Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in...

Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically

Diverse Students in Special Education

2008-2009 SPR&I Regional Training

2

Goals for today: Review indicators B4, 9 & 10 and the process used to

determine Significant Discrepancy and Disproportionate Representation due to Inappropriate Identification Significant discrepancy versus disproportionate

representation Required response if flagged for B4, 9, 10

Review worksheet content (9 & 10 only) Focus on data analysis Removing ambiguity in the referral – eligibility process

Review P to P content Focus on file review – compliance Articulating practice Team exercise/discussion

Corrective Action Planning (CAP) Elements of an effective plan

3

Indicator B4: Discipline Percent of districts identified by the State as

having a significant discrepancy in the rates of suspensions and expulsions of children with disabilities for greater than 10 days in a school year.

Significant discrepancy is defined as: a rate of suspension/expulsion of greater than 10

days based on chi-square analysis and/or a ≥1% suspension/expulsion rate of special education students within a district and

District must have at least 10 students in their SECC and not justified by unique district characteristics

4

Purpose of B4 Ensure FAPE for all students with

disabilities by: Reducing ambiguity of discipline procedures

across the district Address academic and behavior support

needs to assist a student in the LRE

5

IEP Team & IEP Team Considerations and Special Factors

581-015-2210 - IEP Team (4) The regular education teacher of the child must participate

as a member of the IEP team, to the extent appropriate, in the development, review, and revision of the child's IEP, including assisting in the determination of:

(b) Appropriate positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies for the child.

581-015-2205 - IEP Team Considerations and Special Factors (3) In developing, reviewing and revising the IEP of

children described below, the IEP team must consider the following additional special factors:

(a) For a child whose behavior impedes the child’s learning or that of others, consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies to address that behavior;

6

Disciplinary Removals of More than 10 School Days (Pattern or Consecutive) 581-015-2415

(3) Manifestation determination. Within 10 school days of any decision to change the placement of a child with a disability because of a violation of a code of student conduct, the school district must determine whether the child's behavior is a manifestation of the student's disability in accordance with OAR 581-015-2420.

(4) Manifestation. If the determination under subsection (3) is that the child's behavior is a manifestation of the child's disability, the school district must: (a) Return the child to the placement from which the child

was removed, unless…

AND

7

Disciplinary Removals of More than 10 School Days (Pattern or Consecutive) 581-015-2415 (cont)

(b) Either: (A) Conduct a functional behavioral assessment, unless

the school district conducted a functional behavioral assessment before the behavior occurred that prompted the disciplinary action, and implement a behavior intervention plan; or

(B) If the student already has a behavior plan, review the behavioral intervention plan and modify it, as necessary, to address the behavior.

8

2006-2007 B4: Activities

38 Districts were flagged in 2006-2007 OSEP required revision to ODE’s process

for determining “Significant Discrepancy” As a consequence of that finding, ODE

held a Policy to Practice (P to P) review with all 38 districts

Following the P to P, ODE mailed a letter to each district with required actions to be addressed in a corrective action plan (CAP)

9

What Was Learned? District special education personnel

need to verify discipline data submitted to ODE

Districts need discipline data collection system that captures low and high level discipline data

It is important to review and disseminate district policies on discipline for children with disabilities to all staff at least annually

Ensure appropriate implementation of discipline policies and procedures

10

B4:Next Steps

07-08 Flagged districts will need to verify data accuracy

including access to services for students suspended/expelled beyond 10 days

Flagged districts will need to complete policy to practice review

After policy to practice review districts will need to complete CAP based on ODE’s feedback

Process:

District submits Discipline Data

ODE applies threshold

Districts not meeting threshold are identified with Significant Discrepancy

ODE conducts policy to practice review with districts identified with Significant Discrepancy

After policy to practice review, District completes Corrective Action Plan (CAP)

ODE approves or rejects CAP

Rejected CAPs are revised by district until approved by ODE

11

For indicator B4, districts will need to do a corrective action plan after completing a policy to practice review that addresses required

actions from ODE.

ODE required actions district must take:

1. Verify discipline data prior to submission.

12

General Guidelines for Corrective Action Plans

Activities should be: Observable Measurable Actionable Realistic

Activities should include: Timelines Responsibility assignment Technical assistance needs

Activities should align with larger district-wide improvement plan

13

Example ODE Recommendation:

Ensure the accurate and timely collection, analysis, review by district special education director, and reporting of suspension/expulsion data for students with disabilities.

District CAP District describes a clear process for review and

approval by the special education director prior to data submission in June.

Process includes: dates and names of individuals involved in the process

District provides a statement assuring that special education director reviewed and approved the data prior to submission

Assures the same process is being used this year

14

Example ODE Recommendation: Ensure IEPs are developed and implemented to

support the academic and behavioral needs of students eligible under IDEA.

District CAP District describes process in which they use an

appropriate data (that tracks and summarizes low and high level behaviors) to identify if students on IEPs demonstrate a “pattern” of behavioral difficulties.

AND For those students, with both low and high level

“patterns” of behavioral difficulty, district states that a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) was conducted

AND A Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan exists

15

B4:Next Steps Continued FFY 2007 APR and 08-09 data

Revise measure for indicator for next APR submission due to inability to use worksheet content

Striving for balance in accountability and not being overly burdensome

One approach is to use a risk ratio similar to how indicators B9 and B10 are examined

16

IDEA: Regulations Require policies and procedures.

The State must have in effect, consistent with the purposes of 34 CFR Part 300 and with section 618(d) of the Act, policies and procedures designed to prevent the inappropriate overidentification or disproportionate representation by race and ethnicity of children as children with disabilities, including children with disabilities with a particular impairment described in 34 CFR 300.8 of the IDEA regulations. [34 CFR 300.173] [20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(24)]

Require collection and examination of data regarding disproportionality. Special education Special education by disability type Suspension and Expulsion (Discipline) LRE

Establish requirements for review and revision of policies, practices and procedures.

Require States to disaggregate data on suspension and expulsion rates by race and ethnicity.

Require States to monitor their LEA's to examine disproportionality.

17

IDEA: State Performance Plan and Annual Performance Report

Indicator 9: Percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that is the result of inappropriate identification.

Indicator 10: Percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories that is the result of inappropriate identification.

18

Purpose of B9 & B10

Reduce inappropriate referrals to special education by: Addressing general education instruction

and intervention polices and practices Addressing variability in referral rates by

race/ethnicity Addressing variability in evaluation process

19

Quality Instruction in General Education

Eligibility

Evaluation

Child Find, Referral

Gen Ed Behavioral Interventions:

SWPBS

Gen Ed Academic Interventions: SWRTI

Disproportionality

20

Annual APR

Indicator and PCR

Cycle

July

April

January

October

August

May

March

February December

November

June

May 09Districts continue to submit evidence of correction for 07-08 and 08-09 noncomplianceDistricts revise rejected improvement plans and CAPs

08-09 data populated for B5, 9 & 10 reports

Jan. 09Districts continue submitting 08-09 PCR data

Districts begin Improvement Plan for B1-2, 3, 5 & 11 based on 2007-2008 data (if required)

Districts begin Corrective Action Plans for B4, 9 & 10 based on 2007-2008 (if required)

April 09Districts submit evidence of correction for 07-08 and 08-09 noncompliance

ODE approves/rejects district improvement plans and CAPs

2008-2009

Aug. 08ODE disseminates Final Determinations

Nov. 08Districts submit evidence of correction for 06-07 noncompliance until 100% compliantWorksheets due for B5, 9 & 10 based on 07-08 data Policy to practice reviews for B4 (if required)Districts continue submitting 08- 09 PCR data

Dec. 08Policy to practice reviews for B9 & 10 (if required)Districts continue submitting 08-09 PCR data

Feb. 09APR due to OSEPDistrict 08-09 PCR data due end of month

March 09CC verify 08-09 PCR submission

Improvement Plan due end of month for B1-2, 3, 5, & 11 based on 07-08 dataCAPs due for B4, 9 & 10 (if required) Districts to verify public report card data

Oct. 08Districts submit evidence of correction for 06-07 noncompliance until 100% compliantSPR&I Annual Trainings ODE populates reports for B1-2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10 & 11 with 07-08 data08-09 PCR report opens for submissionODE populates B1-2 report with 07-08 data

June 09Districts continue to submit evidence of correction for 07-08 and 08-09 noncompliance

July 08 Districts continue to submit evidence of correction for 07-08 and 08-09 noncompliance

ODE working on final determinations including correction of 07-08 noncompliance

September

Sept. 08Districts submit evidence of correction for 06-07 noncompliance until 100% compliant

21

Indicator B9: Disproportionate representation in special education

Measure: The percentage of IDEA eligible students disaggregated by

race/ethnicity differs by +/- 20% from the percentage of all students within the district disaggregated by race/ethnicity in at least one race/ethnic category

Weighted Risk Ratio analysis shows a value >2.0 or < 0.25 in the same race/ethnic category; and, There are at least 10 IDEA eligible students in the same

race/ethnic category in special education.

Process: District submits SECC Data

ODE conducts policy to practice review for unjustified districts

Based on policy to practice review, ODE determines if Disproportionate Representation due to inappropriate identification exists

Districts with Disproportionate Representation complete Corrective Action Plan


Flagged districts complete worksheet by due date

ODE justifies district based on worksheet

Districts not meeting thresholds are Flagged in SPR&I



22

5.83 > 20% diff (2.60*1.20 = 3.12) = Over-representation &5.83 < -20% diff (2.60*.8 = 2.08) ≠ Under-representation

23

B10: Disproportionate representation by disability type

Measure: The percentage of IDEA eligible students disaggregated by

race/ethnicity and disability category differs by +/- 20% from the percentage of all students within the district disaggregated by race/ethnicity in at least one race/ethnic and disability category

Weighted Risk Ratio analysis shows a value >2.0 or <0.25 in the same race/ethnic category and disability category; and,

There are at least 10 IDEA eligible students in the same race/ethnic category and disability type.

Process:

District submits SECC Data

ODE conducts policy to practice review for unjustified districts

Based on policy to practice review, ODE determines if Disproportionate Representation due to inappropriate identification exists

Districts with Disproportionate Representation complete Corrective Action Plan


Flagged districts complete worksheet by due date

ODE justifies district based on worksheet

Districts not meeting thresholds are Flagged in SPR&I



26

1.21 > 20% diff (.56*1.20 = .67)= Over-representation &1.21 < -20% diff (.56*.8 = .45) ≠ Under-representation

27

Child Find and Referral

Policies and Procedures for Child Find, Referral and Identification (34 CFR §300.111; OAR 581-015-2080)

General Education Intervention and Problem Solving Process

Administrative Oversight General Education Interventions and

Supports Bilingual Considerations Referral

28

Evaluation & Eligibility

Evaluation (34 CFR §300.201; OAR 581-015-2105) Assessment Tools and Strategies

Eligibility (34 CFR §§ 300.301 through 300.311; OAR 581-015-2120) Eligibility Decision Making Process

29

B9 & 10 Worksheet: Purpose and Expectations

Focus on Data Analysis: Pre-referral, Referral, Evaluation/Eligibility Referral and placement data disaggregated by

ethnicity, primary disability, socio-economic status

New students to special education – where were they coming from?

Least Restrictive Environment Suspension, expulsion, attendance and high

school completion Transfer students

30

B9 & 10 Policy to Practice: Purpose and Expectations Focus on Compliance: Pre-referral, Referral,

Evaluation/Eligibility Review Indicator reports in SPR&I. Review the worksheet submitted for Indicator. Review original files (initial referral, most recent

evaluation, and IEP) for 10% of the students in special education who are included in the potentially disproportionate representation group(s).

Complete step one based on district policies and procedures.

Complete step two based on the sample of files reviewed.

Submit these completed document(s) to the ODE using the SPR&I upload process.

31

Districts will need to do a corrective action plan after completing a policy to practice review that addresses required actions from ODE.

Revised CAP now contains separate text boxes for each content area.

ODE required actions district must take:

1. Collect and analyze pre-referral data by race/ethnicity.

ODE is able to provide feedback and will reject or approve CAP once it is submitted.Rejected CAPs will need to be resubmitted until approved.

32

General Guidelines for Corrective Action Plans

Activities should be: Observable Measurable Actionable Realistic

Activities should include: Timelines Responsibility assignment Technical assistance needs

33

Where you begin to address disproportionality...

34

SYST

EMS

PRACTICES

DATASupportingStaff Behavior

SupportingDecisionMaking

SupportingStudent Academic Achievement and Behavior

OUTCOMES

Equitable use of general education prevention/intervention efforts and accurate referral and proper identification

35

Data Critically examine your district data and provide

your schools with their own data to discuss Overall S.E. prevalence rate Percentage of students in S.E. by ethnic group Risk Ratios S.E. referral and placement rates

Referral and placement (LRE) data disaggregated by ethnicity, primary disability, socio-economic status

Discipline Graduation/Drop-Out Transfer students New students to special education – where are they

coming from?

36

Special Education Students and Fall Membership by Ethnicity , 2007-08

2.20%4.84%

3.03%

17.13%

72.80%

3.05% 2.63%4.42%

15.92%

73.97%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

Native American Asian Black Hispanic White

2007-08 FM

2007-08 SECC

37

Percent of Students in each Ethnicity Receiving Special Education Services out of the Total District Ethnicity Population (B9 Example)

30.47%

15.00%

5.88%

24.47%

13.14%

14.68%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%


Native American Weighted Risk Ratio = 2.03.Native American students receiving Special Education services = 39/128=30.47% of all Native American students in the District.

38

Percent of Students Receiving Special Education Services Compared to Percent of Students in District by Ethnicity for Mental Retardation (B10 Example)

4.863.34 3.65

27.05

61.09

1.79

4.38

1.20

31.55

61.09

.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00


Native American Weighted Risk Ratio = 2.65, Black: Weighted Risk Ratio = 3.05.

MR

FM

39

Percent of Special Education Students Suspended/Expelled for more than 10 Days Compared to Percent of Students in District by Ethnicity (B4 Example)

2.13 2.13

42.55

19.15

34.04

2.00

10.61

16.30

14.09

56.99

.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00


Black Weighted Risk Ratio = 3.63.

SpEd Discipline

FM

40

INSTRUCTION: Oregon Statewide Assessment, Reading, 2006-07

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

3rd 5th 8th 10th

Amer Indian

Asian

Black

Hispanic

White

41

INSTRUCTION: Oregon Statewide Assessment, Math, 2006-07

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

3rd 5th 8th 10th

Amer Indian

Asian

Black

Hispanic

White

42

Systems

Admin Leadership Team-based implementation Defined commitment Allocation of FTE Budgeted support Development of decision-driven

information system

43

Planning and Practices Develop a multi-year, comprehensive

improvement plan that addresses all facets of disproportionality

Professional development Define expectations Teach expectations Monitor Use information for decision-making

44

Problem ?

Systems ?

Local/Individual ?

Use Questions and Data to Target Issues and Use Resources Most Efficiently

45

Suggested Resources IDEA: Building the Legacy of IDEA 2004: http://idea.ed.gov/

Disproportionality Module

National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems (NCCRESt): http://www.nccrest.org/

National Center on Response to Intervention: http://www.rti4success.org/

National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS): http://www.pbis.org/main.htm

State Implementation of Scaling-up Evidence-based Practices (SISEP) Center: http://sisep.fmhi.usf.edu/

Oregon RtI: http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=315

Oregon PBS: http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?=553

Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in...

Documents

Transcript of Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in...