligibility Criteria for Fluency Disorder:
•
•
•
An eligibility committee will determine that an
individual is eligible for special education and/or
related services as a student who has a fluency
disorder (speech impairment) when all of the
following criteria are met:
The student has a fluency rating of moderate or
severe on the Fluency Communication Rating Scale
for students age three through twenty-one years.
•
•
The student’s disability adversely affects
educational performance.(Retained this statement)
•
The student needs special education.
(Speech/language therapy can be special education
or a related service.) (Retained)
Eligibility Criteria for Fluency Disorder:
An eligibility committee will determine that an
individual is eligible for special education
and/or related services as a student who has a
fluency disorder when the following criteria are
met:
–
–
•
Omit the word “all””
The student has a fluency rating of moderate or
severe on the Fluency Communication Rating
Scale (see Appendix for Fluency Rating Scale
and Guidelines for Stuttering Services )
Expanded language to clarify the difference
between primary disability and related service.
–
–
A communication disorder is considered a related
service when required to assist an eligible student
with an exceptionality to benefit from special
education.
A communication disorder is not considered the
primary disability when the symptoms are attributable
to hearing or other impairments that are more
appropriately defined under another eligibility
category.
Social (Pragmatic) Communication
Disorder (SCD): New Section
•
SCD: An impairment of pragmatics diagnosed based on difficulty in
the social uses of verbal and nonverbal communication in naturalistic
contexts.
•
New diagnosis in the DSM-5
– Will more accurately recognize individuals who have significant problems
using verbal and nonverbal communication for social purposes,
– Increase ability to communicate, participate socially, maintain social
relations or otherwise preform academically or occupationally.
•
Most common associated feature of social pragmatic communication
disorders is language impairments
– Characterized by history of delay in reaching language milestones
– Structural language problems
Social (Pragmatic) Communication
Disorder: Diagnostic Criteria
•
Persistent difficulties in the social use of verbal and nonverbal communication
as manifested by all of the following:
–
–
–
–
Deficits in using communication for social purposes, such as greeting and sharing information,
in a manner that is appropriate for social context.
Impairment of the ability to change communication to match context or the needs of the
listener, such as speaking differently in a classroom than on a playground, talking differently to
a child than to an adult, and avoiding use of overly formal language.
Difficulties following rules for conversation and storytelling, such as taking turns in
conversation, rephrasing when misunderstood, and knowing how to use verbal and nonverbal
signals to regulate interaction.
Difficulties understanding what is not explicitly stated (e.g., making inferences) and nonliteral or
ambiguous meaning of language (e.g., idioms, humor, metaphors, multiple meanings that
depend on the context for interpretation).
•
Onset of symptoms may occur in the early developmental period but deficits may not
fully manifest until social communication demands exceed limited capacities.
•
Symptoms not attributable to another medical or neurological condition or to low
abilities in the domains of word structure and grammar, and are not better explained by
autism disorders, intellectual disability, global developmental delay, or another mental
disorder.
Social (Pragmatic) Communication
Disorder: Eligibility Criteria
•
An eligibility committee will determine that a student is eligible for special education
and/or related services as a student who has a Social (Pragmatic) Communication
Disorder based on the following:
–
Assessment measures that include norm referenced tests, multiple observations,
checklists and structured tasks.
– Assessment procedures that are contextually based and involve multiple settings
and communication partners.
– Assessment results indicate deficits in functional limitations in effective
communication, social participation, social relationships, academic achievement,
and/or occupational performance, individually or in combination.
•
•
•
The student’s disability adversely affects educational performance.
The student needs special education.
Social pragmatic communication disorder cannot be diagnosed in the presence of
restricted repetitive behaviors, interests, and other activities related to the diagnosis of
Autism.
SPEECH-LANGUAGE IMPAIRMENT
Special Considerations
Current
Revision
•
•
•
Lack of discrepancy between cognitive
level
(i.e.,
mental
age)
and
communication
performance
(i.e.,
language age) shall not be the sole factor
to determine a severely speech and
language disordered student's eligibility
for services. Other factors that must be
considered are informal evaluation
results, physical ability, educational and
therapy history.
When verbal communication is not an
effective means of communication for the
student, the student must be evaluated to
determine the need for an alternative
means of communication, such as an
augmentative communication device.
Added language to more clearly define
–
•
Cognitive referencing refers to the practice of finding
students not eligible for services when their language
skills are deemed to be commensurate with their
cognitive abilities. IDEA does not require a significant
discrepancy
between
intellectual
ability
and
achievement for a student to be deemed eligible for
speech language services. Lack of discrepancy
between cognitive level (i.e., mental age) and
communication performance (i.e., language age) shall
not be the sole factor when determining eligibility for a
severely speech and language disordered student.
Other factors that must be considered are informal
evaluation results, physical ability, and educational and
therapy history.
When verbal communication is not an effective means of
communication for the student, the student must receive
an Augmentative/Alternative Communication Evaluation
to determine the need for an alternative means of
communication. All available means of communicating
within the student’s ability level must be considered.
This may include verbal, manual, pictorial or electronic
modes of communicating.
Page
43
44
46
47
47-48
48
50
51
58
59
Chapter 5 – Individualized Education Programs
Introduction. Added Standards-Based Individualized Education Program (SB-IEP).
Sec.1.C.6. Defined ten school days as number of days IEP Team has to conduct
manifestation determination.
Sec.1.E. Added accommodations to clarify determinations made in IEPT meeting.
Sec.2 Added online to clarify WVIEP. Removed reference to special education
forms/templates.
Sec.2.C. Reordered and added 8. transition services and 9. need for accessible instructional
materials (AIM) to Considerations.
Sec.2.D.2. Removed benchmarks to clarify objectives.
Sec.2.G.1. Clarified difference between accommodations and modifications.
Sec.2.G.3. Aligned related services to IDEA. (IDEA 2004)
Sec.2.M. Adds further definition of general educator to include teachers of music, musical
education, art and driver education. Requires general education teachers not attending
IEPT meeting of students enrolled in their classes to read and sign a copy of the student’s
IEP. (HB 4384)
Sec.3.B. Further definition of IEP Amendment to clarify incorporation of the amendment
into the on-line IEP and require each service provider to read and sign a copy of the
student’s IEP. (HB 4384)
Policy 2419 has added a 9th consideration which addresses
students who struggle with print-based materials.
9. Is there evidence that indicates that the student cannot use typical printbased materials effectively due to a disability that impacts reading fluency
and/or access to print information?
If YES is selected,
directions will appear.
Yes
No
9. Is there evidence that indicates that the student cannot use typical printbased materials effectively due to a disability that impacts reading fluency
and/or access to print information?
If yes, consider which option best describes the student:
The student understands instructional content at grade level but is unable to read with
sufficient accuracy and fluency to support comprehension at the same rate as his/her
peers; or cannot physically manipulate the print medium; or due to blindness/low vision
cannot see standard print materials. If so, complete the verification form located under
Resources in the main menu and keep in the student file.
The student needs alternative materials and modified content in accessible formats.
If so, click here for informational resources.
Districts have the opportunity and responsibility to provide learning materials that are
accessible to all students. Refer to the AIM Guidance Document for further information.
(Note: If additional time is needed to explore the decision making process, the IEP may need to
be amended to address this issue.)
Supports for students who cannot effectively use print-based materials should be addressed in
the present level statement and documented where appropriate within the IEP (e.g. conditions
of the goal, supplemental services, statewide testing accommodations.)
Student Search
Authorized List
IEP Snapshot
Student Information
ESY Determination
IEP Considerations
+ Assessment Results
+ IEP Transition Planning
+ Present Levels
Standard Type
+ Goal Areas
+ IEP Services
+ Statewide Testing
+ IEP Placement
Prior Written Notice
Amendments
+ Finalize Process
+ IEP Printing
+ Mastery/Progress
+ Utilities
+ Resources
Logout
oYes oNo
oYes oNo
oYes oNo
Standard Type with 3
questions
HB 4384 General Educator IEP Review
HB 4384 General Educator IEP Review
Student ID
Student
Name
IEP
Needs
Read
Password
Most recent
finalized IEP
Confirmation Button
***********
9981532642
Doe, John
Yes
ty736W73k2
1.Copy the password
2. Click here to paste
password and read IEP
I confirm that I
have read and understand the IEP
9934213113
Smith, Larry
Yes
Lk334209s
1.Copy the password
2. Click here to paste
password and read IEP
I confirm that I
have read and understand the IEP
9920654035
Timmons, Kim
Yes
si932ljh54
1.Copy the password
2. Click here to paste
password and read IEP
I confirm that I
have read and understand the IEP
HB 4384 General Educator IEP Review
Student ID
Student
Name
9981532642
Doe, John
9934213113
Smith, Larry
9920654035
Timmons, Kim
IEP
Needs
Read
Password
Most recent
finalized IEP
Confirmation Button
ty736W73k2
1.Copy the password
2. Click here to paste
password and read IEP
I confirm that I
have read and understand the IEP
Yes
Lk334209s
1.Copy the password
2. Click here to paste
password and read IEP
I confirm that I
have read and understand the IEP
Yes
si932ljh54
1.Copy the password
2. Click here to paste
password and read IEP
I confirm that I
have read and understand the IEP
HB 4384 General Educator IEP Review
Student ID
Student
Name
IEP
Needs
Read
9981532642
Doe, John
No
ty736W73k2
1.Copy the password
2. Click here to paste
password and read IEP
9934213113
Smith, Larry
Yes
Lk334209s
1.Copy the password
2. Click here to paste
password and read IEP
I confirm that I
have read and understand the IEP
9920654035
Timmons, Kim
Yes
si932ljh54
1.Copy the password
2. Click here to paste
password and read IEP
I confirm that I
have read and understand the IEP
Password
Most recent
finalized IEP
Confirmation Button
IEP has been read
Principal View
(Can send email reminders to staff prompting them to read IEPs that have not yet been read
and can also drill down to see specific student’s status as having been read on not.)
HB 4384 General Educator IEP Review
Teacher ID
Last Name
First Name
IEPs Still Need Read
1
993637373
Allen
Fred
NO
2
993572424
Bostic
Linda
NO
3
993624365
Burdette
Larry
YES
4
993621710
Garrett
Melissa
NO
5
994563839
Hunter
Harry
YES
6
993625376
Martin
Jack
NO
7
994635424
Sumter
Harold
NO
8
994637251
Turner
Nathan
YES
Send reminder Email to
ALL teachers Needing
to read IEP
Notify
Send reminder
email
Send reminder
email
Send reminder
email
District Administrative View - page 1
HB 4384 General Educator IEP Review
District Administrative View - page 2
(Cannot send email reminders, but can drill down to see
which student IEPs have and have not been read.)
HB 4384 General Educator IEP Review
Teacher ID
Last Name
First Name
IEPs Still Need Read
1
993637373
Allen
Fred
NO
2
993572424
Bostic
Linda
NO
3
993624365
Burdette
Larry
YES
4
993621710
Garrett
Melissa
NO
5
994563839
Hunter
Harry
YES
6
993625376
Martin
Jack
NO
7
994635424
Sumter
Harold
NO
8
994637251
Turner
Nathan
YES
Page
Chapter 6 – Administration of Services
69
Sec.4.B. Moved waiver request to end of Sec.4.B and clarified.
66
Sec.4.B. Added English Language Arts.
68
Sec.4.B. Aligns Level I, II and III Service Needs with Policy 2510’s grade spans. (Policy 2510)
68
Sec.4.B. Aligns Level I and II Service Needs in early Learning Programs Grades K-5.
Page
Chapter 7 – Discipline
70-71
70
71
71
71
Changes were made to Chapter 7 to align with the requirements and language in IDEA.
Introduction clarifies discipline requirements for all students and those that apply to SWDs.
(IDEA 2004)
Protected students moved from the end of the chapter to the beginning so as to more clearly
define which students are and are not protected under these procedures.
Disciplinary Removals define which days are considered removals under the discipline
procedures.
Disciplinary Change of Placement added the requirement to document the process on the
Disciplinary Action Review Form (DARF) and qualified provision of services when student
removed.
Sec.1. Reflects Policy 4373: Expected Behaviors in Safe and Supportive Schools. (Policy 4373)
72
Sec.2.A.1. Added functional behavior assessment (FBA) conducted unless one was conducted
before the behavior that resulted in a change of placement.
72-73
Sec.2.B.1. Defined disciplinary procedures when conduct not a manifestation of student’s
disability.
Sec.2.C. Removal to interim alternative education setting language aligned to IDEA.
73
Page
Chapter 9 – General Supervision and Accountability For Performance and Compliance
87
Sec.2.A. Revised CSP title and SPP federal changes.
91-93
Sec.3.A.1. Added speech-language pathologists, speech-language pathology assistants must
complete eighteen (18) hours of professional development. Twelve (12) of these hours must be
related directly to their professional growth. The WVDE is responsible for providing twelve
(12) hours each year and the district is responsible for documenting attendance. (West Virginia
Legislative Sunrise Evaluation Overview)
Sec.3.A.2. Added school psychologists must complete twelve (12) hours of professional
development related directly to professional growth provided by WVDE in collaboration with
professional state association.
Sec.3.A.3. Added professional development responsibilities of WVDE and District for sign
support specialists and educational sign language interpreters.
Sec.3.B. Added interveners.
Chapter 9: Sign Support Specialist
and Educational Interpreters
WVDE Responsibility
The WVDE is required to approve a waiver for sign support
specialist serving in lieu of an educational sign language
interpreter after two years. This waiver is verification of a
professional development plan when an educational sign
language interpreter is unavailable.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Appropriate Job Description (Guidelines: page 47)
PD Plan and verification with waiver request
Suggested template available
Submit to Pat Homberg
August 23 & 24 Training
Disconnects: Certified Personnel List, Credentials and
job titles (most are listed as Braille Specialists)
Chapter 9: Sign Support Specialist
and Educational Interpreters
District Responsibility
The cost of certification renewal and satisfying the requirements of
the West Virginia Registry of Interpreters is paid in full by the
employer for any service person who is:
– Educational sign language interpreter I or II
•
–
Educational sign language interpreter I
•
–
Testing, training, continuing education to advance to II
Sign Support Specialist
•
•
Testing, training, continuing education to renew or maintain
Testing, training, continuing education to advance to interpreter I or
II
Anticipated costs in addition to training
–
EIPA
•
•
–
Performance: $310
Written: $200
RID membership necessary for WV Registry
Chapter 9: Intervener
An intervener is a specially trained person who works
consistently one-to-one with a student who is deafblind. The
intervener facilitates access to the environmental information
that is usually gained through vision and hearing but which is
incomplete to the child who is deafblind. The intervener helps
the student gather information, learn concepts and skills, and
develop communication and language.
• Established position for children with deafblindness
• National Intervener Credentials – WV has 2 interveners
• WV SenseAbilities initiative – 2 more trained per year
– Intervener training:
• Utah State University online university program (WV certified
coaches)
• Open Hands Open Access online modules
– Parents and teacher trainings
– IEP Decision Making Tool
SLP Professional Development
Education Requirements
•
1992: WV Board of Examiners for Speech-Language Pathology and
Audiology was established to license speech-language pathologists (SLPs)
working in WV.
– SLPs employed by school districts or RESAs were exempt from licensure from the
WV Board of Examiners based on the following:
• WV State Superintendent has authority to administer the state’s program for
licensure of speech professionals working in the schools.
• IDEA requires the WVDE to exercise general supervision for ensuring students
with disabilities are provided a free appropriate public education (FAPE).
•
2012: WV Board of Examiners proposed legislation that required SLPs
working in the schools to be licensed by the Board and requested a review of
the licensure requirements.
SLP Professional Development
Education Requirements
•
Prior to 2013 Session, the WV Legislative Auditor Performance & Research Division
(PERD) conducted a review and recommended the following:
– WVDE be given 2 years to improve the continuing education requirements for speech
professionals employed in the schools.
– Continuing education should reflect topics specific to the field of speech pathology and
include a certain number of hours to be completed.
– The report would be updated by December 2014 to determine if the WVDE complied
with the recommendations.
•
Policy 2419 was revised to include the continuing education requirement of 12 hours
specific to the field of speech-language pathology.
•
The report was updated in August 2014 to determine if the WVDE complied with the
recommendations.
– The WVDE met all recommendations included in the PERD report.
– PERD recommended the WV Code be amended to clearly identify SLPs working in
the schools as being “exempt” from licensure.
SLP Professional Development
Education Requirements
•
•
.
•
All WV education personnel must complete eighteen (18) hours of professional development
annually to maintain employment as specified in West Virginia Code §126-73-6.1.c.6.
•
At least twelve (12) of the hours for SLPs and speech-language pathology assistants (SLPAs)
must relate directly to their professional growth and development. (NEW REQUIREMENT)
•
Specific topics should include: augmentative/alternative communication; phonology; articulation;
receptive/expressive language; swallowing; fluency; voice disorders; cognitive/social aspects of
communication; hearing (impact on speech and language); assessment of students with speechlanguage disorders and other topics related to the practice of speech-language pathology.
WVDE Responsibility
–
–
•
POLICY 2419 REVISIONS
The WVDE is required to provide twelve (12) hours of professional development directly related to
speech-language pathologists’ professional growth and development.
Professional development information shall be made available to the districts to facilitate registration .
District Responsibility
–
–
The district is accountable for documenting SLPs and SLPAs participation in twelve (12) hours of
professional development directly related to their professional growth and development and submit
documentation to the WVDE
District provided professional development must be submitted to the WVDE for prior approval.
SLP Professional Development
Education Requirements
• Professional Development Activities
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
“KIDSTRONG” CONFERENCE
CAMP GIZMO ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY CAMP
“CELEBRATING CONNECTIONS”
WVU GRADUATE CLASSES
WVU ONLINE MODULES (under development)
WVSHA Conference/Workshops
National Conferences
LEA/RESA WORKSHOPS (WVDE Approved)
• Information Available on WVDE/OSP Website
School Psychologists’ Professional
Development Education Requirements
• All WV education personnel must complete eighteen (18) hours of
professional development annually to maintain employment as
specified in West Virginia Code § 126-73-6-1.c.6.
• At least twelve (12) of the hours for school psychologists must relate
directly to their professional growth and development as specified by
the NASP-Approved Standards and Domains of Practice (Adopted
2010).
• Areas/Domains include data-based decision making and accountability;
consultation and collaboration; interventions and instructional support
to develop academic skills; interventions and mental health services to
develop social and life skills; school-wide practices to promote
learning; preventative and responsible services; family-schoolcommunity collaboration services; diversity in development and
learning; research and program evaluations; and legal, ethical and
professional practice.
School Psychologists’ Professional
Development Education Requirements
WVDE Responsibility
• The WVDE is required to provide twelve (12) hours of professional
development directly related to school psychologists’ professional
growth and development in collaboration with the professional
state association.
• Professional development information shall be made available to
districts to facilitate registration.
District Responsibility
• The district is accountable for documenting school psychologists’
participation in the twelve (12) hours of professional development
directly related to the school psychologists’ professional growth and
development.
• District provided professional development must be submitted to
the West Virginia Department of Education for approval.
School Psychologists’ Professional
Development Education Requirements
Professional Development Activities
• WVSPA and WVPA Conferences/Workshops
• National Conferences
• LEA/RESA Workshops (WVDE Approved)
• Online training modules and webinars (WVDE,
NASP, etc.)
Page
Chapter 10 – Procedural Safeguards
96
Sec.3.B. IEP Team and parent may agree to initiate services within fewer than
five (5) days.
99-100 Sec.7.B. Clarifies rates for independent educational evaluations based on
prevailing rates.
100-101 Sec.8.B. Redefines criteria for surrogate parent.
Page
Chapter 11 – Dispute Resolution
103
Added 1. Facilitated Individualized Education Program Team meeting and renumbered
Sections.
103-104 Sec.1. Added Facilitated Individualized Education Program Team Section to provide an
additional resolution process.
106
Sec.2.D. Defined that the district requests early resolution.
108
Sec.4.A. Defined burden of proof as the responsibility of the party seeking relief in a
due process complaint as a result of Supreme Court Case (Shaffer v Weast, 546 U.S.).
110-111
Sec.3.E. In Resolution Process either party may void the agreed to resolution to adjust
thirty-day period within three (3) business days of signing.
Facilitated IEP Team Meeting
 CADRE – National Center on Dispute Resolution in Special Education
 IEP Facilitation is not required by the IDEA
 States that have facilitated IEP programs have a lower rate of due process
complaints
 The facilitator does not advocate for either party but is familiar with
special education policies and practices.
 IEP Facilitation is on the continuum of dispute resolution practices that
start with prevention and informal interventions before moving into more
formal and court-involved procedures.
Facilitated IEP Team Meeting
 The facilitator helps the IEP Team members to focus on developing the IEP
for the student.
 The facilitated IEP Team meeting is a voluntary early dispute resolution
option.
 The IEP Team develops the IEP and the facilitator helps the team
complete the student’s IEP and solves a problem or reach an agreement to
the mutual satisfaction of the participants.
 The IEP Team Facilitator is not a member of the IEP Team.
Facilitated IEP Team Meeting
Request








Written request to the West Virginia Department of Education
Agreed to by both parties (LEA and Parent)
Two weeks prior to the scheduled IEP Team meeting
Submitted with original signature(s), facsimiles and e-mails will not be
accepted
WVDE has made a request form available but it is not required
The Facilitated IEP is not used to deny or delay a parent’/adult student’s
right to a hearing or any other rights under Part B of the Act
The Facilitated IEP is free to the parties
The Facilitated IEP Team meetings are scheduled in a timely manner and
adhere to all required timelines
Facilitated IEP Team Meeting
Facilitator
 The facilitator is qualified, trained and verified by the WVDE in facilitation
techniques.
 The IEP Facilitator is not an employee of the WVDE or of an LEA.
 The IEP Facilitator does not a personal or professional interest that
conflicts with the facilitator’s objectivity.
 The IEP Facilitator does not have a student enrolled in the district involved
in the Facilitated IEP Team meeting.
Page
Glossary
117
Added Accommodations.
117
Removed age span from Adolescent Education programs. (Policy 2510)
118
Changed name from Vocational Education to Career and Technical Education.
121
Renamed Early Learning Programs, removed age spans and inserted grade span Prek-five. (Policy 2510)
121
Renamed Educational Sign Language Interpreter. (Policy 5202)
121
Revised Eligible Students with Exceptionalities.
121
Revised Eligible Students with Disabilities.
122-123
Added Functional Vision Assessment.
124
Added Interveners.
124
Revised Interpreting Services.
125
Added Manifestation Determination
125
Removed age span from Middle Level Programs and inserted grade span six-eight. (Policy 2510)
125
Added Modifications.
125
Added Modified Diploma definition. (SB 209)
128
Added Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses.
129
Added English language arts and science to Program of Study.
131
Revised School Health Services.
132
Renamed and revised Sign Support Specialist. (HB 2470)
133
Added Speech-Language Pathology Assistant. (Policy 5202)
134
Added Standards-Based Individualized Education Program.
135
Removed Travel Training.
135
Added Universal Design for Learning.
Page
Appendix – Acronyms and Abbreviations
137
Removed Alternate Assessment.
137
Added AIM Accessible Instructional Materials.
137
Added APR Annual Performance Report.
137
Revised CASE Council of Administrators of Special Education.
137
Changed CIFMS to CSP Compliance System Procedures.
137
Removed GED.
138
Added OSP Office of Special Programs.
138
Revised PBS.
138
Added RDA Results-Driven Accountability.
138
Added RSP results System Procedures.
138
Added SLPA Speech-Language Pathology Assistant.
138
Added SSIP State Systemic Improvement Plan.
138
Added TASC Test Assessing Secondary Completion.
139
Added UDL Universal Design for Learning.
139
Removed WESTEST2.
140
Revised State Approved Test List For The Identification of Gifted Students in West Virginia.
145
Added Articulation Development Chart.
146
Revised Suggested guidelines for Stuttering Services.
146
Added Suggested guidelines for Stuttering Services for Preschool.
150
Added Discipline Flow Chart.
RESA Networking Lunch
GENERAL SUPERVISION






Targeted Technical Assistance and
Professional Development
Technical Assistance Linked to SPP
Targeted Technical Assistance
Professional Development
Regional Education Service Agencies
Technical Assistance Support Specialists
Technical Assistance Network (WVTAN)
2013 WESTEST 2 Math proficiency by grade:
all WV school districts
80
SWOD
70
SWD
Math proficiency rate
60
50
40
52.8
45.7
50.7
52.9
52.1
48.1
47.4
47.1
7.8
9.0
8.1
49.2
49.8
30
20
24.3
22.1
15.3
10
12.3
0
3
4
5
6
10.4
7
8
Grade level
9
10
6.1
11
13.8
All grades
2013 WESTEST 2 Math proficiency by grade
RESA: ___
80
70
SWOD
SWD
48.1
49.4
Math proficiency rate
60
50
40
42.4
46.8
45.6
48.9
45.8
45.4
41.5
46.1
30
24.3
20
10
13.6
13.3
11.0
0
3
4
5
6
7.9
10.6
7
8
Grade level
6.6
9
10.0
10
4.6
11
11.7
All grades
2013 WESTEST 2 RLA proficiency by grade:
all WV school districts
80
SWOD
70
SWD
RLA proficiency rate
60
58.8
50
40
49.5
52.6
56.3
56.0
58.1
8.2
9.6
56.6
47.3
51.9
54.2
30
20
10
19.5
16.7
9.6
0
3
4
5
10.1
6
9.7
7
8
Grade level
9
7.6
5.6
10
11
11.4
All grades
2013 WESTEST 2 RLA proficiency by grade
RESA: ___
80
SWOD
70
SWD
RLA proficiency rate
60
50
40
45.9
47.4
51.4
51.7
52.3
54.5
6.7
6.2
7.1
7.2
52.3
48.4
49.7
8.8
7.7
9.2
10
11
44.2
30
20
10
13.4
14.1
0
3
4
9.2
5
6
7
8
Grade level
9
All grades
4 Year Graduation Rate (2012-2013)
All
100
SWD
90
80
Graduation rate
70
60
79.9
64.0
78.5
75.7
63.6
50
81.9
84.2
63.7
65.4
RESA 4
RESA 5
88.9
81.1
72.1
86.2
67.0
57.8
54.6
81.4
62.2
40
30
20
10
0
RESA 1
RESA 2
RESA 3
RESA 6
RESA 7
RESA 8
All WV
Counties
GENERAL SUPERVISION





Integrated Monitoring
Activities
Compliance and Results
Driven Monitoring of 57
LEAs
4 year Cycle Onsite
Focused Monitoring
Annual Desk Audit (ADA)
District Self-Assessment
(DSA)
Improvement, Correction,
Incentives and Sanctions






Findings of Noncompliance
Improvement Plan
Corrective Action Plan
(CAP)
On-Site Review
Continuous Compliance
Review (Prong 2)
Sanctions
Results Driven Accountability
Assuring Compliance
Improving Results
Office of Special Programs
WV Department of Education
August 20, 2014
Results and Compliance Monitoring
WV has revised the monitoring framework
to focus on the educational results and
functional outcomes for students with
disabilities and balancing those results
with the compliance requirements of IDEA.
Office of Special Programs
Compliance/Results Coordinators
RESA 1- Sheila Paitsel & Vicki Mohnacky
RESA 2- Lorraine Ciambotti-Elswick, Kathy Knighton &
Jim Harris
RESA 3- Mike Knighton & Betsy Peterson
RESA 4- Debbie Harless & (vacant)
RESA 5- Anne Monterosso & Mary Pat Farrell
RESA 6- Anne Monterosso & Valerie Wilson
RESA 7- Matt Dotson, Ginger Huffman & JoDonna Burdoff
RESA 8- (vacant) & Annette Carey
RESULTS
Results 2020
• OSEP is implementing a revised accountability
framework designed to more directly support states in
improving results for infants, toddlers, children and
youth with disabilities, and their families.
• Section 616(a)(2) of the IDEA requires that the primary
focus of IDEA monitoring be on improving educational
results and functional outcomes for children with
disabilities, and ensuring that states meet the IDEA
program requirements.
• Each state is required to develop and implement a
State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP).
Current SEA Initiatives
• Governor's Initiative – All students will read on
grade level by third grade
• ESEA Waiver Flexibility Monitoring
– Priority and Focus School Support
• OEPA visits
• OSP Results/Compliance Monitoring
• Teacher Evaluation System
• The State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP)
• A-F School Grading System (Fall 2015)
*All Initiatives focus on Results
WV Results
What does WV data indicate?
_ Graduation rate
– Test scores drop at the Middle School Level
– Reading continues to be a serious concern
– WV has 15.5 percent of students identified with
disabilities in comparison to 13.0 percent in the nation
– WV has a large amount of students with Intellectual
Disabilities and Speech/Language Impairments in
comparison to the nation
– WV has a large Low SES population
How Will WV Monitor Results?
How will we improve results?
– Drilling down into our data
– Looking at infrastructure within LEAs and individual
schools
– Developing a Student Identified Measurable Result
(SIMR)
– Developing a Theory of Action
– Developing a Plan
– Implementing the Plan
– Evaluating the Plan
Stakeholder Engagement
• We must leverage the knowledge and skills of
our partners.
The work is too complex and the outcomes are
too important!
211
LEA Activities
• Basic Data Display-provided by WVDE
• Discussion of Annual Determinations and Data
with Stakeholders (3 times a Year)
1. Discussion of Results & Develop a Plan
2. Review Plan/Adjust Plan
3. Review Results Develop Improvement
Plans for ADA submission
LEA Results Activities
• LEAs will use Drill Down Questions provided in
the Self-Assessment Tool Book for guided
discussion
• Analyze infrastructure using guided questions
• Choose a Student Identified Measurable
Result (SIMR)-based on your analysis
• Develop a Theory of Action Plan
Focus for Improvement Worksheet
Guiding questions to
help a LEA summarize
results from data and
infrastructure analysis
and then to determine if
a primary concern leads
to a meaningful and
appropriate focus for
improvement supported
by data.
214
Theory of Action
What will we do about it?
Data Analysis
•
Infrastructure Analysis
In-depth Analysis of Quantitative
and Qualitative Data Related to
Primary Concern Area to Confirm
Focus Area for Improvement
Why is it
happening?
•
In-depth Analysis of Quantitative
and Qualitative Data Related to
Primary Concern Area to Confirm
Focus Area for Improvement
Focus for Improvement
Infrastructure Analysis
Data Analysis
•
Broad Analysis of Quantitative
and Qualitative Data to Identify
Areas of Low and High
Performance
What is the
problem?
•
Broad Analysis of Quantitative
and Qualitative Data to Identify
Systemic Issues Impacting
Performance
215
What is a Theory of Action?
Through a series of if-then statements the
Theory of Action describes the general
improvement strategies and the outcomes
expected.
Develop a Theory of Action
Using IF, THEN statements:
- Make the connection between what you are doing
(Improvement Strategy) and what you expect to
happen (Results)
- Focus on how and why the program will produce the
change, using “if-then” statements to generate a
logical explanation (Rationale) and reveal strategies
and assumptions about how resources and activities
are used.
If we do this
Then this will
happen.
217
If we do this
Then this will
happen.
For example:
• IF we have professional learning communities, THEN
we will have a scheduled time for teachers/providers
to discuss their work and the work children and
youth produce.
• And IF teachers/providers share their work and the
results with each other, THEN they will be able to
learn from each other’s successes and draw upon the
expertise of their colleagues around common
challenges.
If we do this
Then this
will happen.
• And IF teachers/providers draw upon the expertise and
successes of their colleagues around common
challenges, THEN teachers will be able to incorporate
new and successful strategies into their practice with
support from their colleagues.
• And IF teachers/providers incorporate successful
strategies into their practice, THEN children and youth
will benefit from more effective teaching.
• AND THEN student learning will increase.
Theory of Action
Theory of Action is also the basis for your plan of
activities.
If we do this
Then this will
happen.
Create a Logic Model
• Next it will be helpful to develop a logic model
that shows the relationship between the
activities and the outcomes that the LEA expects
to achieve over a multi-year period.
– A logic model visually depicts a program’s
components so that planned activities align with
desired outcomes.
– Logic models diagram identified problems, root
causes and local conditions that facilitate concise and
clear communication, planning and evaluation, and
allow programs to critically analyze the progress they
are making toward their goals.
221
Create a Logic Model
Many people say a logic
model is
a road map.
222
Simplest form
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
OUTCOMES
Every day logic model –
Family Vacation
Family Members
Drive to state park
Budget
Set up camp
Car
Camping
Equipment
INPUTS
Cook, play, talk,
laugh, hike
OUTPUTS
Family members
learn about each
other; family
bonds; family has
a good time
OUTCOMES
Logical chain of connections showing
what the program is to accomplish
INPUTS
Program
investments
What we
invest
OUTPUTS
Activities
What
we do
Participation
Who we
reach
OUTCOMES
Short
Medium
Longterm
What results
225
Logic Model Template
Inputs
What
resources
will be used
to support
the project?
Activities
Outputs
What are
the main
things the
project will
do/provide?
How many
and what
sort of
observable/
tangible
results will
be
achieved?
Short-Term
Outcomes
What will
occur as a
direct result
of the
activities &
outputs?
(typically,
changes in
knowledge,
skills,
attitudes)
Mid-Term
Outcomes
What results
should follow
from the
initial
outcomes?
(typically
changes in
behavior,
policies,
practice)
Impact
What
results
should
follow from
the initial
outcomes?
(typically,
changes in
broader
conditions)
Evaluating the Implementation
•Logic Model helps with Evaluation
• Helps us match evaluation to the program
• Helps us know what and when to measure
• Are you interested in process and/or
outcomes?
• Helps us focus on key, important information
• Prioritize: Where will we spend our limited
evaluation resources?
• What do we really need to know?
227
Logic model and common types of evaluation
Needs/asset
assessment:
What are the
characteristics, needs,
priorities of target
population?
What are potential
barriers/facilitators?
What is most
appropriate to do?
Process evaluation:
How is program
implemented?
Are activities
delivered as
intended? Fidelity of
implementation?
Are participants being
reached as intended?
What are participant
reactions?
Outcome evaluation:
To what extent are
desired changes
occurring? Goals met?
Who is benefiting/not
benefiting? How?
What seems to work?
Not work?
What are unintended
outcomes?
Impact evaluation:
To what extent can
changes be attributed to
the program?
What are the net
effects?
What are final
consequences?
Is program worth
resources it costs?
228
Logic Model Credits
• Information on logic models was obtained
from the following sources
– University of Wisconsin-Extension’s Logic Model Resources:
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/evallogicmo
del.html
– W.K. Kellogg Foundation’s Logic Model Development Guide:
http://www.wkkf.org/~/media/475A9C21974D416C90877A
268DF38A15.ashx
229
Develop and Implement a Plan
• The LEA will:
– Strengthen LEA infrastructure to support
implementation of Results Improvement
Plan (RIP)
– Support schools in implementing evidencebased practices
– Develop an evaluation plan
230
Evaluate Progress and Revise Plan
• The LEA will:
– Conduct and review results of ongoing
evaluation
– Determine extent of progress
– Revise the plan as needed
231
COMPLIANCE
DOCUMENTS
• Compliance System Procedures Integrated
Monitoring Activities Manual
• Compliance System Procedures Integrated
Monitoring Activities Tool Book
Compliance Monitoring
• Compliance remains a part of the monitoring
system required by IDEA
• Compliance has improved in WV within the
past four year monitoring cycle
Four-Year Monitoring Cycle
2014-2015
Brooke
Jefferson
Pleasants
Nicholas
Webster
Jackson
Taylor
Wayne
Wetzel
Grant
Doddridge
OIEP
2015-2016
Barbour
Braxton
Calhoun
Clay
Hampshire
Lewis
Marshall
Mercer
Mingo
Monroe
Pendleton
Pocahontas
Roane
Tucker
2016-2017
Cabell
Fayette
Gilmer
Greenbrier
Hancock
Kanawha
McDowell
Mineral
Morgan
Ohio
Preston
Randolph
Wirt
Wood
Wyoming
2017-2018
Berkeley
Boone
Hardy
Harrison
Lincoln
Logan
Marion
Mason
Monongalia
Putnam
Raleigh
Ritchie
Summers
Tyler
Upshur
WVSDB
Compliance Monitoring
Review
Two Phases of Compliance Monitoring
Review:
1. Desk Review
2. On-site Review
Monitoring Activities
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Monitoring Communication
Desk Review
Entrance Conference
Central Office Review (4A/4B if applicable)
School Visits
Exit Conference
Prong 2 Monitoring (Six(6) Month Visit)
Desk Review
Desk Review Documentation:
1. WVEIS Caseload Reports
2. Certified special education list with
certification documentation, HQT
3. Special education bus schedules and school
start/stop times (bell to bell schedule)
4. Financial documents: Recent Single Audit
Report, equipment list, private school
consultation, LEA plan/budget (identify staff
paid through special education budget)
Entrance Conference
• LEA will present the Theory of Action Plan
• LEA will Discuss strengths, weaknesses and
support needed
• LEA will submit a copy of the plan to the
Monitoring Coordinator
School Visits
• Monitoring Team will visit Priority and Focus
Schools
• Monitoring Team will verify infrastructure and
analyze the school’s ability to scale-up to
improve results
School Visits: Service Verification
• The Service Verification checklist is used to
confirm students with disabilities schedules
match IEP service minutes
• Student files and corresponding
documentation verify all services are
implemented
School Visits: Service Verification
•
•
•
•
•
Student IEP service pages
WVEIS student schedules/secondary
WVEIS Condensed Master Schedules/Secondary
WVEIS Per Period class rosters/secondary
Elementary teacher schedules
1.
2.
3.
4.
student names
grade level
class start/end times,
subject taught
• All service provider schedules (student names,
start/end times of service)
Exit Conference
• The monitoring coordinator will provide an
overview of preliminary monitoring findings
and/or recommendations
• District may request follow-up technical
assistance
• Correction of Noncompliance and Prong 2
Review
Participants
• Superintendent
• Special Education Director
• RESA Special Education Director (Optional)
• Other personnel
• Monitoring Team
Secondary Transition
Indicator 13
• Secondary Transition Staff Development
• LEAs scheduled for Results and Compliance
Monitoring will use their results of the
Transition File Reviews for their Spring 2015
ADA
Resources
• Monitoring Manual
• Draft Monitoring Tool Book
GENERAL SUPERVISION
Effective Dispute Resolution





Facilitated IEPs
Mediation Process
State Complaint Process
Due Process Hearings
Early Resolutions
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
WV Policy 2419
Chapter 11
•
Facilitated IEP Team Meetings
• State Complaints
• Mediation
• Due Process Complaints
Office of Special Programs
2014-2015 Fall Conference
Authority
The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) require
the WVDE, Office of Special Programs
(OSP) to adopt and use procedures to
investigate and resolve complaints alleging
the Department, district or participating
agency has violated a provision (statute or
regulation) of the IDEA, Part B, EDGAR or
WV Code.
Dispute Resolution Options
1. Facilitated IEP Team Meetings
2. State Complaints
Early Resolution
3. Mediation
4. Due Process Complaints
Resolution Process
What is a Facilitated IEP
Team Meeting ?
Voluntary early resolution option utilizing an
impartial facilitator…
 To guide the IEP process during the
meeting
and
To assist with effective communication
between IEP Team members.
The IEP Facilitator is one who …
 Is an impartial third party.
 Has no stake in the IEP Team decisions.
 Provides assistance to the IEP Team
before a potential conflict develops.
Steps to Request a
Facilitated IEP Team Meeting
1. District or parent/adult student must submit
a written request to the WVDE-OSP.
2. Request must contain an original signature.
3. Both parties must agree to use the
Facilitated IEP process.
4. Request must be received at least 2 weeks
prior to the scheduled IEP Team meeting.
What is a State Complaint ?
A state complaint is a signed written
statement by an individual or organization
which
• alleges the Department, district or
participating agency has violated a
requirement of the Federal or State law; and
• includes the facts upon which the
allegations(s) is based.
State Complaint Process
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
Receive and review the written letter of
complaint.
Issue Initial Letter, a written notification of the
determined allegations.
Complete the investigation.
Issue Letter of Findings, a written decision to the
district and the parent/adult student.
If needed, define procedures for implementation
of Corrective Actions.
Ensure Enforcement, specifically, that Corrective
Activities are completed within timelines.
Following the Steps …
I. Receive and review the written letter
of complaint
• Determine the sufficiency and , if
appropriate, the allegations.
• Notify the parties.
II. Issue Initial Letter
• State allegation(s) aligned with policy or code
• State timelines and extensions, if warranted
• Request additional information –
• Complainant and/or Parent
• District
• Identify options –
• Early Resolution
• Mediation
Preparing the
Complaint Response Form (CRF)
• Submit all requested documents, specified
to each allegation, sequenced in timeline.
• Submit any additional documentation,
including a description of who, what ,
when where and how these documents
apply to each allegation.
• If the district determines the allegation is
valid, correct the deficiency and provide
documentation of the corrective action.
III. Complete Investigation
• Review data submitted in CRF and data
from complainant and/or parent.
• Conduct telephone interviews with all
parties.
• Determine if violations have occurred,
including additional violations, if
warranted.
IV. Issue Letter of Findings (LOF)
State the issues:
• Identify investigative procedures.
• State Findings of Facts.
• State Conclusions and determine if violation
is found for each allegation.
• If needed, describe Corrective Activities
and timelines.
• Provide procedural guidance and technical
assistance.
V. Procedures for Implementation of
Corrective Activities
• Timelines are indicated for completion of
corrective activities
• Timeline extensions for completing
corrective activities may be allotted.
• Technical assistance for the completion of
corrective activities is provided per
request.
Early Resolution to State Complaints
• Either the district or parent/adult student
may request early resolution to a state
complaint by contacting the other and
voluntarily participate in the early
resolution option.
• If early resolution is reached, on any or all
allegations, the district must submit signed
Verification form.
What is Mediation ?
Mediation is an informal, non-adversarial,
confidential and voluntary process in which
an impartial third party, the mediator,
provides an opportunity to the parties
involved in a dispute to resolve their
differences and create a mutually
satisfactory solution.
Mediation Process
Mediation is …
o Voluntary on the part of both parties
o Conducted by an impartial facilitator
selected on a rotational basis
o Paid for by the Department
o Not used to deny or delay a parent’s right
to a due process hearing or any other
rights.
Mediation Process
• Mediation must be scheduled within 20
calendar days of the receipt of the written
request at a location convenient to the
parties.
• The parties must develop a written
agreement or documentation of nonagreement.
• Discussions within mediations are
confidential and cannot be used as evidence
in hearings.
Mediation Process
• The written agreement is signed by the
parties, is copied for the parties and is filed
with the Department.
• Parties who sign Mediation Agreements
are expected to implement them
voluntarily.
Benefits of Mediation
Parents and educators –
Develop final agreement;
Work together and control outcome;
Are provided a less costly option;
Resolve disagreements more quickly; and
Repair damaged relationships.
Due Process Complaint System
• A due process complaint may be filed to
resolve disputes on matters related
identification, evaluation, educational
placement or the provision of FAPE.
• A due process complaint will be presented
before an impartial hearing officer.
• For students parentally placed in private
schools due process applies to child find,
evaluation and reevaluation.
Due Process Complaint System
A written due process hearing request must
be signed by the parent or the parent’s
attorney or the district’s representative and
submitted to the Department and/or district
superintendent.
Due Process Complaint
When a complaint is received • Department assigns a due process hearing
officer, selected on a rotating basis.
• Hearing officer will issue a final decision
within 45 calendar days of the written
request.
• Location of the hearing to hear oral
arguments must be a time and location
reasonably convenient to parents/student.
Due Process Complaint
• Hearing officer presides over the hearing.
• Either party may be represented by an
attorney.
• Each party must disclose information 5
business days prior to a hearing.
• Parents decide if hearing will be “opened”
or “closed”.
• Parents determine if student will attend.
Due Process Hearing Decisions
• Hearing officer makes the determination of
sufficiency.
• Due process hearing decision is final.
• Due process hearing may be appealed
within 90 calendar days through civil
action.
Resolution Session
Within 15 days of receiving a due process
complaint from the parent the district must
convene a meeting with the parent/adult
student to discuss the due process
complaint and the facts that form the basis
of the complaint so the district has an
opportunity to resolve the dispute.
Resolution Session
• If a resolution is reached, the district and
the parent sign a legally binding
document, enforceable in state and federal
court or OSP complaint process.
• If the district does not resolve within 30
days of receipt of complaint, the hearing
may occur.
Resolution Session
Resolution meeting need not be held if both
parties agree:
1. in writing to waive the meeting; or
2. to participate in mediation.
In cases where the district is unable to obtain
participation of the parent after reasonable
efforts have been made and documented, the
district may, at the end of 30 day resolution
period, request hearing officer dismiss parent’s
due process complaint.
Dispute Resolution
Summary
1. Facilitated IEP Team Meetings
2. State Complaints
Early Resolution
3. Mediation
4. Due Process Complaints
Resolution Process
? Questions ?
Office of Special Programs
Monitoring & Compliance
Ghaski Browning, Assistant Director
glee@k12.wv.us
Lorraine Elswick, Coordinator
lciambot@k12.wv.us
Kathy Hudnall, Coordinator
khhudnal@k12.wv.us
304.558.2696
800.642.8541