1 / 61

Looking at Performance: Compliance, Results and Perspective

Looking at Performance: Compliance, Results and Perspective Jacquelyn J. Thompson, Ph.D. Director Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services MTSA March 2008

Gabriel
Télécharger la présentation

Looking at Performance: Compliance, Results and Perspective

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. Looking at Performance: Compliance, Results and Perspective Jacquelyn J. Thompson, Ph.D. Director Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services MTSA March 2008

  2. The White Rabbit put on his spectacles. ‘Where shall I begin, please your Majesty?’ he asked. ‘Begin at the beginning,’ the King said gravely, ‘and go on till you come to the end: then stop.’ Lewis Carroll (1832-1898) Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland

  3. The 21st Century “3 Rs” • Willard Daggett, International Center for Leadership in Education, has coined the new “3Rs” • Rigor (what and how of learning) • Relevance (application to real world) • Relationships (essential human connections)

  4. BASIC DATA: SPECIAL ED IN MICHIGAN “Not everything that can be counted, counts. And not everything that counts can be counted.” Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

  5. Special Education Eligibility Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  6. Special Education Eligibility asPercent of Student Population Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  7. 2007 Identification Rates By Disability Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  8. LD SI CI OHI EI ASD ECDD PI SXI HI VI TBI D/B Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  9. Specific Learning Disability 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  10. Speech and LanguageImpairment 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  11. Cognitive Impairment 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  12. Physical and Other Health Impairments 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  13. Emotional Impairment 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  14. Autism Spectrum Disorder 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  15. Early Childhood Developmental Delay 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  16. Severe Multiple Impairment 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  17. Hearing Impairment 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  18. Visual Impairment 1991-2007 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  19. Gender by Age Level Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  20. Annual Performance Report (APR) • IDEA Requirements for State Reporting • 20 Compliance and Results Indicators • Data from multiple sources • Targets and baselines • Improvement activities • USDOE uses for State level “Determinations” (status in meeting the requirements of law)

  21. Annual Performance Report (APR) • Public Reporting • On each LEA, in relation to State Targets • Annually • Determinations • On each LEA, in relation to State Targets • Annually • Consequences (Section 616 of IDEA)

  22. “A goal without a plan is just a wish.” Antoine de Saint-Exupery (1900-1944)

  23. Annual Performance Report CORE QUESTIONS • Are children with IEPs entering school ready to learn at high levels? (6,7,11,12) • Are students with IEPs achieving at high levels? (3,4,5,8,9,10)

  24. Annual Performance Report CORE QUESTIONS 3. Are students with IEPs prepared for success beyond high school? (1,2,13,14) 4. Does the infrastructure support the implementation of IDEA? (15 – 20)

  25. “You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals. To that end, each of us must work for our own improvement and, at the same time, share a general responsibility for all humanity.” Marie Curie (1867-1934)

  26. APR Core Questions (Group #2):Achieving at High Levels 1. AYP - Participation and performance of children with IEPs on statewide assessments Target (NCLB): 95% participation Michigan Performance: Participation rates across grades = 96.4% - 99.7% Targets (NCLB): vary by grade Percent of districts meeting the State’s AYP objectives for progress for SWD: 99.7% Results Indicator #3

  27. Students With IEPs Ages 6-21 Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  28. Source: MICIS December 1, 2007

  29. APR Core Questions (Group #2):Achieving at High Levels 2. Suspension and Expulsion – percent of districts having a significant discrepancy in the rates of suspension and expulsion of children with IEPs for greater than 10 days in a school year. Target: <10% Michigan Performance: <1% Results Indicator #4

  30. APR Core Questions (Group #2):Achieving at High Levels 3. LRE (Educational Environments) – Percent of children with IEPs removed from regular (gen ed) class: • Less than 21% of the day Target: 55% Michigan Performance: 50.3% Results Indicator #5

  31. APR Core Questions (Group #2):Achieving at High Levels 3. LRE (Educational Environments) – Percent of children with IEPs removed from regular (gen ed) class: • Greater than 60% of the day Target: 16.9% or less Michigan Performance: 18.5% Results Indicator #5

  32. APR Core Questions (Group #2):Achieving at High Levels 3. LRE (Educational Environments) – Percent of children with IEPs removed from regular (gen ed) class and: • Served in separate schools, buildings, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements Target: 5.1% or less Michigan Performance: 5% Results Indicator #5

  33. Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  34. APR Core Questions (Group #2):Achieving at High Levels 4. Parent Involvement – percent of parents with a child with an IEP who report that schools facilitated parent involvement as a means of improving services and results for the child Target: 21% composite weighted ratio/NCSEAM Ladder achieving the performance standard as set by a national standard-setting process Michigan Performance: 23.59% Results Indicator #8

  35. APR Core Questions (Group #2):Achieving at High Levels 5. Disproportionality – percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education that is the result of inappropriate identification (non-compliant policies, procedures and practices) Target: 0% Michigan Performance: <1% Compliance Indicator #9

  36. APR Core Questions (Group #2):Achieving at High Levels 6. Disproportionality – percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories that is the result of inappropriate identification (non-compliant policies, procedures and practices) Target: 0% Michigan Performance: 2.4% Compliance Indicator #10

  37. APR Core Questions (Group #3):Ready for Success after School • Graduation – percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high school with a regular diploma compared to percent of all youth in the State graduating with a regular diploma. Target: 80% (NCLB/MI target for all students) Michigan Performance: 69% Results Indicator #1

  38. APR Core Questions (Group #3):Ready for Success after School 2. Dropout- percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school compared to the percent of all youth in the State dropping out of high school. Target: 11.5% or less Michigan Performance: 28.9% Results Indicator #2

  39. Graduation/Dropout Rates Students with Disabilities 1996-2007 *2007 represents data from the 2006-07 school year Sources: MICIS 1996-2006 & CEPI-SRSD 2006-2007

  40. APR Core Questions (Group #3):Ready for Success after School 3.Secondary Transition – percent of youth aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet the post-secondary goals. Target: 100% Michigan Performance: 40% Compliance Indicator #13

  41. APR Core Questions (Group #3):Ready for Success after School • Does the IEP identify the student’s post-secondary vision/goals? Target: 100% Michigan Performance: 89% • Does the IEP identify the student’s strengths, preferences, interests, needs academic achievement, and functional performance? Target: 100% Michigan Performance: 61%

  42. APR Core Questions (Group #3):Ready for Success after School • Will the annual IEP goals and transition services reasonably enable the student to meet the postsecondary vision? • Target: 100% • Michigan Performance: 51% • Are the IEP goals measurable? • Target: 100% • Michigan Performance: 78%

  43. APR Core Questions (Group #3):Ready for Success after School • Was the IEP convened within an annual time frame? Target: 100% Michigan Performance: 76%

  44. Ages 22+ Years Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  45. Source: December 1, 2007/MICIS

  46. APR Core Questions (Group #3):Ready for Success after School 4. Post-Secondary Outcomes – percent of youth who had IEPs and who have been competitively employed, enrolled in some type of postsecondary school, or both, within one year of leaving high school. Baseline data established this year (2006-07) Target for 2007-08: 70% Results Indicator #14

  47. Indicator 14: Percent of youth who had IEPs, are no longer in secondary school and who have been competitively employed, enrolled in some type of postsecondary school, or both, within one year of leaving high school Source: Part B State APR for FFY 2006 (2006-2007)

  48. IMPROVING RESULTS • Evidenced-Based Practices • Balanced Assessment • Student Progress Monitoring • Supports and Strategies in Place • Vision and What We Will Do to Achieve it

  49. MI Transition Outcomes Project “Coming together is a beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success.” Henry Ford (1863-1947)

  50. Core Principles of RTI Response to Intervention: Policy Considerations and Implementation National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE), 2005 www.nasdse.org

More Related