Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in Special Education

1
Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of
Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in
Special Education

• 2008-2009 SPRI Regional Training

2
Goals for today

• Review indicators B4, 9 10 and the process used
  to determine Significant Discrepancy and
  Disproportionate Representation due to
  Inappropriate Identification
• Significant discrepancy versus disproportionate
  representation
• Required response if flagged for B4, 9, 10
• Review worksheet content (9 10 only)
• Focus on data analysis
• Removing ambiguity in the referral eligibility
  process
• Review P to P content
• Focus on file review compliance
• Articulating practice
• Team exercise/discussion
• Corrective Action Planning (CAP)
• Elements of an effective plan

3
Indicator B4 Discipline

• Percent of districts identified by the State as
  having a significant discrepancy in the rates of
  suspensions and expulsions of children with
  disabilities for greater than 10 days in a school
  year.
• Significant discrepancy is defined as
• a rate of suspension/expulsion of greater than 10
  days based on chi-square analysis and/or a 1
  suspension/expulsion rate of special education
  students within a district and
• District must have at least 10 students in their
  SECC
• and not justified by unique district
  characteristics

4
Purpose of B4

• Ensure FAPE for all students with disabilities
  by
• Reducing ambiguity of discipline procedures
  across the district
• Address academic and behavior support needs to
  assist a student in the LRE

5
IEP Team IEP Team Considerations and Special
Factors

• 581-015-2210 - IEP Team
• (4) The regular education teacher of the child
  must participate as a member of the IEP team, to
  the extent appropriate, in the development,
  review, and revision of the child's IEP,
  including assisting in the determination of
• (b) Appropriate positive behavioral interventions
  and supports, and other strategies for the child.
• 581-015-2205 - IEP Team Considerations and
  Special Factors
• (3) In developing, reviewing and revising the IEP
  of children described below, the IEP team must
  consider the following additional special
  factors
• (a) For a child whose behavior impedes the
  childs learning or that of others, consider the
  use of positive behavioral interventions and
  supports, and other strategies to address that
  behavior

6
Disciplinary Removals of More than 10 School Days
(Pattern or Consecutive)

• 581-015-2415
• (3) Manifestation determination. Within 10 school
  days of any decision to change the placement of a
  child with a disability because of a violation of
  a code of student conduct, the school district
  must determine whether the child's behavior is a
  manifestation of the student's disability in
  accordance with OAR 581-015-2420.
• (4) Manifestation. If the determination under
  subsection (3) is that the child's behavior is a
  manifestation of the child's disability, the
  school district must
• (a) Return the child to the placement from which
  the child was removed, unless
• AND

7
Disciplinary Removals of More than 10 School Days
(Pattern or Consecutive)

• 581-015-2415 (cont)
• (b) Either
• (A) Conduct a functional behavioral assessment,
  unless the school district conducted a functional
  behavioral assessment before the behavior
  occurred that prompted the disciplinary action,
  and implement a behavior intervention plan or
• (B) If the student already has a behavior plan,
  review the behavioral intervention plan and
  modify it, as necessary, to address the behavior.

8
2006-2007 B4 Activities

• 38 Districts were flagged in 2006-2007
• OSEP required revision to ODEs process for
  determining Significant Discrepancy
• As a consequence of that finding, ODE held a
  Policy to Practice (P to P) review with all 38
  districts
• Following the P to P, ODE mailed a letter to each
  district with required actions to be addressed in
  a corrective action plan (CAP)

9
What Was Learned?

• District special education personnel need to
  verify discipline data submitted to ODE
• Districts need discipline data collection system
  that captures low and high level discipline data
• It is important to review and disseminate
  district policies on discipline for children with
  disabilities to all staff at least annually
• Ensure appropriate implementation of discipline
  policies and procedures

10
B4Next Steps

• 07-08
• Flagged districts will need to verify data
  accuracy including access to services for
  students suspended/expelled beyond 10 days
• Flagged districts will need to complete policy to
  practice review
• After policy to practice review districts will
  need to complete CAP based on ODEs feedback
• Process

After policy to practice review, District
completes Corrective Action Plan (CAP)
ODE conducts policy to practice review with
districts identified with Significant Discrepancy
Rejected CAPs are revised by district until
approved by ODE
Districts not meeting threshold are identified
with Significant Discrepancy
District submits Discipline Data
ODE approves or rejects CAP
ODE applies threshold
11
ODE required actions district must take 1.
Verify discipline data prior to submission.
For indicator B4, districts will need to do a
corrective action plan after completing a policy
to practice review that addresses required
actions from ODE.
12
General Guidelines for Corrective Action Plans

• Activities should be
• Observable
• Measurable
• Actionable
• Realistic
• Activities should include
• Timelines
• Responsibility assignment
• Technical assistance needs
• Activities should align with larger district-wide
  improvement plan

13
Example ODE Recommendation

• Ensure the accurate and timely collection,
  analysis, review by district special education
  director, and reporting of suspension/expulsion
  data for students with disabilities.
• District CAP
• District describes a clear process for review and
  approval by the special education director prior
  to data submission in June.
• Process includes dates and names of individuals
  involved in the process
• District provides a statement assuring that
  special education director reviewed and approved
  the data prior to submission
• Assures the same process is being used this year

14
Example ODE Recommendation

• Ensure IEPs are developed and implemented to
  support the academic and behavioral needs of
  students eligible under IDEA.
• District CAP
• District describes process in which they use an
  appropriate data (that tracks and summarizes low
  and high level behaviors) to identify if students
  on IEPs demonstrate a pattern of behavioral
  difficulties.
• AND
• For those students, with both low and high level
  patterns of behavioral difficulty, district
  states that a Functional Behavioral Assessment
  (FBA) was conducted
• AND
• A Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan exists

15
B4Next Steps Continued

• FFY 2007 APR and 08-09 data
• Revise measure for indicator for next APR
  submission due to inability to use worksheet
  content
• Striving for balance in accountability and not
  being overly burdensome
• One approach is to use a risk ratio similar to
  how indicators B9 and B10 are examined

16
IDEA Regulations

• Require policies and procedures.
• The State must have in effect, consistent with
  the purposes of 34 CFR Part 300 and with section
  618(d) of the Act, policies and procedures
  designed to prevent the inappropriate
  overidentification or disproportionate
  representation by race and ethnicity of children
  as children with disabilities, including children
  with disabilities with a particular impairment
  described in 34 CFR 300.8 of the IDEA
  regulations. 34 CFR 300.173 20 U.S.C.
  1412(a)(24)
• Require collection and examination of data
  regarding disproportionality.
• Special education
• Special education by disability type
• Suspension and Expulsion (Discipline)
• LRE
• Establish requirements for review and revision of
  policies, practices and procedures.
• Require States to disaggregate data on suspension
  and expulsion rates by race and ethnicity.
• Require States to monitor their LEA's to examine
  disproportionality.

17
IDEA State Performance Plan and Annual
Performance Report

• Indicator 9 Percent of districts with
  disproportionate representation of racial and
  ethnic groups in special education and related
  services that is the result of inappropriate
  identification.
• Indicator 10 Percent of districts with
  disproportionate representation of racial and
  ethnic groups in specific disability categories
  that is the result of inappropriate
  identification.

18
Purpose of B9 B10

• Reduce inappropriate referrals to special
  education by
• Addressing general education instruction and
  intervention polices and practices
• Addressing variability in referral rates by
  race/ethnicity
• Addressing variability in evaluation process

19
Quality Instruction in General Education
Gen Ed Academic Interventions SWRTI
Eligibility
Disproportionality
Gen Ed Behavioral Interventions SWPBS
Evaluation
Child Find, Referral
20
(No Transcript)
21
Indicator B9 Disproportionate representation in
special education

• Measure
• The percentage of IDEA eligible students
  disaggregated by race/ethnicity differs by /-
  20 from the percentage of all students within
  the district disaggregated by race/ethnicity in
  at least one race/ethnic category
• Weighted Risk Ratio analysis shows a value gt2.0
  or
• lt 0.25 in the same race/ethnic category
  and,
• There are at least 10 IDEA eligible students in
  the same race/ethnic category in special
  education.
• Process

22
5.83 gt 20 diff (2.601.20 3.12)
Over-representation 5.83 lt -20 diff (2.60.8
2.08) ? Under-representation
23
B10 Disproportionate representation by
disability type

• Measure
• The percentage of IDEA eligible students
  disaggregated by race/ethnicity and disability
  category differs by /- 20 from the percentage
  of all students within the district disaggregated
  by race/ethnicity in at least one race/ethnic and
  disability category
• Weighted Risk Ratio analysis shows a value gt2.0
  or lt0.25 in the same race/ethnic category and
  disability category and,
• There are at least 10 IDEA eligible students in
  the same race/ethnic category and disability
  type.
• Process

24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
1.21 gt 20 diff (.561.20 .67)
Over-representation 1.21 lt -20 diff (.56.8
.45) ? Under-representation
27
Child Find and Referral

• Policies and Procedures for Child Find, Referral
  and Identification (34 CFR 300.111 OAR
  581-015-2080)
• General Education Intervention and Problem
  Solving Process
• Administrative Oversight
• General Education Interventions and Supports
• Bilingual Considerations
• Referral

28
Evaluation Eligibility

• Evaluation (34 CFR 300.201 OAR 581-015-2105)
• Assessment Tools and Strategies
• Eligibility (34 CFR 300.301 through 300.311
  OAR 581-015-2120)
• Eligibility Decision Making Process

29
B9 10 Worksheet Purpose and Expectations

• Focus on Data Analysis Pre-referral, Referral,
  Evaluation/Eligibility
• Referral and placement data disaggregated by
  ethnicity, primary disability, socio-economic
  status
• New students to special education where were
  they coming from?
• Least Restrictive Environment
• Suspension, expulsion, attendance and high school
  completion
• Transfer students

30
B9 10 Policy to Practice Purpose and
Expectations

• Focus on Compliance Pre-referral, Referral,
  Evaluation/Eligibility
• Review Indicator reports in SPRI.
• Review the worksheet submitted for Indicator.
• Review original files (initial referral, most
  recent evaluation, and IEP) for 10 of the
  students in special education who are included in
  the potentially disproportionate representation
  group(s).
• Complete step one based on district policies and
  procedures.
• Complete step two based on the sample of files
  reviewed.
• Submit these completed document(s) to the ODE
  using the SPRI upload process.

31
ODE is able to provide feedback and will reject
or approve CAP once it is submitted. Rejected
CAPs will need to be resubmitted until approved.
ODE required actions district must take 1.
Collect and analyze pre-referral data by
race/ethnicity.
Districts will need to do a corrective action
plan after completing a policy to practice review
that addresses required actions from ODE.
Revised CAP now contains separate text boxes for
each content area.
32
General Guidelines for Corrective Action Plans

• Activities should be
• Observable
• Measurable
• Actionable
• Realistic
• Activities should include
• Timelines
• Responsibility assignment
• Technical assistance needs

33
Where you begin to address disproportionality...
34
Equitable use of general education
prevention/intervention efforts and accurate
referral and proper identification
OUTCOMES
Supporting Decision Making
DATA
Supporting Staff Behavior
SYSTEMS
PRACTICES
Supporting Student Academic Achievement and
Behavior
35
Data

• Critically examine your district data and provide
  your schools with their own data to discuss
• Overall S.E. prevalence rate
• Percentage of students in S.E. by ethnic group
• Risk Ratios
• S.E. referral and placement rates
• Referral and placement (LRE) data disaggregated
  by ethnicity, primary disability, socio-economic
  status
• Discipline
• Graduation/Drop-Out
• Transfer students
• New students to special education where are
  they coming from?

36
Special Education Students and Fall Membership by
Ethnicity , 2007-08
37
Percent of Students in each Ethnicity Receiving
Special Education Services out of the Total
District Ethnicity Population (B9 Example)
38
Percent of Students Receiving Special Education
Services Compared to Percent of Students in
District by Ethnicity for Mental Retardation (B10
Example)
39
Percent of Special Education Students
Suspended/Expelled for more than 10 Days
Compared to Percent of Students in District by
Ethnicity (B4 Example)
40
INSTRUCTION Oregon Statewide Assessment,
Reading, 2006-07
41
INSTRUCTION Oregon Statewide Assessment, Math,
2006-07
42
Systems

• Admin Leadership
• Team-based implementation
• Defined commitment
• Allocation of FTE
• Budgeted support
• Development of decision-driven information system

43
Planning and Practices

• Develop a multi-year, comprehensive improvement
  plan that addresses all facets of
  disproportionality
• Professional development
• Define expectations
• Teach expectations
• Monitor
• Use information for decision-making

44
Use Questions and Data to Target Issues and Use
Resources Most Efficiently
45
Suggested Resources

• IDEA Building the Legacy of IDEA 2004
  http//idea.ed.gov/
• Disproportionality Module
• National Center for Culturally Responsive
  Educational Systems (NCCRESt) http//www.nccrest.
  org/
• National Center on Response to Intervention
  http//www.rti4success.org/
• National Technical Assistance Center on Positive
  Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS)
  http//www.pbis.org/main.htm
• State Implementation of Scaling-up Evidence-based
  Practices (SISEP) Center http//sisep.fmhi.usf.ed
  u/
• Oregon RtI http//www.ode.state.or.us/search/page
  /?id315
• Oregon PBS http//www.ode.state.or.us/search/page
  /?553