Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in Special Education 2008-2009 SPR&I Regional Training.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in Special Education 2008-2009 SPR&I Regional Training."— Presentation transcript:

1 Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in Special Education SPR&I Regional Training

2 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 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 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 5 IEP Team & IEP Team Considerations and Special Factors 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 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 child’s learning or that of others, consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies to address that behavior;

6 6 Disciplinary Removals of More than 10 School Days (Pattern or Consecutive)  (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  (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 7 Disciplinary Removals of More than 10 School Days (Pattern or Consecutive) (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 B4: Activities 38 Districts were flagged in OSEP required revision to ODE’s 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 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 10 B4:Next Steps  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 ODE’s feedback Process: District submits Discipline Data ODE applies threshold Districts not meeting threshold are identified with Significant Discrepancy ODE conducts policy to practice review with districts identified with Significant Discrepancy After policy to practice review, District completes Corrective Action Plan (CAP) ODE approves or rejects CAP Rejected CAPs are revised by district until approved by ODE

11 11 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. ODE required actions district must take: 1. Verify discipline data prior to submission.

12 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 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 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 15 B4:Next Steps Continued FFY 2007 APR and 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 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 of the IDEA regulations. [34 CFR ] [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 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 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 19 Quality Instruction in General Education Eligibility Evaluation Child Find, Referral Gen Ed Behavioral Interventions: SWPBS Gen Ed Academic Interventions: SWRTI Disproportionality

20 20 Annual APR Indicator and PCR Cycle July April January October August May March FebruaryDecember November June May 09  Districts continue to submit evidence of correction for and noncompliance  Districts revise rejected improvement plans and CAPs  data populated for B5, 9 & 10 reports Jan. 09  Districts continue submitting PCR data  Districts begin Improvement Plan for B1-2, 3, 5 & 11 based on data (if required)  Districts begin Corrective Action Plans for B4, 9 & 10 based on (if required) April 09  Districts submit evidence of correction for and noncompliance  ODE approves/rejects district improvement plans and CAPs Aug. 08  ODE disseminates Final Determinations Nov. 08  Districts submit evidence of correction for noncompliance until 100% compliant  Worksheets due for B5, 9 & 10 based on data  Policy to practice reviews for B4 (if required)  Districts continue submitting PCR data Dec. 08  Policy to practice reviews for B9 & 10 (if required)  Districts continue submitting PCR data Feb. 09  APR due to OSEP  District PCR data due end of month March 09  CC verify PCR submission  Improvement Plan due end of month for B1-2, 3, 5, & 11 based on data  CAPs due for B4, 9 & 10 (if required)  Districts to verify public report card data Oct. 08  Districts submit evidence of correction for noncompliance until 100% compliant  SPR&I Annual Trainings  ODE populates reports for B1-2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10 & 11 with data  PCR report opens for submission  ODE populates B1-2 report with data June 09  Districts continue to submit evidence of correction for and noncompliance July 08  Districts continue to submit evidence of correction for and noncompliance  ODE working on final determinations including correction of noncompliance September Sept. 08  Districts submit evidence of correction for noncompliance until 100% compliant

21 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 >2.0 or < 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: District submits SECC Data ODE conducts policy to practice review for unjustified districts Based on policy to practice review, ODE determines if Disproportionate Representation due to inappropriate identification exists Districts with Disproportionate Representation complete Corrective Action Plan ODE applies threshol d Flagged districts complete worksheet by due date ODE justifies district based on worksheet Districts not meeting thresholds are Flagged in SPR&I ODE approves or rejects CAP Rejected CAPs are revised by district until approved by ODE

22 > 20% diff (2.60*1.20 = 3.12) = Over-representation & 5.83 < -20% diff (2.60*.8 = 2.08) ≠ Under-representation

23 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 >2.0 or <0.25 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: District submits SECC Data ODE conducts policy to practice review for unjustified districts Based on policy to practice review, ODE determines if Disproportionate Representation due to inappropriate identification exists Districts with Disproportionate Representation complete Corrective Action Plan ODE applies threshol d Flagged districts complete worksheet by due date ODE justifies district based on worksheet Districts not meeting thresholds are Flagged in SPR&I ODE approves or rejects CAP Rejected CAPs are revised by district until approved by ODE

24 24

25 25

26 > 20% diff (.56*1.20 =.67)= Over-representation & 1.21 < -20% diff (.56*.8 =.45) ≠ Under-representation

27 27 Child Find and Referral Policies and Procedures for Child Find, Referral and Identification (34 CFR § ; OAR )  General Education Intervention and Problem Solving Process Administrative Oversight  General Education Interventions and Supports  Bilingual Considerations  Referral

28 28 Evaluation & Eligibility Evaluation (34 CFR § ; OAR )  Assessment Tools and Strategies Eligibility (34 CFR §§ through ; OAR )  Eligibility Decision Making Process

29 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 30 B9 & 10 Policy to Practice: Purpose and Expectations Focus on Compliance: Pre-referral, Referral, Evaluation/Eligibility  Review Indicator reports in SPR&I.  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 SPR&I upload process.

31 31 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. ODE required actions district must take: 1. Collect and analyze pre-referral data by race/ethnicity. 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.

32 32 General Guidelines for Corrective Action Plans Activities should be:  Observable  Measurable  Actionable  Realistic Activities should include:  Timelines  Responsibility assignment  Technical assistance needs

33 33 Where you begin to address disproportionality...

34 34 SYSTEMS PRACTICES DATA Supporting Staff Behavior Supporting Decision Making Supporting Student Academic Achievement and Behavior OUTCOMES Equitable use of general education prevention/intervention efforts and accurate referral and proper identification

35 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 36 Special Education Students and Fall Membership by Ethnicity,

37 37 Percent of Students in each Ethnicity Receiving Special Education Services out of the Total District Ethnicity Population (B9 Example)

38 38 Percent of Students Receiving Special Education Services Compared to Percent of Students in District by Ethnicity for Mental Retardation (B10 Example)

39 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 40 INSTRUCTION: Oregon Statewide Assessment, Reading,

41 41 INSTRUCTION: Oregon Statewide Assessment, Math,

42 42 Systems Admin Leadership Team-based implementation Defined commitment Allocation of FTE Budgeted support Development of decision-driven information system

43 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 44 Use Questions and Data to Target Issues and Use Resources Most Efficiently

45 45 Suggested Resources IDEA: Building the Legacy of IDEA 2004:  Disproportionality Module National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems (NCCRESt): National Center on Response to Intervention: National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS): State Implementation of Scaling-up Evidence-based Practices (SISEP) Center: Oregon RtI: Oregon PBS:


Download ppt "Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in Special Education 2008-2009 SPR&I Regional Training."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google