1. IEP Team Decisions and Implementation Data: Influences of IDEA 97, NCLB and IDEIA Jim Shriner NCEO Conference Call September, 2006

2. Today’s Purposes 1.Highlight IEP / accommodation data extracted from Project PAR -- a larger study of decision-making about curricular access and assessment participation for students with disabilities. 2.Present main IEP / accommodation data from recent Case Study / Evaluation work with local district (Project IEP-D). OSEP Grants: H324D980070; H325N020081 Lizanne DeStefano, co-P.I. on both efforts

3. Project PAR – IEP Analysis “Immediacy” of implementing IDEA 97 focused attention on assessment plan for students with disabilities. Significant amounts of missing and incomplete data on initial sample of IEPs Fewer than 4 of 10 IEPs contained all IDEA – specified statements.

4. IEP Documentation Changes - PAR

5. School-level focus: Middle School Better Use of Data - District and State Assessment Participation and Accommodation Project IEP-D

6. Special Education Testing Observation Summary Data Fall - DistrictSpring - State Sessions Observed 2536 Multiple Tests Administered 1611 Number of Students 1-153-13

7. Observations suggested overall supportiveness of general education environment Data forms did not. Caused us to ask: –What is real benefit to SPED Pullout accommodation? Fall ITBS Accommodation

8. SPED teachers likely to be multi-tasking More “chaotic” at times SPED “accommodation” may have negative Cognitive, Social/Behavioral, & Affective consequences from student perspective Limited consistency across testing environments Fall ITBS Accommodation

9. Accommodation Use and Supports for Testing Professional Testing Practices for Educators: Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) Illinois State Board of Education, 2004-2006. Required procedures and activities; Prohibited procedures and activities; Best Practices, which are procedures and activities that are highly recommended, but are not required

10. Spring Testing – Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) Routine Practice and Gen. Ed. Accommodation data gathered by testing session Observation and Forms gathered daily

11. General Ed. Environment provided more than “default” accommodations/supports listed in testing manual Supportive, NOT Unethical No Scheduling changes in Gen. Ed. ISAT Accommodation

12. Summaries across accommodation types (Setting, Scheduling, Presentation, Response) and students yield moderate kappa values, and suggest Over-representation of accommodations on IEPs. HOWEVER -- For Individual Accommodations, IEPS tended to Under-represent accommodation use. (nearly 3:1 ratio) IEP – ISAT Accommodation Agreement

13. Often, accommodations of a “social/behavioral” nature were provided, though not on IEP –E.g., Redirection, Praise, Encouragement Many students got similar packages of accommodations (c.f. Elliott, Kratochwill, & McKevitt, 2001) IEP – ISAT Accommodation Agreement

14. Accommodations Monitoring Form –Routine Use and Helpfulness –“Data” based decisions for accommodation use –IEP under-representation of accommodation use may mean “over- accommodation” (c.f., Phillips, 1999) Accommodation Use

15. Accommodation determinations are often “Isolated IEP decisions” Limited tracking of accommodation plans and use Limited awareness/involvement of Gen. Ed. Teachers (despite their overall good work with respect to accommodations) IEP / Accommodation Research to Practice

16. Policy Shifts Practice Drifts  State’s guidelines have good lists, but may not stress guiding principles to fully consider general education role  Consistency of rules across tests and levels  State - IEP Team Balance: Pre-determined valid accommodation(s) vs. acceptability and function of accommodation(s)

17. Investigate how accommodation decision changes mesh with IDEA 2004 provisions for amendments to IEP. What data will support an accommodation change decision? How do IEP Teams address valid vs. invalid accommodation documentation needs in context of “peer reviewed” and “scientifically based” research? (Maybe they don’t.) – Is it similar to RTI provisions? (P. Zirkel, CASE Presentation, Sept. 6, 2006) Actions Ahead?