Transcript Jan 5th Video Conference

Educational Practices for
Students with Complex
Support Needs in
Pennsylvania
January 5, 2011
Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network
PaTTAN’s Mission
The mission of the Pennsylvania
Training and Technical Assistance
Network (PaTTAN) is to support the
efforts and initiatives of the Bureau of
Special Education, and to build the
capacity of local educational agencies
to serve students who receive special
education services.
2
Pennsylvania’s Commitment to Least Restrictive
Environment (LRE)
Our goal for each child is to ensure IEP
teams begin with the general education
setting with the use of supplementary
aids and services before considering a
more restrictive environment.
3
Purposes
• To share information regarding the effective
instruction of students with complex support
needs in a Standards Aligned System
• To gather input from members of the
network who provide leadership for
professional development to PA LEAs
4
Objectives
1. Develop a common understanding about the
requirements, research and rationale
for effectively instructing students with
complex support needs.
2. Discuss and explore the current status
and future directions for educating
students with complex support needs in
Pennsylvania.
5
Objectives
3. Identify the current initiatives of PDE/BSE,
PaTTAN, and Intermediate Units that impact
and support effective educational and
instructional practices for students with
complex support needs.
4. Gain input regarding questions,
challenges, opportunities, and needed
resources as we move forward together in
this work.
6
Agenda
9:00 – 9:10
9:10 – 10:15
10:15 – 10:30
10:30 – 11:00
11:00 – 11:45
11:45 – 12:15
Welcome
Shift in Educational Practices:
Requirements, Research and
Rationale
Break
Current Activities and
Connections
Future Directions/Next Steps
Debrief and Wrap Up
7
PDE Mission: To lead and serve the educational
community to enable each individual to grow into
an inspired, productive, fulfilled lifelong learner.
JOHN TOMMASINI,
DIRECTOR, BSE, PDE
8
Federal Requirements
• Federal laws and regulations required that all
students, including those with the most severe
disabilities, participate in the statewide accountability
process:
–
–
–
–
Section 504 of The Rehabilitation Act,
Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
Amendments of 1997
– No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Standards Aligned System
• Working to make Pennsylvania’s StandardsAligned System a reality for all learners,
including those with complex support needs.
10
Who are the students?
Think, Pair, Share
• When you hear “learners with complex
support needs”, who do you think of?
– Learning characteristics
– Labels
– Kind of supports needed
11
Students with complex support needs…
• Are those student with disabilities who comprise
about 1 – 2 % of all students; and,
• Are most often are assessed via the PASA, rather
than the PSSA; and,
• May include students who have intellectual
disabilities and/or may need life skills support,
multiple disabilities support, autistic support or
physical support; and,
• May require augmentative communication systems
and assistive technology in order to access,
participate and progress in learning.
12
The Vision
“Imagine educational practices in which learners with
significant disabilities have the same learner outcomes
as students without disabilities”
Kleinert & Kearnes, 2001
13
Our Vision
• When students with disabilities are provided
with appropriate instruction and supports,
they can learn grade-level academic
knowledge & skills and communicate in ways
that are commensurate with their same age
peers without disabilities.
14
What is your current level of agreement with respect
to the vision?
1 – “I strongly support”
2 – “I support”
3 – “I support but with minor concerns that
would need clarification”
4 – “I might be able to support but have major
concerns to be addressed”
5 – “I cannot support at this time”
15
• Shift in Educational Practices:
Requirements, Research &
Rationale
16
“Don't Underestimate the Potential of Students
with Disabilities”
Rick Creech, Educational Consultant
PaTTAN Harrisburg
17
Curricular Context for Students with
Complex Support Needs
1970’s
1980’s
• Developmental Model
• Functional Life Skills Model
1990’s
• Social Inclusion and
• Self-Determination Model
1997 - present
• Access and Participation in
General Education Curriculum
• Universal Design for Learning
18
Value, Equal Worth
and Respect
Research
Estimate the number of
studies conducted over the
past 35 years regarding
content and pedagogy for
typical students.
Has this research impacted
educational practices?
20
Now consider…
• How many validated research and literature
review studies occurring in the past 35 years
studying educational practices for students
with complex support needs?
21
128 reading
55 math
10 science
22
M. McSheehan: 2010 PEAL Conference, Pittsburgh PA
Early Research
• Students with complex support needs can be
educated
• Validated concept of “Partial Participation”
23
Functional Activities?
• Multiple studies support that instruction on
functional activities, a mainstay of the
curriculum in self-contained settings, can be
embedded effectively within general education
activities, resulting in an increase in
instructional time for both functional activities
and general education curriculum content.
(Fisher & Frey, 2001; Hunt & Farron-Davis, 1992; Hunt, Farron-Davis, et
al.,1994; Johnson, McDonnell, Holzwarth & Hunter, 2004; McDonnell,
Thorson, McQuivey & Kiefer-O’Donnell, 1997)
24
Current Research Topics
• Context
• Relationship Between Context, Curriculum
and Student Learning
• Effective Instructional Practices
• Promoting Active Engagement
• Access to Grade level Content and Standards
25
The Least Dangerous Assumption
• “…educational decisions ought to be based on
assumptions, which if incorrect will have the
least dangerous effect…we should assume
that poor performance is due to instructional
inadequacy rather than to student deficits…”
Anne Donnellan Ph.D
University of San Diego
26
Presume Competence
Viewing students through the lens of a disability
label may increase the likelihood of misjudging
capabilities and barring some students from
opportunities to learn what other students
their age are learning
(Jorgensen, McSheehan & Sonnenmeier, 2007)
27
Implications
• General and special educators collaborate to
design and deliver effective instructional
practices that maintain depth and breadth of
standards when providing instruction to
diverse groups of students.
• Curriculum, assessment and instruction are
designed incorporating Universal Design for
Learning (UDL) principles.
28
Implications
• All teachers are proficient in reaching and
teaching all learners.
• All students are engaged in rigorous standards
aligned instruction with the expectation of
high rates of student achievement.
29
Pennsylvania Research Studies
Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network
3
0
Evolving Accountability System
• 2000-01 The Pennsylvania Alternate System of
Assessment (PASA) was introduced as the
statewide alternate assessment to assess
reading and math in grades 5, 8, and 11
with grade 3 added later.
• 2005-06 Grades 4, 6, and 7 were tested for the
purposes of AYP for the first time
• 2007
PASA Science Assessment in grades 4, 8,
and 11 introduced.
Assessing Students with Complex Support Needs
• According to federal guidelines, alternate
assessments judged against alternate academic
achievement standards should be aligned to grade
level expectations.
• The PASA alternate anchors/eligible content are
aligned to the grade level PSSA anchors/eligible
content.
• The PASA alternate anchors/eligible content are reinterpreted and limited in depth and breadth.
Research Agenda
• SALLSA Enhanced Assessment Grant (2008)
• A State Consortium To Examine
the Consequential Validity Of
Alternate Assessments Based On Alternate
Achievement
Standards (AA-AAS) : A Longitudinal Study
(2008)
• National Center and State Collaborative
(2010)
Research Activities
• Activities
– Alignment study in reading and math
– Curricular Indicator Survey
• Activities
– Survey teachers who administer the PASA
– Survey administrators directly involved with the PASA
(e.g., principals where the PASA is administered)
– Conduct observations in classrooms of teachers who
completed the survey
Research Activities
• Develop a new alternate assessment aligned to the
Common Core (e.g. Common Core Assessment for
the 1% population)
• Grant includes development of a comprehensive
model curriculum, instruction, assessment and
professional development
Selected Findings
• Disconnect:
– Majority of students had symbolic communication systems
– Yet teachers frequently teaching content at the “attention”
level
• Professional development may help teachers target
deeper learning (i.e., higher levels of Depth of
Knowledge (DOK) while retaining the expectation
for independent performance.
• Limited professional development opportunities with
regards to interpretation of PASA scores and
communication of results.
Standards Aligned System
Mission
To include students with complex support needs in
a meaningful way within the Standards Aligned
System
SAS Activities
• The University of Kentucky through ILSSA and
National Alternate Assessment Center
worked in cooperation with the Bureau of
Special Education and PaTTAN
• June 15-18, 2010
• Approximately 20 educators including special
and general educators, curriculum specialists
SAS Activities
• Educators modified lesson plans within SAS
and/or developed new lesson plans
– Pathways to Learning (http://www.ihdi.uky.edu/IEI/) was
used in combination with the SAS Curriculum
Framework
• Focus of modified lesson plans included:
– “Near links” and “far links” to grade level
content
– Communication levels (pre-symbolic,
emerging symbolic, symbolic)
SAS Outcomes
• 21 lesson plans were developed in June
• Lesson plans required additional vetting
• The following are ready for immediate
placement onto SAS, :
– 7 modified reading lesson plans
– 4 modified math lesson plans
– 2 modified science lesson plans
Current Pennsylvania Activities &
Connections
• Access to & Participation in General
Curriculum
• Effective Instruction
• Leadership
• Infrastructure
41
What is your current level of agreement with respect
to the vision?
1 – “I strongly support”
2 – “I support”
3 – “I support but with minor concerns that
would need clarification”
4 – “I might be able to support but have major
concerns to be addressed”
5 – “I cannot support at this time”
42
How To Vote via Texting
TIPS
1. Standard texting rates only (worst case US $0.20)
2. We have no access to your phone number
3. Capitalization doesn’t matter, but spaces and spelling do
Future Directions and Next Steps
• Input from IU teams
• What questions do you have?
• What challenges and opportunities do you
see?
• What supports may be needed?
45
Activity Instructions
•
•
•
•
Complete worksheet individually
Share within IU team
Prioritize for sharing
Debrief
46
Contact Information
PaTTAN Directors
Angela Kirby-Wehr
[email protected]
PaTTAN Harrisburg
James Palmiero
[email protected]
PaTTAN Pittsburgh
Janet Sloand
[email protected]
PaTTAN King of Prussia
www.pattan.net
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Edward G. Rendell, Governor
Pennsylvania Department of Education
Amy C. Morton, Acting Secretary
John J. Tommasini, Director
Bureau of Special Education
Patricia Hozella, Assistant Director
Bureau of Special Education
47