Students with Disabilities in the P-16 Framework: Outcomes and Improvement Strategies Rebecca H. Cort VESID October 2007 Statewide Meeting

Facing today’s educational challenges means improving critical systems and structures that support achievement from the earliest years though college completion. Source: Commissioner Mills Report to the Board of Regents, October 2006 Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

GOALS: 1. Close the great divide in achievement along lines of income, race and ethnicity, language and disability. 2. Keep up with growing demands for still more knowledge and skill in the face of increasing competition in a changing global economy Source: Commissioner Mills Report to the Board of Regents, October 2006 Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Results for Students with Disabilities Source: Report to the Board of Regents, June 2007 Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

We’re Making Progress Achievement is up in Grades 3-8 in English Language Arts and Mathematics Few students are educated in separate settings More take and pass Regents exams every year More graduate every year More earn Regents diplomas More attend college than a decade ago Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

But Achievement and Graduation Rates Remain Far Too Low Black students are disproportionately classified. Too few students with disabilities are in general education settings in the Big Five Cities. Achievement in Grades 3-8 is a fraction of what it should be. Successful outcomes (graduation) are too low. Too many students are dropping out of school. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Final: April 2007 Classification Rate increased slightly but has been fairly stable for the past few years. *Revised methodology Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Source: BEDS Data and December 1, 2005 PD1/4, Final: April 2007 All minorities are over represented in special education except Asians, who are significantly underrepresented. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Final: June 2007 Much larger percentages of students with disabilities are provided special education services in separate classes and in separate settings in the Big Five Cities, compared to rest of State. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

2006 & 2007 English Language Arts (ELA): Percentages of Students with Disabilities at Levels 3 & 4 Performance of students with disabilities meeting the ELA learning standards increased at every grade in 2007, even with the increase in ELL students with disabilities tested. Overall, 1 in 5 students with disabilities performs at grade level. Gap: Compare the 22.8% average for students with disabilities across grades 3-8 with that for all students in grades 3-8 at 63.4%. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

2006 and 2007 English Language Arts (ELA) Students with Disabilities English Language Learners Percentages at Levels 3 & 4 Performance of students with disabilities (SWD) who are English Language Learners (ELL) meeting the ELA learning standards increased at every grade in 2007, but the increases are very low. Overall, 1 in 12 students with disabilities who are English Language Learner performs at grade level. Gap: Students with disabilities in grades 3-8 who were not English Language Learners were 3 times as likely to meet the standards than students with disabilities who are English Language Learners. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

2006 & 2007 English Language Arts (ELA): Percentages of Students with Disabilities at Level 1 In every grade, fewer students with disabilities showed serious academic problems. Gap: Compare the averages across grades 3-8 for students with disabilities at 25.1% with that for all students in grades 3-8 at 6.1%. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Except in the Large City Districts, more students with disabilities met the standards in Gap: Variations among need/resource categories were substantial & 2007 English Language Arts (ELA) by Need/Resource Categories: Percentages of Students with Disabilities at Levels 3 & 4 Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

The percentage of students with disabilities in serious academic difficulties decreased in every category. Gap: Students in Large City Districts were 4 times as likely as those in Low Need Districts to score at Level & 2007 English Language Arts (ELA) by Need/Resource Categories: Percentages of Students with Disabilities at Level 1 Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

2006 & 2007 Mathematics: Percentages of Students with Disabilities at Levels 3 & 4 Performance of students with disabilities meeting the Mathematics Standards increased at every grade in Overall, 1 out of 3 students with disabilities performs at grade level. Gap: Compare the 37.2% average for students with disabilities across grades 3-8 with that for all grade 3-8 at 72.7%. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

2006 & 2007 Mathematics: Percentages of Students with Disabilities at Level 1 In every grade, fewer students with disabilities showed serious academic problems. Gap: Compare the average across grades 3-8 for students with disabilities at 28.2% with that for all students in grades 3-8 at 7.5% Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

2006 & 2007 Mathematics by Need/Resource Categories: Percentages of Students with Disabilities at Levels 3 & 4 Students with Disabilities in Low Need Districts were 3 times as likely as those in Large City Districts to meet the standards in Gap: Variations among need/resource categories were substantial. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

The percentage of students with disabilities in serious academic difficulties decreased in every category. Gap: Students with Disabilities in Large City Districts were about 4 times times as likely as those in Low Need Districts to score at Level & 2007 Mathematics by Need/Resource Categories: Percentages of Students with Disabilities at Level 1 Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Since 1997, there has been more than 354% increase in the number of students with disabilities tested. Of the students tested in 2006, 65% achieved a score between Regents English Examination and Students with Disabilities Public Schools-Including Charter Schools, Final April 2007 Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

*Beginning in 1999, students take either of the two math examinations. Sequential Mathematics Course I examination ended in Regents Sequential Mathematics Course I and Math A Examinations and Students with Disabilities Since 1997, there has been a 323% increase in the number of students with disabilities tested. Of the students tested in 2006, 70% achieved a score between Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07 Public Schools-Including Charter Schools, Final April 2007

Regents Diplomas Earned by Students with Disabilities Public Schools-Including Charter Schools Students graduating with Regents diplomas in were required to pass five Regents examinations compared to eight being required in previous years. Since higher standards were adopted in 1996, more than 10 times as many students with disabilities are earning Regents diplomas. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Student GroupCohort Enrollment Regents/ Local Diploma IEP Diploma & Other Still Enrolled Transfer to GED Dropout 2001 Total Cohort After 4 Years All Students214, %1.8%18.4%4.8%10.9% Gen.Ed. Students 187, %0.0%17.7%4.5%9.7% Students with Disabilities 26, %14.4%22.8%6.6%18.9% 2001 Total Cohort After 5 Years All Students212, %2.4%5.1%1.4%18.9% Gen. Ed. Students 185, %0.1%4.7%1.2%17.5% Students with Disabilities 26, %18.8%7.3%2.4%28.6% 2002 Total Cohort After 4 Years All Students216, %2.0%15.8%1.4%14.2% Gen. Ed. Students 189, %0.1%14.7%1.3%13.0% Students with Disabilities 27, %14.8%23.1%2.6%21.9% High School Outcomes for 2001 and 2002 Total Cohorts Final: June 2007 Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Outcomes for 2001 Total Cohort of Students with Disabilities After 5 Years by Need/Resource Capacity Total State Includes Charter Schools, Final- April 2007 More students in the Big Five Cities dropped out than graduated. Gap: There are substantial variations in outcomes by need/resource capacity of school districts. Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

The number of self-identified students with disabilities in New York State higher education programs decreased slightly after many years of steady increase. 2.8% 3.0% 3.3% Number of Individuals with Disabilities and Percent of Total Enrollment in NYS Institutions of Higher Education* *Data for 1998 are not available Source: OHE 3.4% 3.6% Final: April % 3.5% Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Strategies for Improving Student Performance in the P-16 Initiative Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Action 1 Identify Low Performing Schools & Target Improvements Set annual State targets for improvement Publish performance data Hold low-performing schools accountable Redirect IDEA funds in low-performing schools Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Action 2 Help Districts Improve Instructional Practices Identify instructional practices contributing to poor student performance and help districts make improvements Describe and promote effective practices through district-to-district assistance –Improved literacy –Positive behavioral interventions –Effective special education service delivery Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Contracts for Excellence: Targets Predominantly benefit students with greatest educational needs –English language learners & limited English proficiency –Students in poverty –Students with disabilities Schools identified as requiring academic progress, corrective action or restructuring with emphasis on the most serious academic problems For evidence-based practices that facilitate student attainment of learning standards Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Contracts for Excellence: Allowable Activities Class size reduction Increased time on task Teacher and Principal quality initiatives Middle and High School restructuring Full-day pre-kindergarten and kindergarten With prior SED approval, up to 15% for experimental programs to improve student achievement Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Action 3 Align VESID Technical Assistance Resources Direct technical assistance (TA) resources to address school improvements in: –Literacy –Behavioral supports –Quality delivery of special education services Improve achievement and reduce disproportionate representation of minority students by: –Preventing inappropriate referrals –Increasing declassification rates Expand availability and capacity of TA centers to promote training and implementation of Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) in the Large 4 and BOCES Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Action 4 Increase Positive Post School Outcomes Increase the number of students with disabilities transitioning directly from high schools to: – vocational rehabilitation training programs – employment – college 60 Model Transition Program Projects CUNY MOU Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

VESID Key Actions for Direct TA resources to IDEA-identified districts Direct TA resources to IDEA-identified districts Contracts for Excellence prioritize students in greatest need, including students with disabilities Contracts for Excellence prioritize students in greatest need, including students with disabilities Focus TA on improving core instructional practices Focus TA on improving core instructional practices Identify successful schools Identify successful schools Establish statewide Response to Intervention (RtI) Technical Assistance Center (TAC) Establish statewide Response to Intervention (RtI) Technical Assistance Center (TAC) Provide grants to districts to implement RtI programs Provide grants to districts to implement RtI programs Explore the development of Career and Technology Education (CTE) program options for students with disabilities to decrease dropout rates Explore the development of Career and Technology Education (CTE) program options for students with disabilities to decrease dropout rates Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07

Important Policy Changes to Improve Results 2007 High standards for behavioral assessments and interventions High standards for behavioral assessments and interventions New criteria for determining students with learning disabilities New criteria for determining students with learning disabilities Response-to-Intervention Programs – LD, Screening, Contracts for Excellence Regulations Response-to-Intervention Programs – LD, Screening, Contracts for Excellence Regulations Continuum of service options to meet individuals student needs Continuum of service options to meet individuals student needs

Improving critical systems and structures that support achievement requires us to… Be purposeful in improving core instructional practices Be purposeful in improving core instructional practices Lead systems initiatives (TA) with long- term and lasting impact or outcomes Lead systems initiatives (TA) with long- term and lasting impact or outcomes Measure success not in effort, but effect Measure success not in effort, but effect Be visionary Be visionary

“Today, with a growing acknowledgement of service system accountability, we may be on the verge of moving toward a visionary style of solving problems. A visionary style is focused more on goals and desired outcomes and less on specific (perhaps symptomatic) problems. A visionary style helps us see past the current issues that attract our immediate attention into a future of what might be, “if only we....”

References & Links   P-16 Education: A Plan for Action   Report to the Board of Regents on Closing the Achievement Gap: Strategies for Students with Disabilities Implemented in d4.doc d4.doc   Results for Students and Individuals with Disabilities in and Final2007.ppt:// Final2007.ppt   State Performance Plan and Annual Performance Report   Special Education Policy Guidance, Laws and Regulations Keynote by R. Cort, 10/3/07