1. 1 Catherine Fowler, NSTTAC Matt Klare, NDPC-SD Deanne Unruh, NPSO Lorrie Sheehy, AZ Dept. of Ed

2. Participants will:  Learn about the structure of the STEPSS tool  Learn how it can be used with LEAs for data based decision-making through an example from Arizona 2

3. Drives Programmatic Improvement Targets Improving Student Outcomes Evidence-based Practices

4. To help state and local educators, in partnership with other stakeholders, use secondary transition indicator data to improve transition programs for youth with disabilities. 4

5.  To help state education agencies 5 Meet Federal Reporting Requirements Build the capacity to consistently and efficiently disseminate transition data to local districts for program improvement

6. States must assess the capacity of their current infrastructure systems and their ability to enhance this infrastructure to increase the capacity of LEAs to implement, scale up, and sustain evidence-based practices that will result in improved student outcomes across key measures of performance on assessment, graduation with a regular diploma, and post- school outcomes

7. Examine Examine graduation, dropout, the secondary transition component of IEPs, and post-school outcomes data Assess Assess State/District progress toward meeting targets in each outcome area Select Select predictors of post-school success, and Developimplement Develop and implement an action plan designed to improve in-school, secondary transition programs for students with disabilities

8.  Phase 1:  Upload transition related indicator data (SEA)  Review STEPSS slideshow with stakeholders  Phase 2:  Phase 2: Assessing Outcome Areas  Phase 3:  Phase 3: Prioritizing Predictors and Essential Characteristics for Implementation  Phase 4:  Phase 4: Developing an Action Plan 8

9.  Can be housed on UO server or portable to SEAs server  Multiple levels of security:  valid login and password from every user  requires and enforces a valid session for every user  passwords are encrypted before being stored in the database and use a salted SHA-256 algorithm before storing them  all traffic between the web browser and the server is encrypted and sent over HTTPS 9

10.  User Guide:  Security  Uploading the data  Inputting information for slideshow  Local Facilitator’s Guide:  Step-by-Step process to use STEPSS as part of a DBDM in a district/state 10

11. 11 COP, Facilitators’ Guides, Demos Small group instruction via webinar for one or multiple states or local districts 1:1, small group, state specific

12.  Series of Meetings with Stakeholders  Meeting Time  Flexible, based on the needs of the stakeholders  Each phase is a natural breaking point  Dependent on ▪ pace of the stakeholder group ▪ number of outcome areas identified for improvement ▪ details incorporated into the action plan 12

13.  SEA upload of indicator data  Data Manager  Transition Specialist  Contractor  Pre-populates the slideshow and action planning framework  Districts do not upload data 13

14.  Separate SEA/LEA slideshows  Familiarize stakeholders with ▪ Federal transition Indicators: graduation, dropout, secondary transition component of IEP, and post-school outcomes ▪ How SEA meets reporting requirements for these Indicators  Review SEA and LEA results 14

15.  Informational Slides  Purpose and Materials  Federal Reporting Requirements  Data Slides  Data displays -- grouped bar and column graphs  Collection Methods and Results Organized by Indicator  Group Activity Slides  Think-Pair-Share  Reflect 15

18.  To help stakeholders identify any gap/s between the state and or district percentages and the desired (i.e., targeted) percentage for each Indicator.  State and district actual percentages and the state desired target are pulled from data entered by the SEA.  Local district stakeholders enter the district’s desired target 18

19. 19 82

20.  After reviewing data for each indicator:  STEPSS provides an Indicator Summary - each outcome area is sorted based on the assigned Progress Rating: No, Some, or Significant Progress  Predictors aligned with outcomes rated as No Progress or Some Progress are identified for Prioritizing. 20

21.  To narrow the scope of the action plan by reviewing evidence-based predictors of post-school success and prioritizing predictors and essential program characteristics for implementation.  Predictor  Predictor - an in-school experience, typically a program (i.e., work-based learning experiences) correlated with improved post-school outcomes.  17 Predictors  17 Predictors identified by high quality research 21

22. 22

23. 23

24.  For Each Predictor:  Operational definition  5 – 15 Essential Program Characteristics ▪ Used to implement and evaluate a predictor at a state or local level ▪ For example: 24

25. 25

26.  For each program characteristic of a predictor consider:  Criteria for Prioritizing:  Current Implementation Status ▪ Currently Implemented or Not Currently Implemented ▪ Necessary Implementation  Implementation Timeline ▪ 3 Months or Less -- Adjustable  Available Resources for Implementation ▪ Time, administrative support, materials 26

27.  To develop a plan of action that promotes change at the classroom, school, community, or state-level to improve outcomes of youth with disabilities.  These are the action steps that need to occur in order to implement the prioritized predictors and program characteristics. 27

28.  Action Plan describes A. what needs to happen to implement that program characteristic B. who needs to be involved C. what additional data, if any, are needed D. who is responsible for implementing the step E. timeline for completing the step 28

29. 29 Printable Action Plan

30.  Phase 1: Upload and review transition related indicator data with stakeholders using the STEPSS slideshow component  Phase 2: Assess Progress of Outcome Areas  Phase 3: Prioritize Predictors and Essential Characteristics for Implementation  Phase 4: Develop Action Plan 30

31. Arizona State line

33. 246 School Districts 399 Charter Schools* (increasing each year) 53 Native BIA/BIE Schools 13 Joint Technical Education District (JTED) Schools 48 Secure Care Education Schools 246 School Districts 399 Charter Schools* (increasing each year) 53 Native BIA/BIE Schools 13 Joint Technical Education District (JTED) Schools 48 Secure Care Education Schools Education Statistics… Students: 1,096,040 General Education 128,281 Special Education 11.7% SPED Population - October 2012Students: 1,096,040 General Education 128,281 Special Education 11.7% SPED Population - October 2012

34. Special Education Personnel 6,675 Special education teachers 2,267 Special education related service providers 634 Special education administrators Personnel = Highly Mobile 13% SPED teachers left their school during/after the school year 17% SPED teachers were in their first year of teaching 22% SPED administrators were in their first year of administration Special Education Personnel 6,675 Special education teachers 2,267 Special education related service providers 634 Special education administrators Personnel = Highly Mobile 13% SPED teachers left their school during/after the school year 17% SPED teachers were in their first year of teaching 22% SPED administrators were in their first year of administration 2011-2012 Annual SPED Data Collection Special Education Personnel Statistics…

36.  Agency focus on improved graduation rates and college and career readiness for all students  ADE/ESS leadership has made PSO and DBDM a priority  Support for ongoing enhancement to the PSO online application to provide PEA and school level reports outlining response rates, representativeness, and disaggregated results  Commitment to providing TA and training to assist PEAs in understanding and using their data

37.  Arizona is a NPSO intensive TA state  High level commitment to using STEPSS in AZ  Proven AZ PSO online data collection and reporting system  Established multi-unit collaboration including: IT, data management, research and evaluation, and secondary transition  Grant-funded capacity building team training program can serve as pilot for STEPSS in Arizona

38.  Use NPSO developed system, resources, and technical assistance.  Start with a pilot group  Provide training on use of STEPSS.  Evaluate pilot; determine if Arizona-specific system will be developed.  Develop plan for full implementation

39. 39

40. Catherine Fowler, (chfowler@uncc.edu)chfowler@uncc.edu Matt Klare, (MKLARE@clemson.edu)MKLARE@clemson.edu Deanne Unruh, (dkunruh@uoregon.edu)dkunruh@uoregon.edu Lorrie Sheehy, (lorrie.sheehy@azed.gov)lorrie.sheehy@azed.gov 40