Evaluation Planning

1
Evaluation Planning Eligibility

• Identifying Learning Disabilities Under a
• RTI Model
• October 17, 2008

2
Important Idea

• RTI is one
• component of a COMPREHENSIVE evaluation.

3
Individualized Approach

• Trevors evaluation rather than LD evaluation
• Consider eligibility requirements for all
  suspected disabilities

4
General evaluation requirements

• ALL special education evaluations must still be
  conducted so that
• No single measure is used to determine
  eligibility
• Non-biased, technically sound instruments are
  given as intended, by qualified personnel
• An evaluation is comprehensive enough to identify
  all of a students special education and related
  service needs, even if they are not typical to a
  particular disability
• AND all special education evaluations still begin
  with a review of existing information (parents,
  teachers, statewide assessment, etc.)

5
General evaluation requirements (contd)

• ALL eligibility evaluations must establish that
  children may not be determined eligible if the
  determinant factor is lack of appropriate
  instruction in reading, including the essential
  components of reading instruction
• Phonemic awareness
• Phonics
• Vocabulary
• Reading fluency
• Comprehension strategies
• Or lack of instruction in math
• Or limited English proficiency

6
SLD regulations of note

• Districts need to define repeated and
  reasonable intervals.
• Formal assessment could be DIBELS or other CBMs

• Teams must include for all SLD evaluations
• data that demonstrate that prior to or as part
  of the referral process the child was provided
  appropriate instruction in regular education
  settings, delivered by qualified personnel and
• 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.
• This information is to be used to prompt
  evaluation as appropriate.

7
SLD regulations of note (whether using RTI or
not)

• Observation must be completed in regular
  classroom in the area of concern
• If multiple concerns exist, pick the most
  pervasive.
• May use either information from an observation in
  routine classroom instruction and monitoring that
  was done before referral or
• May conduct an observation of the childs
  academic performance in the regular classroom
  after referral (and consent)

8
SLD regulations of note

• The team must establish that the child does not
  achieve adequately for age or to meet
  State-approved grade level standards in academic
  skills, and
• The student has been provided with learning
  experiences and instruction appropriate for the
  childs age or State-approved grade level
  standards

• The contrast is with age and standards, not
  ability
• To meet implies looking at rate of progress
• This determination of low achievement is the
  foundation for eligibility

9
SLD regulations of note

• Reading fluency has been added to the list of
  achievement areas
• basic reading skills
• reading comprehension
• oral expression
• listening comprehension
• written expression
• mathematics calculation
• mathematics problem solving

• This reflects current research that points to
  persistent reading fluency problems as an
  indicator of LD

10
SLD regulations of note

• Once low achievement is established, the team may
  find a student eligible if
• The child does not make progress sufficient to
  achieve age or State-approved grade level
  standards when using RTI, or
• The child exhibits a pattern of strengths and
  weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both,
  relative to age, standards, or intellectual
  development.

• Always establish the childs progress This is
  result of the RTI evaluation.
• TTSD isnt using this criteria, but you may see
  it on move-in eligibility statements.

11
SLD regulations of note (when RTI is used)

• Documentation must include the kind of
  instructional strategies that were used and the
  student centered data that was gathered
• That parents were notified
• about the States policies about RTI that include
  the kind and amount of data that must be gathered
  and what general education services must be
  provided, and
• the kind of instructional strategies that were
  used to increase the childs progress and
• that the parent has the right to an evaluation

12
Evaluation Planning What You Know

• Individual Problem Solving Worksheet
• Student Intervention Profile
• Progress Monitoring Data
• Developmental History

13
Evaluation Planning What You Need to Know

• Observation data
• Achievement data
• WIAT-II or Woodcock Johnson-Achievement
• Phonics Inventory
• Scored Writing Samples
• CBMs
• Assessments in other areas of concern
• Communication
• Fine motor
• Social/emotional
• Perceptual motor/perception
• Memory
• Physical/medical (including medical statement)
• Cognition

14
Evaluation Planning Parent Participation

• Before referral
• Progress monitoring data/Intervention Info.
• RTI pamphlet
• Invitation to participate in EBIS meetings
• During referral
• Procedural Safeguards

15
LD Eligibility Statement

• Compare the ODE and TTSD
• LD Eligibility Statements
• How do they differ?

16
Dual Discrepancy

• Low skills (The easier part)
• Slow progress despite intensive intervention
  (The trickier part)

17
Does the Student Have Low Skills?
18
Defining Low Skills
19
Defining Intensive Intervention

• Reading Core Instruction plus 30-45 minutes per
  day of supplemental instruction (according to
  protocol).
• Math Written Expression Core Instruction plus
  third tier interventions (according to protocols).

20
Is the students progress slow?
21
Defining Slow Progress
22
Other Considerations

• Context is key
• Typical growth
• Cohort growth
• Fidelity of program
• Intervention attendance

23
Eligibility Decision Making

• It comes down to the balance How does the
  weight of the intervention compare to the rate of
  progress?

24
Briar

• 2nd Grader
• Fall ORF 22
• Winter ORF 55
• Gain 2.37 words/week
• Typical gain 1.5 words/week

• 90 mins. Classroom Reading Instruction
• SMART volunteer
• Read Naturally 30 min. 4 times per week
• Changed to Phonics for Reading and Read Naturally
  30 min. per day

25
Tommy

• 25th percentile on OAKS Math Composite in 3rd
  grade
• Remains at 25th percentile in 4th and 5th
• Low average

• Core program
• 5 min./day computer-assisted practice
• 30 min./day Connecting Math Concepts

26
Rita

• 1st Grader
• The rate
• Gain 6-10wpm in 8 weeks
• Other students gain 22 wpm in the same period of
  time

• The weight
• MacMillan 90 min./day
• Triumphs 45 min./day

27
Annie

• 2nd grader
• The rate
• Reads 45 words per minute (target is 90 wpm)

• The weight
• MacMillan 45 min./day
• Reading Mastery 90 min./day
• The context
• Moved to the district 4 months ago
• Has been in 4 schools
• Recently moved in with a relative due to abuse in
  the home

28
Mark

• The weight
• Core reading program
• 30 minutes of additional reading program 5x a
  week
• The context
• Jim was adopted from Russia 2 years ago
• ELL teacher interviews family and finds out he
  didnt attend school before he came the U.S.

• 5th grader
• The rate
• Reads 77 words per minute (target is 150 wpm)
• Scores below average benchmark on the State-wide
  assessment

29
Dont miss the forest for the trees

• Consider the whole child
• The questions on the eligibility forms merit
  conversation when considering a referral

30
Dianna

• 3rd grader
• Reads 45 words per minute in Spanish (target is
  85 words per minute)
• Reads 15 words per minute in English

• Lectura 90 min./day
• Phonics for Reading 30 min./day
• Has been in the same school since Kindergarten
• The other students in her cohort group read an
  average of 90wpm in Spanish and English

31
The team must determine that the
students lack of progress is not due to

• Lack of appropriate instruction
• Existence of another disability
• Limited English proficiency
• Environmental or Economic Disadvantage

32
Keep the End in Mind Avoid the Oops

• Required components
• Other relevant components
• Exclusionary factors

33
What About?

• English Language Learners
• Most useful approach
• Interventions in language of core program
• Cohort comparison critical
• Review Section 8 on LD Eligibility Report
  Checklist

34
Is the problem the result of limited English
proficiency?

• 1. Identify primary and secondary languages.
• 2. Report current levels of Oral, Writing, and
  Reading proficiency in primary language and in
  English.

35
(LEP Continued)

• 3. What is the home language?
• 4. What is the parents literacy proficiency?
• 5. What is a typical academic profile for a
  student with this language and family history?

36
For ELL Students

• Response to Intervention
• Progress compared to cohort
• AND
• Problem Solving Approach

37
What About?

• 3 Year Re-evaluations
• Same kind of thinking
• Weight of progress vs. weight of support
• Disabilities are life-long conditions
• Special education should work

38
3 Year Re-evaluations (cont.)

• Evaluation planning is critical step
• Thorough review of current information
• May be enough to continue eligibility
• Weight of progress vs. weight of support

39
LD Eligibility Reports

• Checklist
• Background information
• Low skills
• Resistance to instruction
• Observation
• Opportunity to learn the skills
• Other disabilities
• Cultural factors or economic disadvantage
• Limited English proficiency
• Conclusion

40
LD Eligibility Reports

• Sample Report

41
LD Eligibility Reports

• Not so helpful
• Kevin reads 27 words per minute at the second
  grade level.

• More helpful
• Kevin reads 27 words per minute at the second
  grade level, while the expected level for January
  is 65 words per minute.

42
Report Writing Tips

• Read and ask Did I answer the questions I
  raised?
• Reread with different audiences in mind
• Parents
• Are abbreviations spelled out?
• Tests explained?
• Administrative law judge
• What I meant, Your Honor,
• Another districts learning specialist
• Proofread your report for grammar

43
Think Columbo

• Not everyone speaks Edu-speak
• Write for your audience

44
Quality LD Eligibility Reports

• Individually Quickly read the sample report.
• In partners
• How does this differ from LD reports in your
  district?
• Which components are useful?