Specific Learning Disabilities Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts April 2012 Guidelines for Identifying Students with Specific Learning Disabilities Guidelines to inform practice and.
Download ReportTranscript Specific Learning Disabilities Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts April 2012 Guidelines for Identifying Students with Specific Learning Disabilities Guidelines to inform practice and.
Specific Learning Disabilities Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts April 2012 Guidelines for Identifying Students with Specific Learning Disabilities Guidelines to inform practice and decisionmaking Background information Strategies and procedures to provide consistency across schools and districts Resources You Will Know… The nature, roles and responsibilities of the various teaming structures needed within the SPL framework Procedures for verifying each of the SLD criteria Level of Learning Rate of Learning Exclusionary Factors Validating Underachievement Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses How to document the written requirements for SLD determinations You Will Understand… Eligibility Committee (EC) members need a comprehensive understanding of the student, his/her educational environment, educational history, and response to multi-level instruction The EC decision-making process relies on high quality: o Collaboration o Data analysis o Documentation o Assessment Policy & Guidance Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of Students with Exceptionalities July 2012 • Elements of multi-level instruction • Problem-solving model • SLD Standards/Criteria Specific Learning Disabilities Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts • “Standard operating procedures” • Decision-making considerations • Resources Authority Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA 2004), permitted the use of a process for identification of students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) that is based on the child’s response to scientific, research-based intervention. (§300.307(a)(2)) In 2007 the West Virginia Board of Education approved a revision to Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of Students with Exceptionalities In 2012 the West Virginia Board of Education Approved a revisions to Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of Students with Exceptionalities Advance Organizer Connecting SPL & SLD Problem-Solving and Teaming SLD Eligibility Standards Multidisciplinary Evaluation Components Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses Connecting SPL, PSW & SLD Documentation Requirements Connecting SPL and SLD The Framework and the Identification Process Operationalizing SPL In 2011, Support for Personalized Learning was adopted as a framework for providing personalized learning to all students. SPL is characterized by a seamless system of high quality instructional practices allowing all students to sustain significant progress, whether they are considered at-risk, exceeding gradelevel expectations or at any point along the continuum. SPL benefits include earlier identification of academic difficulties and a reduction in the number of students inappropriately referred for special education services. SPL Continuum of Support Suggested SPL Guidelines Variables Targeted Instruction Intensive Instruction Time Per Session 15-30 minutes 30-60 minutes Length of Session Time will vary based on student needs 9 weeks minimum prior to moving to Intensive. Continues only until specific skill, concept, behavior is in place (usually short-term) 9 weeks minimum Number of Sessions 3-5 per week 3-5 per week Frequency of Progress Monitoring Every 2-3 weeks Every 1-2 weeks SPL Data-One Element of SLD Eligibility West Virginia’s SLD eligibility criteria no longer includes the use of the IQ-achievement discrepancy SPL is one component of the identification of specific learning disabilities. A specific learning disability determination is based on both educational need and a student’s low response to high-quality general education instruction. A body of evidence demonstrating academic skill deficiencies and insufficient progress when provided TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction is required in documenting eligibility as a student with a specific learning disability. Parents as Partners in the SPL Process The district must document that the student’s parents were notified about the following: The state’s policies regarding the amount and nature of student performance data that would be collected and the general education services that would be provided; Strategies for increasing student’s rate of learning; and The parents’ right to request an evaluation at any time throughout the SPL process “A Parent’s Guide to Support for Personalized Learning (SPL)” is available at http://wvde.state.wv.us/spl/familycommunity.html Critical Concepts It is critical that teachers, administrators and evaluators understand that low achievement alone does not constitute a student with a learning disability. only after a student is provided TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction over a sufficient period of time that the conclusion of a SLD may be made. delivery of sufficient and appropriate multi-level instruction includes the provision of supports at CORE, TARGETED and INTENSIVE levels. instruction at these increasingly more intense levels ensures that each student is provided an adequate opportunity to learn prior to a SLD determination. Connecting SPL to SLD Severe and persistent low achievement Minimal or low response to TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction Consideration of exclusionary factors, including lack of appropriate instruction SLD Determination Advance Organizer Connecting SPL & SLD Problem-Solving and Teaming SLD Eligibility Standards Multidisciplinary Evaluation Components Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses Connecting SPL, PSW & SLD Documentation Requirements Problem Solving and Teaming Laying the Foundation for Decision-Making Problem-Solving Process 1. Identify and Define Needs 2. Analyze the Problem 5. Evaluate and Adjust the Plan 3. Develop a Plan 4. Implement and Monitor the Plan Progress Monitoring Progress monitoring provides dynamic assessment information to help teachers make instructional decisions. Frequently collected data provides ongoing guidance to teachers regarding the effectiveness of instruction and whether changes to instruction are needed. While progress monitoring data are collected prior to and during the referral and evaluation process (every two to three weeks in TARGETED and every one to two weeks in INTENSIVE), it is important that school personnel involved at various decisionmaking levels (i.e., IT, SAT, MDET, EC) understand the purpose and utility of progress monitoring procedures. Progress Monitoring Progress monitoring varies depending on the level of intensity. For students at the CORE level, progress monitoring is provided to all students using on-going universal screening and assessments aligned with instruction. Students who are receiving more intensive instruction in TARGETED and INTENSIVE levels are provided more focused progress monitoring. Tools that are flexible, efficient, accessible and informative are a priority. Progress monitoring is the way in which a team can gather the data used to make decisions during the problem-solving process. Progress Monitoring Progress monitoring assessments function within SPL as a gauge of student performance and bring forward the need for conversation about instruction for groups of students or for individuals. Assessments in this category most typically target evidence of progress relative to specific, high-priority skills and processes. Data in this category could come from Acuity testlets or probes, DIBELS Next, West Virginia Writes, as well as other assessments. Progress monitoring assessment results can be used to adjust scaffolding, instructional pacing and presentation, as well as contribute to a collection of data used to make decisions about most appropriate instruction and placement for individual students. Progress monitoring data provides valuable information about students’ improvement as a result of a particular instructional method or program and measures instructional change and student growth. Progress Monitoring Guidelines for Charting Student Progress Draw trend line of student progress (e.g., Tukey method) for 7-8 data points and compare to the student’s goal line Trend is not as steep as the goal line, make a teaching change Trend is steeper than the goal line, raise the goal May use “four-point rule” if at least three weeks of instruction has occurred and the last four scores collected all fall above or below the goal line Four most recent scores all fall below the goal line, make a teaching change Four most recent scores all fall above the goal line, raise the goal (Stecker & Lembke, 2007) Collaborative Structures Instructional Team IT Individualized Education Program IEP Team Eligibility Committee SAT Student Assistance Team Student EC Team MDET Multidisciplinary Evaluation Team Collaborative Structures West Virginia Board of Education Policy 2510, Assuring Quality of Education: Regulations for Education Programs, sets forth requirements at each programmatic level to address the needs of struggling students. In Grades K-4 schools must provide strategies for early detection and intervention to correct student deficiencies in reading, language arts and mathematics. At the middle school level, an intervention component ensures mastery of the rigorous content standards and objectives at each grade level. High school students who do not demonstrate mastery of the content standards and objectives shall be provided extra help and extra time through intervention strategies. Instructional Teams (IT) Instructional Teams (ITs) are generally comprised of same grade- level teachers and providers of customized instruction. Naturally fit into the structure of middle schools and are also accommodated by departmental teams at the high school level. May also include the principal, school psychologist, special education teachers, speech/language pathologist and any other qualified personnel who have knowledge of the student and/or expertise in data analysis and instructional planning. (IT) Focus ITs focus on student progress by: 1. using screening/interim assessment and other performance data to identify students who are not performing satisfactorily; 2. grouping students according to specific skill needs; 3. selecting or developing TARGETED instruction; and 4. monitoring student progress and the effectiveness of instruction. Student Assistance Teams (SAT) Policy for Student Assistance Teams (SAT) is set forth in West Virginia Board of Education Policies 2510 and 2419. SAT may act in lieu of the IT Members may be the same or similar to the IT SAT Focus The primary function of the SAT is the review of individual student needs that have persisted despite being addressed by the IT. A teacher, parent, instructional team (IT), adult student, district or any other interested person or agency may initiate a referral to SAT. The SAT ensures that multi-level instruction has been implemented and documented by the student’s teacher and/or provider of customized instruction. Importance of IT and SAT This documentation becomes part of the important existing data that will be used by the Multidisciplinary Evaluation Team (MDET) in determining what additional assessments are needed to determine if the student is a student with a Specific Learning Disability. Subsequently, the Eligibility Committee (EC) will use the SPL data along with additional information gained from the multidisciplinary evaluation to substantiate its eligibility decision. IT and SAT Roles & Responsibilities IT Teachers working together to: Identify students for multi- level instruction Group students Select and develop targeted instruction Monitor student progress and effectiveness of instruction SAT Review documentation collected during TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction. Make recommendations for further, broader problemsolving activities Initiate multidisciplinary evaluations for special education Other Collaborative Teams MDET – Multidisciplinary Evaluation Team Reviews SPL documentation and determines additional areas of assessment needed to constitute a multidisciplinary evaluation. EC - Eligibility Committee Reviews SPL documentation and additional assessments required by the multidisciplinary evaluation team in an effort to confirm the presence of a Specific Learning Disability. IEP Team – Individualized Education Plan Team Reviews the recommendations of the EC and SPL documentation to design a specialized education plan that will allow the child to progress in the State-approved grade-level curriculum. MDET and EC Roles & Responsibilities MDET Review and discuss existing data collected during multi-level instruction Determine the need for additional evaluations that inform instruction and eligibility decision-making Select appropriate assessments to confirm or reject a SLD hypothesis EC Review and discuss student’s response to multi-level instruction Review and discuss results of additional evaluations Determine if multiple data sources indicate a specific learning disability Document the presence of a SLD Advance Organizer Connecting SPL & SLD Problem-Solving and Teaming SLD Eligibility Standards Multidisciplinary Evaluation Components Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) Connecting SPL, PSW & SLD Documentation Requirements Multidisciplinary Evaluation Components Selecting Assessments to Inform Instruction and Determine SLD Components of an Evaluation for SLD Data collected throughout the SPL process is used as one component of the multidisciplinary evaluation The purpose of evaluations is to help the team identify not only why a student is struggling, but also how teachers can design appropriate and individualized specially designed instruction. In conducting an evaluation, schools are encouraged to select assessment procedures to link eligibility determination to instruction. A complementary relationship between the SPL process and psychoeducational testing exists in evaluating for a potential learning disability. SPL Documentation Constitutes Existing Data… Most information is gathered through the course of the student’s instruction A chronology of the student’s educational history Screening, Interim assessments, formative/classroom assessments and progress monitoring data Results of diagnostic assessments to inform the instructional process (e.g., Quick Phonics Screener, Phonological Awareness Screening Inventory, Key Math3, Basic Reading Inventory) Documentation of the nature, frequency, and duration of TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction Considerations for Selecting Formal Assessments In conducting an evaluation, MDETs select assessment procedures that will link eligibility determinations to instruction. Assessments that focus on specific features of a student’s academic difficulty are more useful than measures that address global academic areas. For the student who exhibits weaknesses in areas such as memory, attention, or processing speed, the evaluation battery addresses those areas. Cross Battery Assessment (XBA) Approach for Determining SLD Cross battery assessment(XBA) is a process of selecting subtests that target specific cognitive domains. XBA results and interpretations inform and guide instructional approaches and strategies for the student. XBA can be used to determine if a pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses exists between cognitive abilities and achievement XBA includes multiple measures for arriving at a conclusion that confirms or rejects the hypothesis made by the SAT and MDET. Lists included in the SLD guidance document Appendix are not exclusive. Professional judgment and expertise should guide the selection of tests. www.crossbattery.com Observation Requirement The student suspected of having a SLD must be observed in the learning environment, including the general classroom setting, to document the student’s academic performance and behavior in the areas of difficulty. Observation Requirement Use information from observation done before the student was referred for an evaluation OR At least one member of the evaluation team conducts an observation after the student has been referred for evaluation and parent consent is obtained Observation and Parent Consent Circumstance Observations conducted as part of routine classroom instruction and monitoring of the child’s performance before the referral for evaluation Observations conducted after the child is suspected of having a disability and is referred for evaluation Consent Required Consent Not Required Parent Requests for Evaluation The law is clear - a parent may request an evaluation at any time during the SPL process If a parent requests an evaluation, the district may choose to: 1. Request permission to evaluate, OR 2. Decline the request to evaluate and issue prior written notice (PWN) in accordance with the regulations Advance Organizer Connecting SPL & SLD Problem-Solving and Teaming SLD Eligibility Standards Multidisciplinary Evaluation Components Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) Connecting SPL, PSW & SLD Documentation Requirements SLD Eligibility Standards Operationalizing the SLD Criteria SLD Eligibility Standards Policy 2419 frames the SLD eligibility as: level of learning (Standard 1); rate of learning (Standard 2); and exclusion factors (Standard 3), including the validation of the provision of appropriate instruction. pattern of strengths and weaknesses Standard 1 – Level of Learning The first element in identifying a student with a learning disability addresses the student’s mastery of grade-level content in one or more of the following areas: oral expression; listening comprehension; written expression; basic reading skill; reading fluency skills (area added in 2004 revisions to IDEA); reading comprehension; mathematics calculation; or mathematics problem solving. Standard 1 – Level of Learning Key consideration student demonstrates significant and persistent low academic achievement even after obtaining evidence of research-based CORE classroom instruction and TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction. Standard 1 – Level of Learning Possible Verification Sources for Level 1 Screening and assessment results that include a minimum of 3 data points that reflect at least 9 weeks of TARGETED instruction and at least 6 data points that reflect at least 9 weeks of INTENSIVE instruction that are at or below the 8th percentile are considered significant. Confidence intervals should be considered. An individually administered norm-referenced achievement test score at or below the 8th percentile is considered significant. Confidence levels for each test administered should be considered. Student performance relative to State-approved grade-level standards is an essential component of determining the existence of severe underachievement. CSOs are available in electronic format on the West Virginia Teach 21 website at http://wveis.k12.wv.us/Teach21/public/ngcso/NGSCO.cfm Standard 2 – Rate of Learning Academic progress or Rate of Learning is the student’s attained rate of improvement compared to the typical rate of improvement in a given content area. It is through regular assessment of an instruction and its effect on the student’s achievement that student response is determined. Progress monitoring data provide measurable evidence of changes in the student’s achievement that are attributable to a particular instructional approach. Standard 2 – Rate of Learning Standard 2, Rate of Learning, is met when the student’s learning rate or growth is substantially below grade-level peers and, based on progress monitoring data, a reasonable rate of progress cannot be projected even when the student is provided supplemental instruction of reasonable intensity and duration. Standard 2, Rate of Learning, is met when the student’s attained rate of improvement is substantially below grade-level peers’ typical rate of improvement and, based on progress monitoring data and Gap Analysis, reasonable or targeted rate of improvement cannot be projected even when the student is provided supplemental instruction of reasonable intensity and duration. Understanding Rate of Improvement (Slope) Key Terms: Typical Rate of Improvement-the rate of improvement of a typical student at the same grade level throughout the school year. Targeted Rate of Improvement-the rate of improvement that a targeted student would need to make by the end of the school year in comparison to a typical student. Attained Rate of Improvement-the actual rate of improvement the student ends up achieving as a function of their particular progress across the year. Understanding Rate of Improvement (Slope) Calculations: Typical Rate of Improvement- is calculated by subtracting the beginning of the year expected score from the end of year expected score divided by the total weeks in a school year (36 weeks). Targeted Rate of Improvement- is calculated by subtracting the targeted student’s beginning of the year score from the end of the year expected score divided by the total weeks in a school year (36 weeks). Attained Rate of Improvement- is calculated by subtracting the beginning of the year score from the end of the year attained score divided by the total weeks in a school year (36 weeks). Understanding Rate of Improvement (Slope) Three ways to calculate Attained Rate of Improvement: Two-point rate of improvement- subtract the starting score from the ending score and divide by the number of weeks that the progress monitoring was collected. The IRIS Center provides a slope calculator for assistance in the calculation of rate of improvement (slope). http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu (click on resources then assessment (includes progress monitoring), next modules (8), then Perspectives and Resources-scroll to the bottom to find the Slope Calculator). Directions for use of the calculator are also available. Modified two-point rate of improvement-subtract the median score of the first three data points from the median score of the last three data points and divide by the number of weeks that the progress monitoring was collected. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS)- see http://sites.google.com/site/rateofimprovement/ created by Caitlin Flinn, Andrew McCrae, and Mathew Ferchalk for an in-depth description of the OLS calculation. Understanding Gap Analysis Gap analysis is a mathematical way of calculating how “low” and how “slow” a student’s progress is now being depicted. By dividing the expected level of performance by the attained rate of performance, an empirical value is obtained. A Gap of more than 2.0 is often considered significant. Appendix D provides a gap analysis worksheet and models to provide guidance. Example of Rate of Improvement If the line of the attained rate of improvement (slope) of a student’s data points is less than or equal to the typical rate of improvement (slope) for a student at the same grade level, this may suggest that the student’s rate of learning or growth is substantially deficient; or Example of Rate of Improvement If the student’s attained rate of improvement (slope) line is greater than the typical rate of improvement (slope) for a student at the same grade level, but a convergence would not occur within a reasonable and foreseeable time period as a result of the student’s low level of learning and slow progress would indicate the student’s rate of learning or growth is substantially deficient; or Example of Rate of Improvement If the attained rate of improvement (slope) of the targeted student is less than or equal to half the typical rate of improvement (slope) of a student at the same grade level, the aim line, it may be considered substantially below grade level peers and the standard may be considered to have been met. Standard 3 – Exclusion Factors The third standard by which the EC determines the presence of a specific learning disability is the assurance that the student’s underachievement is not primarily the result of any of the following: A visual, hearing, or motor disability; Intellectual disability; Behavioral/emotional disorder; Cultural factors; Environmental or economic disadvantage; or Limited English proficiency. Considerations for Validating Exclusion Factors Factor or Condition Screening Procedure Further Comprehensive Assessment Options Vision Check vision records Optometric/ophthalmology exam Hearing Check hearing records Audiological exam Motor Check school health records Medical exam Mental impairment Review school records Cognitive assessment and adaptive behavior tests Emotional/ Behavior disorder Behavior checklists Behavior rating scales, other behavioral assessments Cultural factors Assess cultural status Family interview Environmental or economic disadvantage School records Social worker interview with family (e.g., abuse, poor nutrition, lack of sleep, foster care placement, parent incarceration) Limited English proficiency Home language screening Primary language assessment Validating Underachievement (Ruling Out Lack of Instruction) Only after a student has been provided an opportunity to learn with the additional targeted supports provided within the multi-leveled instruction framework should referral and eligibility for special education eligibility under the SLD category Considerations for Validating Underachievement Appropriate instruction in reading, written expression and mathematics Student’s primary language Limited English proficiency Environmental and cultural factors Excessive absences and patterns of attendance Interruptions in schooling Advance Organizer Connecting SPL & SLD Problem-Solving and Teaming SLD Eligibility Standards Multidisciplinary Evaluation Components Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) Connecting SPL, PSW & SLD Documentation Requirements Pattern(s) of Strengths & Weaknesses Operationalizing the SLD Criteria Operationalizing Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses In 2004, the reauthorization of IDEA also permitted, but did not require, the use of a third method approach to determine SLD identification. In 2012 the West Virginia Board of Education Approved a revisions to Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of Students with Exceptionalities to include the determination of a pattern(s) of strengths and weaknesses in SLD eligibility. This approach involves consideration of a pattern of strengths and weaknesses, or both, relative to intellectual development and achievement. (not IQ-Achievement Discrepancy) When PSW is included as part of the comprehensive SLD evaluation the cognitive process(es) that interfere with a student’s ability to perform academically may be identified. Utilizing PSW to Identify SLD Assessment results need to be able to advance an understanding of how the student’s academic and cognitive domains interact to increase the diagnostic utility of the multidisciplinary evaluation and provide guidance for instructional strategies This method of evaluation, as it relates to eligibility determination, is described within IDEA as “the use of other alternative research-based procedures for determining whether a child has a specific learning disability.” This method has been known as “the third approach” and may be more commonly referred to as the Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses approach (PSW). What is a Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses? Actual cognitive area of weakness is significantly lower than expected based on overall cognitive ability Cognitive Strengths Average or better overall ability Supported by strengths in academic skills Academic deficit(s) is unexpected because overall cognitive ability is at least average (and other factors were ruled out, such as inadequate instruction) Cognitive deficit(s) is specific, not general or pervasive, because overall cognitive ability is at least average Cognitive Weakness/Deficit Cognitive Ability or Processing Disorder Actual academic area of weakness is significantly lower than expected based on overall cognitive ability Academic Weakness/Failure Performance approximately 1SD below the mean or lower Academic Skills/Knowledge (cognitive and academic areas Deficits of weakness are related empirically and relationship is ecologically valid) Sotelo, Flanagan, and Alfonso (2011). Overview of SLD Identification. In D.P. Flanagan & V.C. Alfonso, Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; Flanagan, Fiorello, and Ortiz (2010); Hale, Flanagan, and Naglieri (2008) Critical Concepts The PSW approach includes assessment of a wide range of broad and narrow cognitive processes that identify processing strengths and weaknesses. Interpretation of the assessment occurs at the cluster rather than subtest level. Confidence intervals are used for all clusters, thereby reducing measurement error effects. Evaluation results improve understanding of meaningful connections between cognitive and academic domains and provide practical information to teachers and parents. Manifestations of Cognitive Ability Weaknesses and Empirically-based Recommendations and Intervention (Flanagan, Alfonso, & Mascolo, 2011, 2012) CHC Broad Cognitive Abilities/ Neuropsychological Functions Brief Definition General Manifestations of Cognitive/ Neuropsychological Weakness Specific Manifestations of the Cognitive/ Neuropsychological Weakness Short-Term Memory (Gsm) Ability to hold information in immediate awareness and use or transform it within a few seconds Difficulties With: -Following multi-step Reading Difficulties: -Reading Comprehension (i.e., oral and written instructions -Remembering information long enough to apply it -Remember the sequence of information -Rote memorization -Maintaining one’ place in a math problem or train of thought while writing understanding what is read) -Decoding multisyllabic words -Orally retelling or paraphrasing what one has read Math Difficulties: -Rote memorization of facts -Remembering mathematical procedures -Multi-step problems and regrouping -Extracting information to be used in word problems Writing Difficulties: -Spelling multisyllabic words -Redundancy in writing (word and conceptual levels) -Identifying main idea of a story -Note-taking Recommendations/ Interventions -Use meaningful stimuli to assist with encoding and allow for experiential learning (i.e., learning while doing) -Provide opportunities for repeated practice and review -Provide supports (e.g., lecture notes, guided notes, study guides, written directions) to supplemental oral instruction -Break down instructional steps for student -Provide visual support (e.g., times table) to support acquisition of basic math facts -Outline math procedures for student and provide procedural guides or flashcards for the student to use when approaching problems -Highlight important information within word problems -Have student write all steps and show all work for math computations. -Teach chunking strategies Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses (continued) PSW is important because it may establish links between specific cognitive processes and academic areas of concern. These links have the potential to subsequently inform supplemental instruction and/or specially designed instruction. The identification of processing deficits can lead to more effective instructional and compensatory strategies for students who have not responded adequately to TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction within the SPL approach. Appendix F, G, & H provides examples and descriptions of common assessments used to determine if a PSW exists. Advance Organizer Connecting SPL & SLD Problem-Solving and Teaming SLD Eligibility Standards Multidisciplinary Evaluation Components Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) Connecting SPL, PSW & SLD Documentation Requirements Connecting SPL, PSW & SLD Operationalizing the SLD Criteria A Hybrid Approach An integrated approach to SLD determination, a combination of SPL/RTI and the Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) model, may be advantageous because it hypothesizes a link between the observed low academic performance/ inadequate growth and the responsible cognitive processing weaknesses. In an integrated or hybrid approach to SLD determination it is important to first document the provision of relevant scientifically based core curricula and high quality instruction. The description of the learner’s response to this learning environment is then paired with assessment and used to help determine why the student was not responsive to this instruction. A Hybrid Approach (continued) It is hoped that an integrated approach may ensure that when greater intensity of instruction is not successful eligible students will receive individualized instruction based on their unique patterns of both academic and cognitive processing strengths and weaknesses. Appendix A comprehensively defines the eight areas of SLD and provides resources for each area. Appendix J illustrates the decision-making process teams would proceed through when integrating SPL and PSW. Advance Organizer Connecting SPL & SLD Problem-Solving and Teaming SLD Eligibility Standards Multidisciplinary Evaluation Components Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) Connecting SPL, PSW & SLD Documentation Requirements Documentation Requirements Documentation Documentation requirements include but are not limited to: a chronology of the student’s educational history; progress monitoring data; specific documentation of the nature and intensity of general classroom instruction; comprehensive documentation of the nature, frequency and duration of multi-leveled instruction results; additional achievement/performance data; and formal evaluation reports. SLD Team Report Includes all areas in which a SLD may be manifested (e.g., reading, mathematics, written expression) Includes IDEA requirements Is completed when a student is suspected of having a SLD Accompanies the Eligibility Committee Report An electronic version of the SLD Team Report is available on the Office of Special Programs website at http://wvde.state.wv.us/specialeducationcompliance/resources. html. Reevaluation & Private Schools Reevaluations Review existing evaluation data Current IEP and progress toward meeting annual goals Evaluations and information provided by parent/student Current classroom-based, local or state assessments and classroom-based observations Observations by teachers and related service providers Conduct additional evaluations if needed SPL and Private Schools SPL is a component of the evaluation process for SLD Same evaluation components and procedures apply Option to collect documentation as part of the referral process May consider determining eligibility by using the Pattern(s) of Strengths and Weaknesses approach. SPL and Private Schools Data that demonstrate that prior to or as part of the referral process, the student was provided appropriate instruction in general education settings; and Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, which was provided to the student’s parents (i.e., benchmark, interim and progress monitoring data). SPL and Private Schools The evaluation team, which includes the parent, private school representatives and district personnel, develop a data collection plan as part of the multidisciplinary evaluation. Every effort should be made to inform the parent and private school personnel of the need to address the student’s academic difficulties through the provision of intervention and use of frequent progress monitoring. SLD Document Resources Frequently Asked Questions Glossary of Terms Online Resources References Appendix The Appendix 8 Areas of SLD Diagnostic Assessments SLD Glossary Gap Analysis Worksheet Goal Setting in Reading Worksheet Examples of Cross-Battery for Reading Performance Research-Based Assessment Domains for Reading Achievement Research-Based Assessment Domains for Mathematical Achievement Cognitive Processes and Interventions/Strategies Process for Confirming/Substantiating a Specific Learning Disability Using an Integrated SPL and PSW Approach SLD Academic Skill Deficit Worksheet Documenting Eligibility Requirements for SLD SLD Team Report A “3-2-1 Reflection” What are 3 big ideas/insights you have gained today? What are 2 questions that your team will use to focus and responsively refocus your support to your district? What is 1 action your team has agreed to take in the very near future? Contact Information Pat Homberg, Executive Director Susan Beck, Coordinator Allen Sexton, Coordinator Office of Special Programs [email protected]