Aligning Education Laws to Effective Learning Frameworks

Aligning Education Laws to Effective Learning FrameworksKim Mendenhall, Ph.D.

Policy & Frameworks of Support

• Since early parental advocacy, policy has been moving in the direction of educational integration and justice for all.

• Frameworks that support learning & achievement align with policy tenets.

1965

ESEA (Elementary & Secondary Education Act)

For “educationally disadvantaged”

1970s

EHA (Education for All Handicapped Children Act)

1975 (P.L. 94-142)

FAPE/LRE

UD (Universal Design)

Physical Access

1990s

IDEA (Individuals with Disability Education Act 1990 (EHA reauthorized)

Access to learning

UDL (Universal Design for Learning)

Access to Learning

2000sNCLB – No Child Left

Behind (ESEA reauthorized - 2001)

Greater accountability for

student achievement

Greater involvement in

general curriculum

IDEA 2004

Greater accountability for

student achievement

Greater involvement in

general curriculum

2000s continued...

IDEA 2004

MTSS – system of assessment &

evidence-based practice

UDL

Framework of assessment &

research-validated instructional

options

MTSS/UDLMTSS (Multi-tiered

System of Supports)

Effective Instruction – research-validated

Assessment

Interventions – teacher practices; Response –

progress within intervention

UDL

Flexible learning opportunities – research-

validated

Assessment

Implementing engaging activities that support

access to general curriculum

DiscussionIDEA 2004

MTSS

ESEA

UDL

Policy Foundations of IDEA 2004

Raised the bar for assuring access to general education curriculumMTSS as a framework for academic support and identification for servicesEstablished the National Instructional Materials Accessibility Standard (NIMAS) – greater access to general curriculum through technology

“...shift from focus on access to a focus on learning” (Rose et al., 2009, p. 151)sets precedence for further research and development in new technology for the benefit of all studentsintegrate technology with policy and practice

Prepare students for challenges present in a competitive and advancing world.

(Gordan, 2009; Karger, 2009; Rose et al., 2009; OSEP, 2007)

Policy Foundations of ESEA Reauthorized (NCLB) &

CurrentDriven by student performancePush for greater educational outcomesCouncil for Exceptional Children (CEC) – effective forthcoming reauthorization should be built on “the theme of IDEA” (CEC, 2010, pg. 1):

Focus on individual needBetter teachersEnsure success and high levels of achievement

(Forte, 2010; CEC, 2010)

IDEA 2004 & ESEABoth laws require

states to establish higher and measurable standards and goals for students with disabilities and non-disabled peersAlignment of assessments with standardsImprovement of teacher leadershipEarly intervention services (EIS)Accountability for struggling readers

Both support goal of providing appropriate education for students with disabilities

(D. Fuchs, Fuchs, & Stecker, 2010; Hardman, 2006; Lieberman & Walker, 2007)

Alignment of IDEA 2004 & ESEA

Attend to diverse instructional and individual needs of students in the general curriculumGreater focus on accountability, progress, and student outcomesNeed for greater alignment with special and general education“Scientifically-based” researchAllocation of excess funds from IDEA-Part B for schoolwide programs and ESEA activities as determined by LEAUnified indicators to determine progress towards goals

(Hardman, 2006; Hehir, 2009: OSERS, 2007)

Alignment of IDEA 2004 & ESEA cont...Recommendations:

Find a balance with IDEACongress “recognize differing levels of progress toward accountability matched with appropriate supports” (CEC, 2010, p. 11)Accommodations during instruction and assessment within a UDL framework based on individual need

(CEC, 2010; Rose, Hall, & Murray, 2009)

Vision of IDEA & ESEAAddress student needs in a more inclusionary wayFair and equitable in meeting the needs of all studentsImprove outcomesHigh quality standards for teachers and learningGreater opportunity for ALL to learn (including children with disabilities)Greater collaboration between educatorsMTSS and UDL as a joint system of support

(CEC, 2010; Blanton et al., 2011; Basham et al., 2010;Strangman et al., 2009)

Instructional Framework of MTSS

“...make general and special education a seamless system” (Division for Lerning Disabilities, 2007 p. 3)

Teacher practices = INTERVENTIONProgress within the intervention = RESPONSEProvides early intervention and instructional supports for ALL students

(Kalberg et al., 2010; Sailor, 2009; Stangman et al., 2009; VanDerHeyden & Burns, 2011)

Benefits/Features of MTSS

Research-validated core curriculumFramework of supportive tiered interventionsUniversal screening and progress monitoringUse of data for instructional decisions and monitoring progress3+ levels of support:

Tier 1 – universal/primaryTier 2 – supplementalTier 3 – tertiary/intense

Instructional Framework of UDL

Encourages flexible learning opportunities & student choiceEliminate barriers:

Meeting goalsUtilizing materialsConducting assessment

Provide research-validated options for ALL learners to

Acquire informationBecome engagedExpress themselves

(Basham et al., 2010; CAST, 2011; Jimenez et al., 2007; Rose & Gravel, 2009; Stangman et al., 2009

Benefits/Features of UDL

Improvement in student productivity, performance, and behaviorMore engagement and enthusiasm for learningGreater focus on student needMore collaborationGreater enthusiasm for teachingReduction in special education referralsImproved test scoresCurricular enhancement through use of technology

(Gordon 2009; Rose, 2009; Sopko, 2009)

Bridging MTSS and UDLEmphasis of both:

Effective instructionResearch-validated curriculum

Differentiating instructionAssessment – inform instruction & intervention

Bridging MTSS and UDL cont...

UDL ≈ MTSSEncouraging flexibilityResearch-validated instruction & curriculum

MTSS ≈ UDLScreening studentsProgress monitoringDecision on course of actionTiers of support

(Stangman et al., 2009)


Access to learning environmentsMTSS = Tiers of supportUDL = modifying curriculum, accommodations

Researchers – effective decision makingAligning UDL & MTSSFocus on preventing difficultiesDifferentiationInstruction – engages & motivates

(Basham, 2010; Hehir, 2009;Jimenez et al., 2007; Stangman et al., 2009)


IDEA 2004 – UDL Assistive Technology ActRose (2009)

Appropriating educational funds – innovative technology:

Assistive technologyDigital curricula – digital representation displayed in a variety of ways more effectively than printUDL framework for ALL studentsContinuum of funding – advancing assistive & augmentative technologyInnovative technology – accessible for ALL students

(Edyburn, 2010; Rose, 2009; Sopko, 2009)


IDEA 2004 – NIMASFurther development & alignment of curriculum & assistive technologiesUDL & technologies

Breakdown of barriersGreater access

MTSS & UDLBridge special and general educationEnsure “that all children reach a high level of achievement” (CEC, 2010, p. 1)

(CEC, 2010; Rose et al., 2009)

Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified MTSS & UDL

IDEA & ESEA unitedAccess to curriculumHigh quality education – bridge between special and general education

IDEA & ESEA separateMeeting high performance = could overshadow meeting student needs

IDEA provides a balance to high standards of ESEA

(Hehir, 2009; Karger, 2009; Owen, 2011)

Aligning IDEA & ESEA within a Unified MTSS & UDL cont...

IDEAIdentify students with disabilitiesProvide fair and appropriate academic experience

ESEAProvided accountability to carry out “IDEA’s goal of aiding disabled students’ educational achievement” (Owen, 2011, p. 9) at a time when expectations and accountability for their teaching and learning was suffering.


Next reauthorizationCohesion & balance between general & special educationMore prepared and stronger workforce of educatorsEqual access to assessment and accountability for ALL studentsMeeting needs & improving outcomes of ALL students (included gifted learners)Balancing IDEA & ESEA within a collaborative system of supportImplementing UDL – unbiased assessment tool for studentsAccommodations with individual needs in mindSchool wide plans – include UDL & MTSSIncrease in ESEA funding for school improvement

(OSERS, 2007)


Researchers suggest:Differentiation of research-validated curriculum in unified MTSS & UDL frameworks –

Fewer tiers needed for intervention with an increase in universal student responseGreat emphasis on effective instruction and curriculumTeacher quality maximizedReduction in special education referralsFunding reallocated within a collaborative and unified system

(Stangman et al., 2009; Levenson, 2011)


UDL supports inclusion & meeting diverse needsMTSS supports addressing students needs (intervention) & identifying progress through collection of data (response)Aligned IDEA & MTSS - facilitate successful outcomes through unified MTSS & UDL

(Kalberg et al., 2010; Rose, 2009; Sailor, 2009; VanDerHeyden & Burns, 2010)

ConclusionCommon Core State Standards InitiativeAlignment of important components of IDEA & ESEA with effective learning frameworks of MTSS & UDL – can work within this initiativeFunding for ESEA needs to increase (CASE, 2011) = greater success in alignmentAn aligned IDEA & ESEA, within a unified MTSS & UDL framework may reshape education in an equitable way for all students.

Aligning Education Laws to Effective Learning Frameworks

Documents

Transcript of Aligning Education Laws to Effective Learning Frameworks