1 / 5

Collaboration for Intervention General Education, BBSST, ELL, RtI, Special Education

Collaboration for Intervention General Education, BBSST, ELL, RtI, Special Education. Shelby County Schools August 31, 2009. Today’s Purpose-COLLABORATION.

ikia
Télécharger la présentation

Collaboration for Intervention General Education, BBSST, ELL, RtI, Special Education

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. Collaboration for InterventionGeneral Education, BBSST, ELL, RtI, Special Education Shelby County Schools August 31, 2009

  2. Today’s Purpose-COLLABORATION To ensure that quality instruction, good teaching practices, differentiated instruction, and remedial opportunities are available in general education, and that special education is provided for students with disabilities who require more specialized services than what can be provided in general education

  3. To ensure that underachievement in a child suspected of having an LD is not due to lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math, the group must consider, as part of the evaluation • Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, which was provided to the child’s parents.

  4. Why Not Special Education? • Historically, has not “closed the gap” • Disproportionality issues • Students retained much more often • Students involved in more disciplinary actions • Based on “wait to fail” model • Expectations are lowered • Students rarely exit • Discrepancy model not reliable • National increase in the identification of students with Specific Learning Disabilities (233% from 1975 to 2000)

  5. Statistics • From 1998-2007, students identified as SLD has decreased by 7%. • In 2007, 59% of students with SLD spent most (greater than 80%) of their school day in a general education classroom compared just 40% in 2007. • High school dropout rate of students with SLD was 25% in 2007; 41% in 1997. • Most students with SLD are graduating with a regular high school diploma: 61% in 2007 compared to 51% in 1997. Cortiella, C. (2009). The State of Learning Disabilities, National Center for Learning Disabilities.

More Related