Addressing Disproportionality: 2006 Summer Institute

1
Addressing Disproportionality2006 Summer
Institute

• Using IDEA's Exclusionary Factors in Special
  Education Evaluation Developing an IEP Team
  Toolkit

Craig A. Albers, PhD, NCSP University of
Wisconsin-Madison
John Humphries, NCSP WI Department of Public
Instruction
2
Legal Requirements for Exclusionary Factors

• PL 89-10 (1965) Elementary and Secondary
  Education Act
• Precursor to IDEA
• First mention of services and specialized
  instruction and equipment . . . for persons who
  are handicapped. . . ."
• No mention of eligibility or exclusionary
  factors more of a focus on low-income students
• PL 94-142 (1975)
• Education for all Handicapped Children Act of
  1975
• PL 98-199 (1983)
• Education of Handicapped Act Amendments of 1983
• The term does not include children who have
  learning problems which are primarily the result
  of visual, hearing, or motor handicaps, of mental
  retardation, of emotional disturbance or of
  environmental, cultural, or economic
  disadvantage. SLD

3
Current Legal Requirements for Exclusionary
Factors

• 300.306 (Determination of Eligibility) (b)
  Special rule for eligibility determination. A
  child must not be determined to be a child with a
  disability under this part--
• (1) If the determinant factor for that
  determination is--
• (i) Lack of appropriate instruction in reading,
  including the essential components of reading
  instruction (as defined in section 1208(3) of the
  ESEA)
• (ii) Lack of appropriate instruction in math or
• (iii) Limited English proficiency.

4
Current Legal Requirements for Exclusionary
Factors relating to SLD

• 300.309 Determining the existence of a specific
  learning disability
• (3) The group determines that its findings under
  paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section are not
  primarily the result of--
• (i) A visual, hearing, or motor disability
• (ii) Mental retardation
• (iii) Emotional disturbance
• (iv) Cultural factors
• (v) Environmental or economic disadvantage or
• (vi) Limited English proficiency.

5
Required Documentation

• 300.311 Specific documentation for the
  eligibility determination.
• (6) The determination of the group concerning the
  effects of a visual, hearing, or motor
  disability mental retardation emotional
  disturbance cultural factors environmental or
  economic disadvantage or limited English
  proficiency on the childs achievement level.

6
How are Exclusionary Factors used in Wisconsin?

• 2005 WSPA Survey of School Psychologists
• Over 200 respondents of the 941 licensed WI
  school psychologists (representing every CESA)
  revealed that a vast majority of IEP Teams (60)
  make little or no documentation of any
  exclusionary factors.
• Denying special educational services because of
  the exclusionary factors was even more rare (90
  of IEP Teams made fewer than 4 denials in the
  course of the 2003-2004 school year).

7
Time for a Quiz!

• Can a 3rd grade ELL student who is having
  difficulty learning to read and do mathematics be
  classified as having a Specific Learning
  Disability?
• YES OR NO?
• Can a 5th grade student who has missed
  approximately 27 of days since beginning
  kindergarten receive special education services?
• YES OR NO?

8
Orienting Questions

• Have you ever had a student where you felt that
  IF the child did not receive special education
  services, that he or she would not receive any
  services at all?
• Has the above rationale ever been mentioned in an
  eligibility team meeting?
• Have you ever been on a team that determined a
  child should not receive special education
  services because of the presence of exclusionary
  factors?

9
Orienting Questions

• Do you know of any student that was placed in
  special education so that he or she could receive
  services (implicitly or explicitly), even though
  you felt that he or she did not actually have a
  disability?

10
Foundations of Exclusionary Factors Toolkit

• THERE IS NO RIGHT WAY TO DO THE WRONG THING!

11
Beware of theCONFIRMATION BIAS!
12
Foundations of Exclusionary Factors Toolkit

• Our purpose is to ensure that special education
  exclusionary factors
• contribute to the appropriate level of services
  for all students, whether through
  federally-mandated special education services or
  through locally-based (i.e., school level)
  intervention services. We recognize the legal and
  ethical requirements for providing appropriate
  services to students with disabilities through
  special education placements however, we also
  recognize that the placement of students without
  disabilities in special education programs is
  detrimental to the student and is an
  inappropriate allocation of resources. We stress
  that exclusionary factors should serve as a
  motivator for the development of locally-based
  universal and selected intervention options to
  more appropriately provide services to students
  without disabilities but who still have
  educational and developmental needs.

13
Our purpose is to ensure that special education
exclusionary factors

• are not recognized as only being a special
  education issue. Instead, regular education also
  has to be connected to exclusionary factors, in
  recognition of regular education and special
  education services being provided along a
  continuum and not as distinct and separate
  entities.

14
Our purpose is to ensure that special education
exclusionary factors

• are considered with all students however, we
  also realize that the issue of exclusionary
  factors is directly connected to the issue of
  overrepresentation of racially, culturally,
  ethnic, economically disadvantaged, and language
  diverse students.

15
Our purpose is to ensure that special education
exclusionary factors

• are systematic, systemic, and data-driven.
  Consideration of exclusionary factors should
  occur at all levels throughout the school system
  and occur in a systematic way, and be based on
  data. Schools should strive to avoid being data
  rich and information poor.

16
Our purpose is to ensure that special education
exclusionary factors

• are recognized as being a double-edged sword.
  While exclusionary factors are intended to
  prevent inappropriate placement, concern exists
  that exclusionary factors can be misinterpreted
  and misused, resulting in students with
  disabilities being excluded from receiving
  legally entitled services.

17
Our purpose is to ensure that special education
exclusionary factors

• are applied and interpreted in such a method to
  increase understanding of the school-based and
  individual differences of the student.

18
Our purpose is to ensure that special education
exclusionary factors

• are considered at pre-referral and
  post-referral time points. This requires
  understanding of multifaceted and inter-related
  factors.

19

• Although many issues are connected to the
  inappropriate placement of students in special
  education programs, and many factors contribute
  to the overrepresentation of racially,
  culturally, ethnic, economically disadvantaged,
  and language diverse students, the appropriate
  use of exclusionary factors will enhance
  appropriate placement and service provision for
  all students.

20
What are the Drawbacks of Ignoring Exclusionary
Factors and Placing Children in Special Education
when the Child does not have a Disability?

• Negative affects of being labeled as having a
  disability when one does not actually exist
• Lowered expectations
• Watered-down curriculum
• Inappropriate allocation of resources
• Many more!

21
Example of Mislabeling Consequences Which
would you prefer?

• Example 1
• During an annual exam, a doctor discovers I have
  high cholesterol.
• This leads him to diagnose me with heart disease.
• Further, because of the diagnosed heart disease,
  he is considering recommending by-pass surgery.
• Implications for obtaining life insurance, health
  insurance, etc.
• Personal (di)stress

• Example 2
• During an annual exam, a doctor discovers I have
  high cholesterol.
• This leads him to diagnose me with high
  cholesterol.
• First stage of treatment is an improved diet and
  more exercise.
• Second stage (if necessary) is treatment with
  medications.
• Surgery does not happen unless blockages are also
  discovered at a later stage.

22
Domains of Focus

• Learner
• Instruction
• Curriculum
• Classroom and school environment disadvantage
• Environmental disadvantage
• Economic disadvantage
• Cultural disadvantage

23
Learner Domain

• Most evaluations tend to be focused on the
  learner rather than on other domains.
• Internal versus extrinsic factors
• This appears to be the result of the prevailing
  belief that a student who is not successful in
  school and who does not respond to immediately
  available classroom interventions must have a
  disability if their assessment results meet the
  criteria for disability.
• Unfortunately, assessment focused primarily on
  the learner ignores other possible reasons for
  delayed achievement.
• Methods of examining this domain include the use
  of RTI models, motivational interviewing, etc.

24
Learner Domain Examples

• LEP/ELL (influence of second language acquisition
  on learning)
• Visual disability
• Hearing disability
• Motor Disabilities
• Impaired cognitive functioning
• Emotional disturbance
• Autism spectrum disorders
• Emotional Stress
• Difficulty adjusting to home or school

• Lack of motivation
• A students academic performance and behavior may
  be impacted by a temporary crisis situation
• School absences due to poor physical health
• Poor school performance and behavior resulting
  from illegal chemical use

25
Instead of looking at what is wrong with the
child (e.g., internal deficit), the remaining
exclusionary factors look at deficits external to
the child
26
Instruction Domain

• (b) To ensure that underachievement in a child
  suspected of having a specific learning
  disability is not due to lack of appropriate
  instruction in reading or math, the group must
  consider, as part of the evaluation described in
  300.304 through 300.306
• (1) Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as a
  part of, the referral process, the child was
  provided appropriate instruction in regular
  education settings, delivered by qualified
  personnel and
• (2) Data-based documentation of repeated
  assessments of achievement at reasonable
  intervals, reflecting formal assessment of
  student progress during instruction, which was
  provided to the childs parents.

27
Instruction Domain

• IDEA04 references the NCLB in requiring
  scientifically-based instruction. Further, the
  language of NCLB was shaped around the 2000
  National Reading Panel report, which states that
  scientifically-based reading instruction should
  include instruction in phonemic awareness,
  phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension,
  including the teaching of early literacy skills.
• Assessing lack of instruction could mean that
  students in 3rd or 4th grade who are
  significantly behind their peers should not be
  found to be disabled if there is no clear history
  of instruction in reading that follows the NCLB
  requirements and that this lack of instruction is
  the determinant factor in the students
  difficulties.

28
Instruction Domain

• Lack of evidenced-based reading programs such as
  Reading Recovery, Reading Mastery, and Success
  for All, which include the essential components
  of reading instruction (e.g. explicit
  instruction, phonemic awareness, etc.)
• Lack of instruction in math
• Lack of exposure to relevant cognitive tasks

• Little to no progress monitoring utilized to
  inform and individualize instruction
• Students not taught at appropriate instructional
  levels
• Failure to examine student behavior in relation
  to instruction to identify deterrents to learning
  
• Poor instructional planning

29
Instruction Domain

• Instructional Match (Ysseldyke Christenson,
  2002)
• Accurate assessment of the students level of
  skill development
• Instructional goals and objectives matched to the
  students skills
• Assigned tasks relevant to the students
  background and experience
• Existence of prerequisite skills necessary to
  complete assigned tasks

30
Instruction Domain

• Instructional Match (cont)
• Instruction timing and pacing consistent with the
  students skill level and attention span
• Standards for acceptable daily classroom
  performance consistent with the students skill
  development level
• Skills necessary for the student to complete
  assigned tasks have been identified through task
  analysis
• Students success rate on academically relevant
  tasks appropriate (i.e., 90-100 for independent
  work)

31
Instruction Domain

• Instructional Expectations (Ysseldyke
  Christenson, 2002)
• Student understanding of what is expected of
  him/her (e.g., task completion, neatness,
  accuracy, mastery of instructional goals, etc)
• Expectation that the student will be an active
  and involved learner
• Student accountability for his/her performance
  and progress
• Opportunities for active responding
• Clear communication of the objectives/goals for
  the instructional lesson so that the student
  knows what is to be learned

32
Instruction Domain

• Instructional Presentation (Ysseldyke
  Christenson, 2002)
• Substantive teacher-student interaction (e.g.,
  ask/answer questions, repeat directions, provide
  feedback)
• Clear directions that are of reasonable
  length/complexity for the student
• Student attention focused and maintained on the
  critical skills and concepts to be learned
• Teacher modeling/demonstration sufficient for the
  student to be initially successful on independent
  activities
• Student and teacher enthusiasm about what is
  being taught
• Variation in instructional routine/presentation
• Information structured for the student in a
  systematic way (advance organizers, review,
  guided practice)

33
Instruction Domain

• Cognitive Emphasis (Ysseldyke Christenson,
  2002)
• Student understanding of the purpose of the
  lesson
• Effective learning strategies that are used
  (e.g., memorizing, reasoning, concluding, and
  evaluating) for the student
• Student explanation of the process used to solve
  problems or complete work
• Student understanding of why and how his / her
  responses are correct / incorrect

34
Instruction Domain

• Motivation Strategies (Ysseldyke Christenson,
  2002)
• Encouragement to perform (e.g., shown how, told
  he / she can do the work)
• Value of learning emphasized in addition to task
  completion
• Student belief that he / she can complete
  assigned tasks with success
• Student understanding of the importance of tasks
  for future activities

35
Instruction Domain

• Motivation Strategies (Ysseldyke Christenson,
  2002)
• Task relevance to background and personal
  experience
• Level of task appropriateness
• Enthusiasm and interest by the teacher
• Ambitious but realistic goals
• Alternative ways to demonstrate mastery
• Rewards contingent on mastery or a performance
  level at which the student can achieve with
  effort
• Reinforcement of student progress and achievement

36
Instruction Domain

• Toolkit materials
• Classroom observation materials
• Examination of time-on-task
• Evaluation of the current classrooms
  instructional techniques
• Materials to assist in the examination of
  student-instructional match
• Clarifications of highly qualified staff
• Progress monitoring components
• Evidence of data-based decision-making

37
Curriculum Domain

• A strong curriculum in one setting does not
  automatically mean that it will work in a
  different environment
• Needs to be a match between the curriculum and
  the students, especially in consideration of
  their background and foundation skills.
• A great curriculum does not guarantee success for
  all other variables are involved.
• Things to examine
• Core components of curricula.
• The existence of formal evaluation system to
  analyze the effectiveness of curriculum and
  instruction (e.g. failure to develop and analyze
  local norms).
• Whether exposure to inappropriate curriculum
  occurs due to unnecessary placement in special
  education (e.g. overrepresentation of minority
  children in SpEd).
• Exposure to inappropriate/antiquated curriculum.
• Failure of curriculum to prepare students for the
  academic demands of the subsequent grade level
  (i.e. lack of curricular cohesiveness between
  grade levels).

38
Curriculum Domain

• Reasonable accommodations of the curriculum to
  meet the students unique and specific
  instructional needs
• Is instruction systematically adapted so that the
  student is able to experience success?
• Are different materials, alternative teaching
  strategies, increased practice opportunities, or
  alternative group placements considered when a
  student fails to master an objective?
• Does the student receive additional review and
  practice in areas of difficulty?

39
Classroom School Environment Domain

• Exposure to inappropriate/antiquated academic
  materials
• Lack of adequately trained teachers (e.g.
  district hiring uncertified teachers)
• Limited to no available bilingual programs
• English language learners (ELLs) taught by
  unqualified teachers
• District size
• Unmanageable class sizes
• Lack of opportunities for continued professional
  development
• Unmanageable caseloads for student services
  personnel (e.g. school counselor, school
  psychologist, speech and language pathologist)

40
Classroom School Environment Domain

• Inconsistent educational programming
• Failure to equip classrooms with computers and
  other useful technology important for student
  growth
• Schools in poor physical condition (e.g. failure
  to appropriately control climate- no air
  conditioning or poor heating system)
• Failure to maintain control of student behavior
  leading to chaotic learning environment

41
Classroom School Environment Domain(Ysseldyke
Christenson, 2002)

• Clear classroom rules and routines that are
  understood by the student
• Enforcement of rules that enhance the likelihood
  that the student will comply with these rules
• Monitoring of students compliance with the rules
• Students ability to manage his/her behavior
• Student participation in the establishment of
  classroom rules
• Sufficient time allocation
• Productive use of time

42
Classroom School Environment Domain(Ysseldyke
Christenson, 2002)

• Positive, safe, and cooperative classroom
  environment
• Reminders about expected behavior in advance of a
  lesson
• Classroom management allows for an academic focus
  (e.g., direct teaching of skills and concepts)
  and high rates of productivity (e.g., content
  coverage, work completion)
• Adequate opportunity to practice with appropriate
  materials and achieve a high success rate
• Importance of classroom tasks in achieving
  instructional goals
• Relatively immediate feedback and specific
  information on his / her performance or behavior
• Active engagement in responding to academic
  content

43
Environmental Disadvantage Domain Impact of Risk
and Relationship with Exclusionary Factors
SOURCE U.S. Department of Education, National
Center for Education Statistics, Early Childhood
Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 199899
(ECLS-K), Longitudinal Kindergarten-First Grade
Public-Use Data File and Third Grade
Restricted-Use Data File, fall 1998, spring 1999,
spring 2000, and spring 2002.
44
Environmental Disadvantage Domain

• Parents may work multiple jobs and have limited
  to no time to be involved in childs education
• Student may take on great responsibilities at
  home, such as caring for younger siblings while
  parents are working, and have little time for
  schoolwork.
• Poor children often have limited access to
  educational materials (e.g. books, computers,
  games) at home and spend more time watching
  television
• Student may be working after school and find
  little time to devote to schoolwork.
• Student may be living in impoverished
  neighborhood that lacks supportive community
  services that provide educational experiences
  (e.g. libraries, YMCA, after-school programs)

45
Environmental Disadvantage Domain

• At home, are high, realistic expectations about
  schoolwork communicated to the child? Is the
  value of effort and working hard in school
  emphasized?
• Expectations
• Encouragement
• Reinforcement
• Is there an authoritative approach to discipline?
  Is the child monitored and supervised?
• Is there an educative home environment, in which
  others participate in the childs schooling and
  learning?
• Are there organization and daily routines that
  facilitate the completion of schoolwork and
  support for the childs academic learning?

46
Economic Disadvantage

• Students from low SES areas are exposed to a
  larger number of risk factors, such as
• Violence
• More crime
• Physical / neighborhood hazards
• Family disruption and divorce
• Separation from family
• A general more punitive parenting style
• Less likely to have well-qualified teachers
• Increased exposure to toxins / air pollution
• Auditory pollution
• Number of people in the home
• Lower number of educational materials in the home
• Less exposure to print
• Lack of access to computers
• Reduced municipal services
• Overcrowded schools / lack of educational funding

47
Economic Disadvantage

• Parents may work multiple jobs and have limited
  to no time to be involved in childs education
• Student may take on greater responsibilities at
  home, such as caring for younger siblings while
  parents are working, and have little time for
  schoolwork.
• Student may be working after school and find
  little time to devote to schoolwork.
• Student may be living in impoverished
  neighborhood that lacks supportive community
  services that provide educational experiences
  (e.g. libraries, YMCA, after-school programs)

48
Economic Disadvantage

• Fewer opportunities to take part in
  extracurricular activities that provide
  educational experiences and adult mentors (e.g.
  girl/boy scouts, music lessons, soccer team)
• Greater exposure to and affiliation with deviant
  peers
• Foster or institutionalized care is more common,
  leading to greater instability which negatively
  impacts school performance
• Tend to be read to less and experience fewer
  supportive parent behaviors (e.g. encouragement
  to count and learn the ABCs)

49
Economic Disadvantage

• Per-pupil school expenditure is strongly tied to
  financial advantage (e.g. students living in
  suburban areas often receive more money than
  inner-city students)
• Increased school absences due to homelessness
  negatively impacts academic performance
• Increased exposure to violence and family turmoil
  may impact school performance
• Separation from family, instability, and chaotic
  households are common realities for children
  living in poverty
• Fewer available social supports
• Less access to healthcare

50
Economic Disadvantage - Impact on Language
Development
13 professional parents
23 working-class parents
6 parents on welfare
51
Cultural Disadvantage

• Biased assessments (e.g., reliance on
  standardized assessments that are not validated
  for limited English speakers)
• Parents and school may have conflicting
  educational and behavioral expectations/goals for
  child due to cultural differences (e.g. parents
  may not value academic learning as highly as
  compliant behavior)
• Miscommunication between parents and school
  personnel arising from differing cultural/ethnic
  backgrounds
• Parents may be less involved in childs education
  due to cultural and communication barriers

52
Cultural Disadvantage

• A student who is a new arrival to the U.S. may be
  at a disadvantage due to limited exposure to
  previous educational settings (e.g. Hmong child
  who has grown up in a refugee camp)
• Ethnically/racially diverse student may
  experience differential treatment at school from
  teachers and students (i.e. institutionalized
  racism, discrimination), impacting academic
  performance and behavior.
• The educational policies of the dominant culture
  maintain the status quo, requiring minority
  groups to conform to the dominant groups
  practices which often include subordination and
  discrimination.

53
Key Questions for Educators, IEP Team, and other
School Professionals to Ask

• The rating scale to be included in the toolkit
  will guide individuals to ask the following
  questions
• Is this factor present?
• Yes, Partially, or No
• For how long has this factor been present?
• From the beginning of the students educational
  experiences.
• For more than one academic year, but not the
  entire time of the students educational
  experiences.
• For only the current academic year,
• Recently (not present at beginning of academic
  year, but began at some point after the beginning
  of the year).

54
Key Questions for Educators, IEP Team, and other
School Professionals to Ask

• Is this factor contributing to the childs
  difficulties?
• Yes, Partially, No
• Would this students difficulties continue to
  exist if this factor was no longer present?
• Yes, definitely
• Yes. However, the students difficulties would
  decrease as a result, but would still remain
  significant
• The students difficulties would decrease, but it
  is unknown to what degree the difficulties would
  still be present.
• No, the removal of this factor would make a
  significant difference in the students
  difficulties.
• No, the removal of this factor would result in
  the students difficulties no longer being
  present.

55
(No Transcript)
56
Consideration of Exclusionary Factors
Prior to Referral
Following Referral
From Day 1

• Lack of appropriate instruction
• Limited English Proficiency
• Environmental Disadvantage
• Cultural Disadvantage
• Economic Disadvantage

• Lack of appropriate instruction
• Limited English Proficiency
• Environmental Disadvantage
• Cultural Disadvantage
• Economic Disadvantage

• Lack of appropriate instruction
• Limited English Proficiency
• Environmental Disadvantage
• Cultural Disadvantage
• Economic Disadvantage
• Nonbiased Assessment

Learner Instruction
Environmental disadvantage Cultural
disadvantage Economic
disadvantage Classroom and Instruction
Environment
57
Toolkit/Guidance Document

• Overview of Exclusionary Factors and Nonbiased
  Assessment
• Definitions, Legal Requirements, and Historical
  Perspectives
• Purpose of Exclusionary Factors
• Conceptualization of Exclusionary Factors within
  the Continuum of Regular Education and Special
  Education Services
• Impact of Exclusionary Factors on Academic
  Performance
• Explanation of Consensus Statements
• How to Consider the Impact of Variable(s)
  Identified as Exclusionary Factors
• Products
• Description and examples of exclusionary factors
• Checklist of exclusionary factors and
  corresponding potential indicators
• Rating list of exclusionary factors and
  corresponding potential indicators
• Explanation of how to utilize products
• Professional development documents and materials
• Discussion of how to address these issues with
  team members
• Miscellaneous
• How to consider exclusionary factors within RTI
  models
• Case Examples
• Example 1
• Example 2

58
CONTACT INFORMATION

• Craig A. Albers, PhD, NCSPAssistant
  ProfessorUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonSchool
  Psychology Program316E Educational Sciences1025
  West Johnson StreetMadison, WI 53706
•  
• Phone [phone]Fax [phone]Email
  caalbers_at_wisc.edu

59
Special Thanks to Members of the Exclusionary
Factors Workgroup

• Jacqueline Iribarren, Student Services
  Coordinator, Middleton/Cross Plains Area School
  District
• Dean Heus, School Psychologist, Wauwatosa School
  District
• Kathy Laffin, DPI Consultant for Learning
  Disabilities
• Doug Jardine, School Psychologist, CESA 12,
  Ashland
• Eva Kubinski
• Craig Albers

• John Hanson, National Technical Consultant,
  Harcourt Measurement
• Kathy Halley, School Psychology Coordinator,
  Madison Metro Schools
• Sara Halberg, Madison Metro Schools
• Kim O'Connor, Madison Metro Special Education
  Teacher/Coordinator
• Tom Potterton, RSN/Director, CESA 12
• John Humphries
• Jeriann Kvapil