Ground Rules

1. Ground Rules • Start and stop on time • All participate • OK to disagree but not be disagreeable • Keep side conversations to a minimum • Other

2. State of IdahoBureau of Special Education Results-Based Model Core Training Developed by Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP School Psychology Program Idaho State University Revised July 2002

3. Results-Based Model Unit 1:RBM Overview The Big Picture

4. RBM Definition The Results-Based Model is a process for meeting student needs without dwelling upon their disabilities. It is intervention andresultsfocused--expending resources, energies, and skills of collaborative teams upon problem-solving solutions that work for the student. RBM is proactive and preventative in that it attempts to catch student concerns early within the general education setting. It places primary emphasis upon what we do for children and what benefits result from our efforts.

5. Define Needs ? ? General Ed Classroom Apply Interventions Evaluate Results RBM Focus

6. Intent of RBM RBM intent is to support teachers, students, & parents leading to increased success in the general education environment...

7. Special Education Teachers Title I Reading, Math English as Second Language General Education Teachers Community Agencies, Programs School Principal, Superintendent SLP; OT/PT; Audiology School Counselor Parents & Families School Psychologist Support for General Education

8. Stakeholders 10 Principles of RBM

9. RBM Principle • Principle 1 Strength–Based Model improves results for all students. • Principle 2 Integration of ALL resources and shared expertise responds more completely to the needs of students. • Principles 3 Empowered parents who participate fully in decision making and implementation improve, educational results

10. RBM Principle: contd. • Principle 4 Collaboration results and improved access and participation in general education curriculum • Principle 5 A proactive and responsive system provides early identification and intervention

11. RBM Principle: contd. • Principle 6 Ongoing training and technical assistance is critical to systems change and improvement • Principle 7 Professionals hold flexible roles based on expertise as well as assignment • Principle 8 Functional assessment is used to gather data to design, implement and monitor the effectiveness of interventions.

12. RBM Principle: contd. • Principle 9 IDEA requirements and best practices incorporated to improve results for students with disabilities • Principle 10 Frequent progress monitoring determines student progress and allows for data-based decisions to adjust interventions as needed.

13. Systematically identify and define problems Develop interventions & monitor progress Evaluate outcomes of interventions Problem Solving Teams Collaborative and interdisciplinary in makeup, teams use the IDEAL problem solving approach to:

14. Educational Audiologist School Social Worker Paraeducator Early Childhood Personnel Speech Language Pathologist Special Education Nurse School Psychologist Special Education Teachers Special Education Consultant Transition Consultant School Counselor Work Experience Coordinator Classroom Teacher Adapted Physical Education Specialist School Nurse Parents Physical Therapist Occupational Therapist Parent Education Coordinator Principal Working as a Team

15. Parental Involvement Parents are the first teachers of their children. Their involvement: • Assists the school and the parent • Greatly reduces problems of resistance generated by misunderstandings.

16. Focuses upon the concerns of educators and parents by using assessment methods most directly associated with measuring the concern as well as being sensitive to “effects” of interventions we apply. Functional Assessment

17. Assessment is…

18. Outcome-Oriented Interventions • Outcomes relative to the development of specific goals that can be measured and objectively assessed.

19. Interventions • Interventions require direction, instruction, and data collection to the area of concern.

20. An Intervention Plan Is a written plan based on an individual student’s problem. It includes: • A description of the behavior • A description of the problem • Direct instruction • Monitoring progress • Evaluation of the data

21. Ongoing Progress Monitoring • Ongoing and frequent monitoring of student progress provides teachers, parents, child, and support staff with valid and sensitive data necessary for judging whether the initial “discrepancy” is getting larger, remaining the same, or being reduced.

22. Systematic Data-Based Decision Making • Data obtained through progress monitoring is used to make decisions regarding the impact of interventions by using pre-planned decision rules to modify interventions that are not effective and continue or enhance one that are.

23. What do we know about data-based decision making? • Data provided by published tests are not useful for making many educational decisions (Reschly, 1988; Salvia & Ysseldyke, 1988; Ysseldyke & Thurlow, 1984) • Test data frequently play a limited role in the way decisions are made (Garcia & Pearson, 1994) • Traditionally data have been collected first and then used to make numerous decisions (Garcia & Pearson, 1994; Shinn & Baker 1996) • Educators need information to make a range of educational decisions (Shinn & Baker, 1996)

24. Vs. Traditional Model(Child Problem Solving) Results-Based Model(Problem Solving)

25. TraditionalModel RBM Model • Definition of a problem (student vs., situation) • Purpose of Assessment (disability vs. function) • Kinds of Assessment (high inference vs. low inference) • Purpose of school-based teams (Procedural vs. flexible) • Data Analysis (Quantitative vs. Qualitative) • Goals of Interventions (service vs. corrective action) • Monitoring success (indirect and infrequent vs, direct and frequent) • End of result (Placement vs. solution)

26. TraditionalModel: contd. RBM Model : contd. • Student categorization (13 vs. non) • Eligibility • Parental role (non active vs. active) • Paperwork (bureaucratic vs. functional)

27. The IDEAL Problem Solver: A Guide for Improving Thinking, Learning, and Creativity Second Edition By John D. Bransford with Barry S. Stein Paperback, 2nd ed., 262pp.ISBN: 0716722054Publisher: W. H. Freeman CompanyPub. Date: March  1993

28. I D E A L RBMProblem Solving Approach dentify the Problem efine the Problem xplore Intervention options ct on the Intervention Plan ook, Analyze, Evaluate Results

29. Act on Interventions Identify Problem Look at Results Explore Interventions Define Problem IDEAL Problem Solving Process of the Results-Based Model • Problem Solving is an integrated process • requiring Decision-Making at each step…

30. Define Needs General Ed Classroom Apply Interventions Evaluate Results RBM = Results

31. Skill Building • Form a group of 3-5 people. • In the group, choose a Facilitator and Recorder. • Take 20 Minutes to write a brief description of • What is the Problem? (Identify) • What is your goal? (Define) • What are you going to do about it? (Explore) • How will you intervene? (Act) • How will you monitor success? (Look) • On the board, poster paper, etc. Write I, D, E, A, L with your responses. • The Recorder will report for the group.

32. State of IdahoBureau of Special Education Results-Based Model Core Training Developed by Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP School Psychology Program Idaho State University Revised July 2002

33. Unit 1 A

34. Minority Students in Special and Gifted Education National Research Council

35. Child's race/ethnicity White, non-Hispanic 14 45 Black, non-Hispanic 29 21 Asian 15 43 Hispanic 24 27 Hawaiian Native/Pacific 30 23 Islander American Indian/Alaska 38 17 Native More than one race, non- 18 35 Hispanic Disadvantaged Children Are Less Well Prepared for Schooling • Percent first time kindergartners by print familiarity scores 3 skills 0 skills

36. Effect of Poverty Increases With Age FIGURE 3-12 Income-to-needs and child cognitive ability: Deep poverty and math ability (PIAT-Math), NLSY-CS data set. Source: Brooks-Gunn, B.J., G.J. Duncan, and P.R. Britto (1999) Are socioeconomic gradients for children similar to those for adults?” P. 109 in Developmental Health and the Wealth of Nations, D.P. Keating and C. Hertzman, eds. New York: Guilford Press. Reprinted with permission of The Guilford Press: New York.

37. Student Achievement is the Product of the Child in the School Context CHILD TEACHER • Biology • Education/teacher -genetic endowment -environmental influence preparation • Family context • Experience -income • Classroom management Student -education style achievement -culture • Community context -resources -culture CLASSROOM • Size • Curriculum • Resources -materials -support personnel

38. II. The Role of the General Education Context

39. Teacher Quality and Student Achievement • Teacher quality is highly correlated with student achievement. • e.g., In 900 Texas school districts, teacher expertise, education, and experience accounted for about 40% of variance in students’ reading and math scores controlling for SES. (Ferguson).

40. Teacher Quality and Minority Student Achievement • High poverty schools have less well prepared teachers. • 15% of elementary and 21% of secondary teachers in high-poverty schools have less that the critical three years of experience, double the rate of low-poverty schools. • In high poverty schools 12% of teachers have not obtained standard certification, and 18% teach out of field. Both numbers are below 1% in low-poverty schools.

41. Classroom/School Management Affects Student Behavior • Effective classroom management affects behavior and achievement • For aggressive boys, ineffective classroom management in 1st grade is a powerful predictor of later behavior problems (Kellam et al.) • Students placed in disorderly classrooms show higher rates of aggression and lower levels of social competence (Aber et al.)

42. Classroom/School Management Affects Student Behavior • Effective classroom management systems require: • Explicit attention to defining expectation • Positively stated rules and classroom routines • Frequent student-teacher interactions

43. Can General Education Interventions Reduce Special Education Placements for Disadvantaged Students? • Success for All evaluation data suggest: • reduction in placements of 50% or more • 2.2% of SFA 3rd graders two years behind compared to 8.8% of control children • In controlled experiments, the Right Start program was found to substantially increase early math achievement for low-income, minority children.

44. III. Special Education Referral and Assessment

45. Rethinking Special Education Referral and Assessment Reading and behavior problems are primary reasons for referral • General education interventions have been demonstrated to improve reading and behavior outcomes • Currently no mechanisms assure students have been exposed to quality reading instruction and classroom management before referral • Referral requires student failure, but screening mechanisms exist that allow for more effective early intervention.

46. Rethinking Special Education Referral and Assessment • Referral is most often initiated by the teacher--an inconsistent and subjective screening device. • Most state regulations require an IQ discrepancy for an LD determination • the criterion does not define students with a unique educational need • IQ discrepancy information is not relevant to available interventions • IQ discrepancy produces a wait-to-fail effect

47. Special Education Recommendation 1 • Change federal guidelines so that special education eligibility would ensue: • When a student exhibits large differences from typical levels of performance in achievement, social behavior, or emotional regulation • AND • With evidence of insufficient response to high-quality interventions in academic and/or behavioral domains of concern.

48. Assessment • Assessment would focus on evidence of insufficient student response to research based interventions : • An explicit definition of the target behavior • Collection of data on current performance • Establishment of goals • Adoption/development of an instructional or behavioral intervention that is research based • Assessment and monitoring of the implementation of the intervention to ensure proper delivery • No IQ test would be required, and results of an IQ test would not be the primary criterion on which eligibility rests.

49. Special Education Recommendation 2 • Universal screening and multitiered intervention for reading problems. • All children screened early (late Kg or early 1st grade) and monitored through 2nd grade. • Those “at risk” for reading problems: supplemental small-group instruction by the classroom teacher for 20-30 minutes/day. • Non-responders should be given more intensive instruction in smaller groups by a teacher with specialized training. • Continued insufficient response: referral to special education and the development of an IEP.

50. Special Education Recommendation 3 • That states launch large-scale pilot programs to test scaling up of universal behavior management programs and early behavior screening and intervention: • Assessment of classrooms and non-instructional school settings (hallways, playgrounds) • Yearly behavioral screening of all children in grades K-3 • The first step in eligibility determination should be the assessment of the child’s classroom context. • If context is not implicated, individualized measures should be taken to help the child adjust in the general education classroom using evidence based interventions. • For non-responders, an IEP should be developed with the participation of behavioral consultants and parents, with careful monitoring of progress.