1. Link Between Inclusive Settings and Achievement in Urban Settings Elizabeth Cramer Florida International University

2. Given That… Standard-based school reform and accountability systems raise expectations about learning outcomes Standard-based school reform and accountability systems raise expectations about learning outcomes Students receive instruction based, in the LRE (, on the standard curriculum Students receive instruction based, in the LRE (Koegel, Matos-Freden, Lang, & Koegel, 2012), on the standard curriculum 61% of all students with disabilities spend 80% or more of their time in general ed (NCES, 2013) 61% of all students with disabilities spend 80% or more of their time in general ed (NCES, 2013)

3. Combined With… Overrepresentation (Harry & Klingner, 2014) Overrepresentation (Harry & Klingner, 2014) Shifting of LD students from White to CLD leads to more restrictive settings for LD students (Ferri & Connor, 2005). Shifting of LD students from White to CLD leads to more restrictive settings for LD students (Ferri & Connor, 2005). Urban children from lower SES are less engaged academically when compared to their suburban peers Urban children from lower SES are less engaged academically when compared to their suburban peers (Blanchett, Klingner, & Harry, 2009 ). Especially problematic at the secondary level where placement decisions may directly affect post school outcomes Especially problematic at the secondary level where placement decisions may directly affect post school outcomes

4. Overview of This Line of Work Examine achievement rates of students with and without disabilities in urban settings as related to inclusion rates and/or class type Examine achievement rates of students with and without disabilities in urban settings as related to inclusion rates and/or class type Is inclusion the least restrictive environment for included students? Is inclusion the least restrictive environment for included students? Any ramifications for students without disabilities? Any ramifications for students without disabilities?

5. Setting MDCPS 4 th largest school district MDCPS 4 th largest school district 2 nd most culturally and linguistically diverse 2 nd most culturally and linguistically diverse 52% of SWD included 80% or more of the school day 52% of SWD included 80% or more of the school day

6. Purpose of Study 1 Evaluate Learning Gains of Black and Hispanic Middle School Students with SLD in Urban schools to determine Evaluate Learning Gains of Black and Hispanic Middle School Students with SLD in Urban schools to determine Is there a difference in learning gains made in inclusive versus non inclusive settings? Is there a difference in learning gains made in inclusive versus non inclusive settings? Do these differences vary between ethnic groups? Do these differences vary between ethnic groups?

7. Participants 40 8 th grade students with LD 40 8 th grade students with LD 20 Black, 20 Hispanic 20 Black, 20 Hispanic 10 resource/10 inclusion for each group 10 resource/10 inclusion for each group All free reduced lunch All free reduced lunch None more than 5 absences None more than 5 absences None ELL None ELL All 2 consecutive years in type of setting All 2 consecutive years in type of setting

8. Data Collection FCAT scores used FCAT scores used 7 th and 8 th grade scores in reading and math 7 th and 8 th grade scores in reading and math Measured developmental scale score changes for each group from the 7 th to 8 th grade administration Measured developmental scale score changes for each group from the 7 th to 8 th grade administration

9. Overall Scale Score Changes Inclusive Settings Inclusive Settings Average of 248 pts increase in reading Average of 248 pts increase in reading Average of 187 pts increase in math Average of 187 pts increase in math Resource Settings Resource Settings Average of 71 pts decrease in reading Average of 71 pts decrease in reading Average of 88 pts decrease in math Average of 88 pts decrease in math

10. Inclusive Settings by Race/Ethnicity Hispanic Students Hispanic Students Reading 344 pts increase Reading 344 pts increase Math 230 pts increase Math 230 pts increase Black Students Black Students Reading 151 pts increase Reading 151 pts increase Math 143 pts increase Math 143 pts increase

11. Resource Settings by Race/Ethnicity Hispanic Hispanic Reading 10 pts increase Reading 10 pts increase Math 192 pts decrease Math 192 pts decrease Black Black Reading 153 pts decrease Reading 153 pts decrease Math 16 pts increase Math 16 pts increase

12. Hispanic/Black Comparison Inclusive Settings Inclusive Settings 193 pts difference reading 193 pts difference reading 87 pts difference in math 87 pts difference in math Hispanics had higher scores in both areas Hispanics had higher scores in both areas Resource Settings Resource Settings 142 pts difference in reading (Hispanic higher) 142 pts difference in reading (Hispanic higher) 177 pts difference in math (Black higher) 177 pts difference in math (Black higher)

13. Settings Scale Score Changes

14. Inclusive Setting Scale Score Changes

16. Resource Setting Scale Score Changes

18. Hispanic Scale Score Changes

19. Black Scale Score Changes

20. Discussion Overall, inclusion showed larger scale score gains than resource Overall, inclusion showed larger scale score gains than resource Score changes less consistent in resource by race/ethnicity and subject area Score changes less consistent in resource by race/ethnicity and subject area Overall, Hispanic students had higher scores than Black students in inclusive settings Overall, Hispanic students had higher scores than Black students in inclusive settings

21. Implications Need for increased inclusion rates in urban schools and for Black and Hispanic students Need for increased inclusion rates in urban schools and for Black and Hispanic students Need for culturally responsive teaching rather than a one size fits all approach Need for culturally responsive teaching rather than a one size fits all approach Need to look at quality of instruction in urban schools across setting Need to look at quality of instruction in urban schools across setting Need for much further in-depth study of inclusive practices and access to general education curriculum across placements Need for much further in-depth study of inclusive practices and access to general education curriculum across placements

22. Purpose of Study 2 To determine if the recommendations provided to 56 schools via the LRE/Achievement at a Glance review process and the support that followed served to improve the inclusion and achievement of urban students with disabilities.

23. LRE Achievement at a Glance Tool Walkthroughs conducted at each of 56 schools (elementary, middle, high) Walkthroughs conducted at each of 56 schools (elementary, middle, high) District staff (at least 2) evaluated random students across 6 domains on a 3 point scale District staff (at least 2) evaluated random students across 6 domains on a 3 point scale Grand total led to classification: outstanding – meets requirements; good – needs assistance; fair – needs intervention; and needs improvement – needs substantial interventions Results shared with administrative team; follow up activities/plan provided

24. Results Significantly significant increase in inclusion rate Significantly significant increase in inclusion rate (t = -8.97, p <.01). Significantly significant increase in amount of time SWD spend with non-disabled peers (t = -12.17, p <.01). Power analysis showed all variables had a high power with the exception of changes in math achievement for gen ed students Power analysis showed all variables had a high power with the exception of changes in math achievement for gen ed students

25. Results Changes in inclusion rate showed significant correlations with changes in average time spent with peers ( Changes in inclusion rate showed significant correlations with changes in average time spent with peers (Pearson’s correlation coefficient of.675 [p <.01]). significant correlations with with changes in math proficiency of gen ed students Changes in inclusion rate showed significant correlations with with changes in math proficiency of gen ed students with a Pearson’s correlation coefficient of.299 (p <.05).

26. Results Statistically significant correlations found between Statistically significant correlations found between math proficiency for SWDs and reading proficiency for students without disabilities (r =.362, p <.01) Math proficiency for students without disabilities and reading proficiency for students without disabilities (r =.480, p<.01), math proficiency for students without disabilities and math proficiency for SWDs (r =.352, p <.01).

27. Discussion LRE review process supported schools in making significant gains in inclusion (mean shifted from 50% to 68% in one year) LRE review process supported schools in making significant gains in inclusion (mean shifted from 50% to 68% in one year) Even when significant, achievement showed an upward trend and NO significant decreases (implies LRE) Even when significant, achievement showed an upward trend and NO significant decreases (implies LRE) Relationships between proficiency across subjects and student type Relationships between proficiency across subjects and student type Possibility of greater results beyond year 1 Possibility of greater results beyond year 1

28. Implications More widespread use of this tool or others More widespread use of this tool or others Combine review with follow up support Combine review with follow up support Involve administrators Involve administrators Longer term/more in depth study Longer term/more in depth study Examine quality of instruction in inclusive classrooms Examine quality of instruction in inclusive classrooms