1 / 118

MASP Representatives

Clinical Guidance on Implementation For the Identification of Students Suspected of Having a Specific Learning Disability. MASP Representatives. Lisa Backman MS NCSP, RSU #14 Windham/Raymond Schools lbackman@rsu14.org Ruth Crowell, MA ABSNP, MDES LLC & RSU #14

oshin
Télécharger la présentation

MASP Representatives

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Clinical Guidance on Implementation For the Identification of Students Suspected of Having a Specific Learning Disability

  2. MASP Representatives • Lisa Backman MS NCSP, RSU #14 Windham/Raymond Schools lbackman@rsu14.org • Ruth Crowell, MA ABSNP, MDES LLC & RSU #14 ruth.crowell@mdesllc.org • Susan Holinger MS NCSP Maranacook Schools Susan_Holinger@maranacook.org

  3. www.masponline.net Resources tab

  4. Objectives • Develop a thorough understanding of Maine’s new Specific Learning Disability (SLD) Regulations • Become familiar with the New SLD Eligibility Form • Learn to identify patterns of strengths and weaknesses • Practice using the new SLD criteria with sample cases

  5. Specific Learning Disability Definition (MUSER VII.2.L) The term means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell or to do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing or motor disabilities, or intellectual disability, or emotional disturbance or environmental, cultural or economic disadvantage. Remains unchanged

  6. How did we get here? • We’ve been here before • 2004 federal changes allowed states to choose between 3 models of determining eligibility for SLD • Discrepancy between achievement and general cognitive ability (Discrepancy model) • RTI • PSW

  7. History • Many states chose to allow individual districts and/or schools to determine their process • Maine chose to create a state-wide process and codified it in Chapter 101 • Task Force was established • Cognitive referencing • Cut scores • Minimal requirement for general ed interventions • 2008 Guidance on Implementation (MASP)

  8. History • 2012 - OSEP concerns with both cognitive referencing and our cut-scores • Process of legislative change to change Chapter 101 • Another working group was formed • DOE • MASP • MADSEC • University of Maine • Parent groups

  9. History • Work group struggled with • RTI only • Efficacy of comprehensive evaluation • Utility of cognitive information • What to call cognitive/psychological processes • End result

  10. History • Reordering of questions • Much remains unchanged • Question 4 – Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) • General education interventions (RTI) (4a) • Educational performance (4b) • Academic achievement (4c) • Psychological processes (4d)

  11. Before We Start, Consider… What is a Specific Learning Disability? What is not a Specific Learning Disability? SLD Guidance Document Appendix V Adapted from West Shore ESD procedures for determining eligibility of a SLD using PSW Model 2013

  12. SLD is: Characterized by an otherwise normal cognitive ability profile indicating that the student has areas of strengths at or above the average range along with a specific area or areas of processing weakness. SLD is not: Characterized by generally low or below average cognitive abilities with little or no areas of strength.

  13. SLD is: Characterized by processing weakness(es) that are linked by research to specific academic weakness(es) SLD is not: Characterized by processing weakness(es) that are not linked with academic weakness(es).

  14. SLD is: Explained by a neurologically-based processing deficit or deficits. SLD is not: Explained by primarily low or below average cognitive abilities, another disability category or an exclusionary factor.

  15. SLD is: Characterized as a “within learner” trait. SLD is not: Explained by external factors such as instructional or environmental variables.

  16. SLD is: Sometimes in existence with other disability categories (sensory, language, behavioral). SLD is not: Primarily explained by another disability and/or condition (Emotional Disturbance, Intellectual Disability, etc.).

  17. SLD is: An educational disability SLD is not: Solely a medical or mental health diagnosis.

  18. SLD is: A disability category under the Maine Special Education Regulations (MUSER) and the Federal Regulations of IDEA. SLD is not: A disability category based on criteria solely from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) or an outside agency’s professional opinion.

  19. SLD is: A wide range of learning difficulties in relation to academic skills SLD is not: An automatic entitlement for students with any academic difficulties

  20. SLD is: An impairment requiring a comprehensive and individual evaluation by an Individual Education Plan (I.E.P.) team to ensure all SLD Federal and State criteria are met SLD is not: An automatic default category when a student demonstrates lack of progress in the general education setting.

  21. SLD is: An educational classification in which a child meets the criteria for SLD, so much so that he/she cannot profit in the general education curriculum without special education support. SLD is not: Applied when the child meets the SLD criteria, but does not require special education support to benefit from general education curriculum.

  22. Question # 1: Adequate Achievement

  23. Eight Areas of Achievement Remains unchanged

  24. Assess All Areas of Suspected Disability Documentation of assessment of the student’s achievement must be provided in all of the areas of suspected learning disability (as identified in the referral documentation)

  25. All Data To Be Considered • DOE: It is important for the team to consider all available achievement data • Both according to the student’s age & grade

  26. Multiple Means for Measuring Achievement Evidence from multiple valid and reliable sources may include: • group-normed standardized assessments • state-wide or district-wide assessments • curriculum-based measures • classroom assessments based on state standards

  27. Achievement Relative To The Student’s Age Examples of Standardized Measures: • WJ-IV & WJ-IV Oral Language • WIAT-III • GORT-V • KTEA-3 • PAL-II • FAR & FAM See Appendix I for list of tests measuring each of 8 areas

  28. Age or Grade Norms? • Level of curriculum to which student exposed • Recently retained – K retained student in the fall • Retained a year or more ago – 9th grade retained in K • Student starting school a year a year late – 6 yrs. In fall of K

  29. Appendix I Example: Basic Reading Skills • WJ-IV: Letter Word Identification Word Attack Spelling of Sounds • WJ-IV Oral Language: Phonetic Coding Speed of Lexical Access • TOWRE, WIAT-III, GORT-V, KTEA-3, PAL-II, FAR

  30. Best Practices for Assessment Example: Basic Reading • Measure letter identification, sight word reading and pseudoword reading. • Measure skills in isolation and in context. • Measure both accuracy and fluency of each. • If the results of one measure are incongruous with the results of other measures, administer/review multiple measures of that construct. More Appendix I: Best practices for each academic skill

  31. More Than One Subtest • Many individually administered standardized achievement tests include a single subtest to measure some of the 8 academic areas. • Example - WIAT:III: Oral Reading Fluency • Important not to base decision on single subtest alone – Use multiple standardized subtests or others such as CMS, etc.

  32. Internally Consistent • Subtests within index should be internally consistent • If not, then further assessment of the specific skill • Example: WIAT-III: Word Reading – 10 Pseudoword Decoding - 6

  33. Determining Adequate Achievement • No specific cut-off for determining “adequate” achievement provided in the regulations. • Most standardized tests use standard deviations (SD) • A score > 1 standard deviation below the mean (>1 SD <Mean) is considered outside the norm: Standard Score <85 Percentile <16% Scaled Score <7 • Standard Error of Measurement- SEM See Appendix II for calculating standard deviations

  34. Achievement Relative to State-Approved Grade Level Standards • State and/or District-wide assessments: MEA’s, etc. • Cut-off scores for meeting vs. not meeting standards • More detail under question #4

  35. Curriculum Based Measures • RTI Data, etc. • More detail under Question #4

  36. Classroom Assessments • Based on State Standards “Does not meet” = “inadequate” • More detail in Question #4 See Appendix III for detailed guidance on “adequate achievement”

  37. Diverse Cultural/Linguistic Backgrounds • Only age and grade-equivalent scores • Very few normed instruments available • Multi-tiered problem-solving approach • Analysis of work samples and other performance data See Appendix IV - Assessment of culturally and linguistically diverse children. Sam Ortiz workshop: Assessing Linguistically & Culturally Diverse Students 4/27/18

  38. Necessary, But Not Sufficient • A finding of low academic achievement is necessary, but not sufficient for SLD identification • Poor achievement may be present for a variety of reasons, only one of which is SLD

  39. Question # 2: Lack of Learning Experiences and Instruction

  40. Adequate Instruction • Includes essential components • Targets student’s specific academic weakness • Includes general education interventions/RTI (MUSER III. General Education Interventions, pages 13 & 14)

  41. Accessing Instruction • Chronic absences • Frequent moves • Behavioral/Emotional interference • Frequently removed from class • English proficiency

  42. Is Lack of Instruction the PrimaryCause? • Review multiple factors • Determine which is primary

  43. Question # 4: Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses

  44. New Portion of SLD Document • Old Question #4 – Processing 1 – 1.5 SD<Mean – removed • Old Question #5 – General Cognitive Ability – removed • Old Question #6 – RTI – embedded in new #4 • Old Question #7 – PSW – expanded by new #4

  45. Looking for Strengths & Weaknesses • No longer any statistical formulas • Not a discrepancy model • Looks for patterns in 4 different areas of data: RTI Classroom Performance Achievement Psychological Processing

  46. Best Explanation for Underachievement • Already identified an academic deficit • Already ruled out instructional deficiency • Already ruled out exclusionary factors • Now – are the characteristics of SLD evident? • Or - some other explanation for inadequate achievement?

  47. What is SLD? “SLD is marked by dysfunction in learning, most often in the academic skills arena. That is, the acquisition and development of academic skills is somehow disrupted from its normal course of learning on the basis of some type of inherent disorder or dysfunction” (Flanagan, Ortiz & Alfonso, 2013, pg. 241)

  48. Lack of Responsiveness to Intervention Pattern of Cognitive & Academic Strengths & Weaknesses AcademicUnderachievement & Underperformance SLD

More Related