Promoting Inclusive Practices Via Monitoring State Performance Plan Indicators # 5 and #6 Barbra Kelley, Ed.D. March 3, 2012

Session Agenda Quick review of the State Performance Plan Indicators #5 and #6 Educational Environment Code Vigilance Sample Data All Striving for the Same Outcomes Framework or Process to Monitor Inclusive Practices Benefits of Self-Monitoring for Greater Inclusion Opportunities

State Performance Plan Indicators #5 and # 6 # 5 – Educational Placements, Ages 6-21 ◦ Percent of students with disabilities ages 6-21 receiving their instruction in the general education classroom 80% or more of the educational day ◦ Percent of students with disabilities ages 6-21 receiving their instruction in the general education 40-79% of their educational day

State Performance Plan Indicators #5 and #6 ◦ Percent of students with disabilities ages 6-21 receiving their instruction in the general education setting less than 40% of their instructional day ◦ Percent of students with disabilities ages 6-21 receiving their instruction in separate schools, residential facilities, or homebound/hospital placements

State Performance Plan Indicators #5 and #6 #6 Preschool Educational Environment Percent of children ages 3-5 with IEPs attending a: ◦ Regular early childhood program and receiving services in the regular early childhood program ◦ Separate special education class, separate school or residential facility

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Preschool EE Chart

Percent of Students Ages 6-21with IEPs in Various Educational Environments % of time inside the general ed. classroom > 80% % < 40% > 80% % < 40% > 80% % < 40% Dist State

% of Time in the General Education Classroom  80 % 40 – 79 % < 40 %  80 % % < 40 % >80% % < 40 % District State Indicator # 5 Mid-Size School District – Three Year Period

% of Time in the General Education Classroom  80 % 40 – 79 % < 40 %  80 % % < 40 % > 80% % < 40 % District State Indicator #5 Large Size School District – Three Year Period

% of Time in the General Education Classroom  80 % 40 – 79 % < 40 %  80 % % < 40 % >80% % < 40 % District State Indicator #5 Small Size School District – Three Year Period

STATE State Performance Plan 20 Indicators Monitoring System Reporting System DISTRICT Education Environmental Code Data Entry Special Education Program Design SCHOOL Response to Intervention Approach Referral and Evaluation Special Education Placement Program Design Education Environmental Code – Indicators #5 % #6

Benefits of Analyzing EE Code Data Comparison over time May or may not be promoting inclusive practices as intended Evidence based decision making practices ◦ Staffing ◦ Student placements and access to the general education setting ◦ Program changes Moving away from traditional placement options

Education Environment Codes EE Code 1 – Students with special needs receiving their instruction in the general education setting 80% or > (Inclusive) EE Code 2 – Students ….. 40% (some inclusive opportunities) EE Code 3 – Students ….. <40% in the general education setting (little or no inclusive education opportunities)

Focus on the Education Environmental Code 2 The goal is to decrease the # of students with special needs in more contained types of settings while increasing the # of students receiving their instruction in the general education setting EE Code 2 is where students move in and out of – both forward and backward There could be potentially anywhere from 25 – 35 % of the students within the school district with special needs being served >40% and <79% in the general education setting.

District Level Special Education Administrator Monitor student movement from EE Code 3 to EE Code 2 (instruction from 40 % in general education) Monitor student movement from EE Code 2 (instruction from > 40 % in the general education setting to <79%) Monitor student movement from EE Code 2 to EE Code 1 (> 80 % in the general Education setting) Promoting an Inclusive Program Design

School Administrator and Program Support Level Monitoring Monitor student movement from EE Code 3 to EE Code 2 (instruction from 40 % in general education) Monitor student movement from EE Code 2 (instruction from > 40 % in the general education setting to <79%) Monitor student movement from EE Code 2 to EE Code 1 (> 80 % in the general Education setting) Promoting an Inclusive Program Design

Benefits of Analyzing EE Code Data Comparison over time May or may not be promoting inclusive practices as intended Evidence based decision making practices ◦ Staffing ◦ Student placements and access to the general education setting ◦ Program changes Moving away from traditional placement options

Framework for Promoting Inclusive Practices by Monitoring State Performance Indicators #5 & # 6 at the District and Individual School Level IStatement of Inclusive Practices Commitment – What does the district or the school value with regard to inclusive practices: WHAT IS IIThree -Year Educational Environment (EE) Code Data – State, District, and School Table completion

THE VISION IIISet Appropriate Goal for the District (may also be imbedded in the DIP or SIP) IVStart of School EE Code Data (baseline data to begin indicator Improvement process) Table with EE Code Data for the Start of the School Year Place for goal to be documented Activities to reach goal

VEnd of First Semester EE Code Data (critical for elementary level schools)  Table with EE Code data  Analysis (at the district level an analysis of the district programs; school level analysis of school service design)  Goal status  Goal adjustment (if necessary)

VIEnd of Second Semester EE Code Data (Critical for all school sites) Table with EE Code data for the end of the school year Analysis (at the district level an analysis of the district programs; school level analysis of school service design) Goal Status Goal adjustment (if necessary) Report of EE Code situation to stakeholders Celebration and continued support

START OF A NEW CYCLE VIINew Three-Year EE Code Data – State, District, and School Table completion Draft new goals Update the DIP and the SIP as appropriate Program and staff adjustments accordingly