SPECIAL EDUCATION DIRECTORS’
34
STATE OF THE STATE SPRING – 2013 SPECIAL EDUCATION DIRECTORS’ Peg Brown-Clark Assistant Commissioner Exceptional Student Services Unit
description
SPECIAL EDUCATION DIRECTORS’ . STATE OF THE STATE SPRING – 2013. Peg Brown-Clark Assistant Commissioner Exceptional Student Services Unit. Colorado Department of Education. Vision - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of SPECIAL EDUCATION DIRECTORS’
STATE OF THE STATESPRING – 2013
SPECIAL EDUCATION DIRECTORS’
Peg Brown-ClarkAssistant Commissioner
Exceptional Student Services Unit
VisionAll students in Colorado will become educated and productive citizens capable
of succeeding in a globally competitive workforce.
MissionThe mission of CDE is to shape, support, and safeguard a statewide education system that prepares students for success in a globally competitive world.
Colorado Department of Education
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
VisionAll students with exceptionalities are prepared for continued
learning and pursuit of post-school opportunities.In Co lo rado, “exceptio nal student ” refers to students Pre-K thro ugh 21 w i th any condition
defined as a d i sabi l i ty under IDEA 2004 and students identified as g ifted and ta lented, regardles s of the setting in w hich ser ved.
MissionThe Exceptional Student Services Unit provides leadership,
professional development, and guidance to build the capacity and effectiveness of Colorado educational systems in meeting the
academic, social-emotional, and independent living needs of students with exceptionalities -- leading to enhanced
achievement and post-school outcomes.
Exceptional Student Services Unit
DATA UPDATES
Achievement GapsColorado Students
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Colorado student performance has been relatively flat with some upward trend for the past nine
years.Percent of Students Proficient or Advanced, CSAP/TCAP
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
150,326 students in grades 3-10 were not proficient on state standards in reading and 217,126 students in grades 3-10 were not proficient on state standards in math in 2011-12
!
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20120.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Math Reading
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
50.1 51.1 52.5 53.3 55.2
78.6 79.2 78.7 78.9 80.2
Minority Non-Minority
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
78.5 79.7 79.6 80.1 81.5
47.6 48.6 50.8 49.9 52.2
Non-Low Income Low Income
The achievement gap between various groups is large and has remained persistent over time.
30% gap has been consistent with minimal closing
Percent of Students Proficient or Advanced by Income, CSAP/TCAP Reading
25% gap: The gap between minority and non minority has improved marginally, but is still large
Percent of Students Proficient or Advanced by Minority, CSAP/TCAP Reading
Similar achievement gaps exist for Colorado English learners, student with disabilities, and on-time graduation rates for all these sub-groups.! Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
State Percent of Students Proficient or Above
Massachusetts 46New Jersey 45
Connecticut 45Vermont 44Montana 42Colorado 40Maryland 40
New Hampshire 40Minnesota 39
Maine 39
Colorado students perform better than the national average, but the state achievement gaps are some of the
largest in the nation.Top 10 States with Highest Percentage of Student
Proficient or Above on NAEP* Reading 8th Grade, 2011
Colorado ties for 6th place for the highest percentage of students proficient and above. The national average is 34%.
Reading Math
5256
20 23
Non-Low Income Low Income
Reading Math
4955
28 27
Non-Minority Minority
Percent of Students Proficient or Above on 8th Grade NAEP Reading and Math by Income and Race, 2011
21 28 32 33
Colorado is in the top quartile for the largest achievement gap in reading and math at the 8th grade level. This gap has been persistent.
Source: NCES, http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/naeptools.asp *National Assessment of Educational Progress, an assessment administered every two years in various subjects
!
Minority/Non-Minority Low Income/Non-Low Income
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Both race and income compound the achievement gap.
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012-1.00
-.90-.80-.70-.60-.50-.40-.30-.20-.10.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.90
1.00
-.19 -.21 -.17-.12 -.12
-.03 -.02
-.71 -.71-.63 -.62
-.56 -.55 -.52
Not FRL FRL
Re ading Ac hi evem ent : Ethnic i ty by F RL
WhiteHis pan ic
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
.35 .35 .36 .37 .37 .37 .38
-.18 -.18 -.17 -.15 -.15 -.14 -.10
Not FRL FRL
Stan
dard
scor
e
What’s Going on?
Within group income gap
Between group race gap
Source: Analysis by CDE staff, CSAP/TCAP Reading data
!Although not shown, the finding holds true for black, Native American, and, to some degree, Asian students.
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
We also see an achievement gap with our English Language
Learners.
ELL (71,883) NON-ELL (390,551)
ELL (75,509) NON-ELL (394,254)
ELL (79,254) NON-ELL (397,111)
ELL (83,399) NON-ELL (399,551)
ELL (86,583) NON-ELL (403,404)
Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading2008 2008 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012
37.8
73.3
38.9
73.9
40.9
73.9
41.6
73.4
43.5
74.9
Percent of Students Proficient or Above on CSAP/TCAP Reading by ELL and Non-ELL English Language
Learners have made significant progress since 2008, reducing the achievement gap from 35.1% to 31.4%; however, more progress needs to be made.
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
ELL – English Language Learner
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Percent of Students Proficient or Above by Disability on 2012 Reading TCAP
Some of our largest gaps are with students with disabilities.
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
74.1
21.8
49.3
41.336.3
30.6 29.9 28.8
17.013.5
10.2
1.6
Our largest disability group is also one of our lowest
achieving56.3% of students with
disabilities are in this category
Disaggregated Results for Student with Disabilities
(Approximately 10% of Colorado students are identified with disabilities)
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Performance Comparisons
Reading E
lem
Reading M
iddle
Reading H
igh
Math Elem
Math M
iddle
Math High
Writing E
lem
Writing M
iddle
Writing H
igh0
1020304050607080
TCAP 2012: Percent Proficient and AdvancedStudents with and without Disabilities by Subject/Level
Students without Disabil-itiesStudents with Disabilities
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Emotional Disa
bility
Specifi
c Learn
ing Disa
bility
Hearing D
isabilit
y
Visual
Disabilit
y
Physical
Disabilit
y
Speech
/Langu
age
Autism
Traumati
c Brai
n Injury
Students
without D
isabiliti
es0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2012 TCAP: % Proficient and Advanced Students with and without Disabilities
ReadingMathWriting
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
2012 TCAP: Reading
Adams 1
, Map
leton
Adams 1
2, North
glenn-Th
ornton
Adams 1
4, Com
merce C
ity
Adams 2
7J, Brig
hton
Adams 5
0, Wes
tmin
ster
Arapahoe 1
, Engle
wood
Arapahoe 2
, Sherid
an
Arapahoe 5
, Cherry
Cree
k
Arapah
oe 6, L
ittleton
Adams-A
rapah
oe 28 J,
Aurora
Boulder
RE1J, St
Vrain
Boulder
RE2, Bould
er Vall
ey
Delta 5
0(J), Delt
a
Denve
r 1, D
enver
Douglas R
e 1, C
astle
Rock
El Pas
o 2, H
arriso
n
El Pas
o 3, W
idefi
eld
El Pas
o 8, F
ountain
El Pas
o 11, C
olorad
o Sprin
gs
El Pas
o 12, C
heyenne M
ountain
El Pas
o 20, A
cadem
y
El Pas
o 38, Lew
is-Palm
er
El Pas
o 49, F
alcon
Fort
Lupton/Kee
nesburg
Frem
ont Re-1
, Can
on City
Gunnison
Jeffers
on R-1
, Lakew
ood
Larim
er R-1
, Poudre
Larim
er R-2
J, Th
ompson
Larim
er R-3
, Park
Logan
Re-1
, Vall
eyMes
a
Moffat Re 1
, Crai
g
Montrose
Re-1J,
Montrose
Morgan R
e-3, F
ort Morga
n
Pueblo 6
0, Urban
Pueblo
70, Rural
Weld Re-4
, Win
dsor
Weld Re-5
J, Jo
hnstown
Weld 6 , G
reeley
East C
entra
l BOCES
Mt Evan
s BOCES
Mountain BOCES
Northeas
t BOCES
Northwes
t BOCES
Pikes P
eak B
OCES
San Ju
an B
OCES
San Lu
is Vall
ey B
OCES
Sante
Fe Trai
l BOCES
South
Cen
tral B
OCES
South
easter
n BOCES
Uncompah
gre B
OCES
Centennial
BOCES
Ute Pass
BOCES
Rio Blan
co B
OCESCSD
B CSISta
te0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
No ScoreAdvancedProficientPartially ProficientUnsatisfactory
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
2012 TCAP: Math
Adams 1
, Map
leton
Adams 1
2, North
glenn-Th
ornton
Adams 1
4, Com
merce C
ity
Adams 2
7J, Brig
hton
Adams 5
0, Wes
tmin
ster
Arapahoe 1
, Engle
wood
Arapahoe 2
, Sherid
an
Arapahoe 5
, Cherry
Cree
k
Arapah
oe 6, L
ittleton
Adams-A
rapah
oe 28 J,
Aurora
Boulder
RE1J, St
Vrain
Boulder
RE2, Bould
er Vall
ey
Delta 5
0(J), Delt
a
Denve
r 1, D
enver
Douglas R
e 1, C
astle
Rock
El Pas
o 2, H
arriso
n
El Pas
o 3, W
idefi
eld
El Pas
o 8, F
ountain
El Pas
o 11, C
olorad
o Sprin
gs
El Pas
o 12, C
heyenne M
ountain
El Pas
o 20, A
cadem
y
El Pas
o 38, Lew
is-Palm
er
El Pas
o 49, F
alcon
Fort
Lupton/Kee
nesburg
Frem
ont Re-1
, Can
on City
Gunnison
Jeffers
on R-1
, Lakew
ood
Larim
er R-1
, Poudre
Larim
er R-2
J, Th
ompson
Larim
er R-3
, Park
Logan
Re-1
, Vall
eyMes
a
Moffat Re 1
, Crai
g
Montrose
Re-1J,
Montrose
Morgan R
e-3, F
ort Morga
n
Pueblo 6
0, Urban
Pueblo
70, Rural
Weld Re-4
, Win
dsor
Weld Re-5
J, Jo
hnstown
Weld 6 , G
reeley
East C
entra
l BOCES
Mt Evan
s BOCES
Mountain BOCES
Northeas
t BOCES
Northwes
t BOCES
Pikes P
eak B
OCES
San Ju
an B
OCES
San Lu
is Vall
ey B
OCES
Sante
Fe Trai
l BOCES
South
Cen
tral B
OCES
South
easter
n BOCES
Uncompah
gre B
OCES
Centennial
BOCES
Ute Pass
BOCES
Rio Blan
co B
OCESCSD
B CSISta
te0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
No ScoreAdvancedProficientPartially ProficientUnsatisfactory
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
2012 TCAP: Writing
Adams 1
, Map
leton
Adams 1
2, North
glenn-Th
ornton
Adams 1
4, Com
merce C
ity
Adams 2
7J, Brig
hton
Adams 5
0, Wes
tmin
ster
Arapahoe 1
, Engle
wood
Arapahoe 2
, Sherid
an
Arapahoe 5
, Cherry
Cree
k
Arapah
oe 6, L
ittleton
Adams-A
rapah
oe 28 J,
Aurora
Boulder
RE1J, St
Vrain
Boulder
RE2, Bould
er Vall
ey
Delta 5
0(J), Delt
a
Denve
r 1, D
enver
Douglas R
e 1, C
astle
Rock
El Pas
o 2, H
arriso
n
El Pas
o 3, W
idefi
eld
El Pas
o 8, F
ountain
El Pas
o 11, C
olorad
o Sprin
gs
El Pas
o 12, C
heyenne M
ountain
El Pas
o 20, A
cadem
y
El Pas
o 38, Lew
is-Palm
er
El Pas
o 49, F
alcon
Fort
Lupton/Kee
nesburg
Frem
ont Re-1
, Can
on City
Gunnison
Jeffers
on R-1
, Lakew
ood
Larim
er R-1
, Poudre
Larim
er R-2
J, Th
ompson
Larim
er R-3
, Park
Logan
Re-1
, Vall
eyMes
a
Moffat Re 1
, Crai
g
Montrose
Re-1J,
Montrose
Morgan R
e-3, F
ort Morga
n
Pueblo 6
0, Urban
Pueblo
70, Rural
Weld Re-4
, Win
dsor
Weld Re-5
J, Jo
hnstown
Weld 6 , G
reeley
East C
entra
l BOCES
Mt Evan
s BOCES
Mountain BOCES
Northeas
t BOCES
Northwes
t BOCES
Pikes P
eak B
OCES
San Ju
an B
OCES
San Lu
is Vall
ey B
OCES
Sante
Fe Trai
l BOCES
South
Cen
tral B
OCES
South
easter
n BOCES
Uncompah
gre B
OCES
Centennial
BOCES
Ute Pass
BOCES
Rio Blan
co B
OCESCSD
B CSISta
te0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
No ScoreAdvancedProficientPartially ProficientUnsatisfactory
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
While growth for students with IEPs is average, in reality a majority of students
with IEPs are not making sufficient growth.
Growth Percent Keep Up Percent Catch Up
51.0
81.6
37.2
45.0
63.3
17.8
Not IEP IEP
Median Growth, Reading 2012
TCAP
Percent of Students Keep Up/Catch Up on 2012 Reading TCAP
More than 8 out of 10 students with IEPs BELOW PROFICIENT are not making sufficient growth to catch up
Source: 2012 TCAP Reading, Data Lab
CDE Priority
Closing the Achievement Gaps
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Colorado’s Achievement Plan for Kids (S.B. 08-212) Rigorous standards and aligned assessments Focus on college and career readiness for all
Accountability Act (S.B. 09-163) Indicators of school/district performance District and school improvement planning Focused support to low performing districts
Educator Effectiveness (S.B. 10-191) Quality standards Emphasis on student growth
READ Act (H.B. 12-1238) Early literacy 3rd grade proficiency
Leveraging statutory initiatives:close the achievement gaps
Increasing Achievement Grants&
Professional Development Efforts
ESSU Target SWDs’ Achievement and Gaps in
Literacy
SEAC FORUM - APRIL 2013
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
NW BOCESPoudre SDSan Luis ValleyJeffCo
Increasing Achievement Grants
Professional Development : instructional practices in teaching reading to all students with disabilities.
Provide support and coaching to ensure literacy interventions are implemented with fidelity.
Identification, selection, and implementation of researched based PreK-12 literacy interventions .
Selection of progress monitoring and diagnostics assessments – target skill deficits & measure growth.
Implement evidence-based l iteracy assessments and interventions .
Focus of Grants
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Create a culture of shared accountability and partnership between general ed and special ed, improving outcomes for all students with disabilities .
Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework and principles in place.
Identify the most significant achievement gaps and proposed corresponding strategies to reduce these gaps .
Explore innovative solutions : use of staff, l iteracy coaches, and reading specialists.
Focus of Grants
Reinventing Special Education
Task Force Priorities
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Create teacher certification based on the demonstration of competency in content areas of l iteracy, math, and behavior, including diagnostic and methodology skills. Teacher licensing and EE work
Develop and use an accountability system driven by positive student growth and outcomes defined by common core academic and emotional/social wellness standards. Student achievement data + compliance
Provide flexible use of funding that allows leveraging resources to improve outcomes for all students. Work with USDE
SPED REINVENTED
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Reduce unnecessary paperwork requirements and streamline the meeting process.
Provide quality education to all students and use effective practices that identify the right students (i.e., only those students whose disability significantly impacts their learning). Increasing Achievement Grants and districts with high
achievement data Design services using the principles of universal design and
multi-tiered systems of support. Use collaboration and proven principles of implementation across all aspects of the system.
Ensure each student with low-growth has an individual growth plan.
SPED REINVENTED
State and National Level Items of Interest
MISCELLANEOUS
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Extra Curricular Activities (OCR) Dear Colleague Letter, Jan. 25, 2013 http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201304.html
OCR Policy Guidance on Retaliation http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201304.pdf
RTI MTSS – use of funds (OSEP) Letter to Couillard, Mar. 7, 2013
SPP/APR (OSEP comment period ends June 14) http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-04-15/pdf/2013-08703.pdf
National
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
PARCC Accommodations Manual (public comment through May 13th)http://parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCDraftAccommodationsManualforSWDEL.pdf
Council for Exceptional Children – report on Teacher Effectiveness http://www.cec.sped.org/Content/NavigationMenu/PolicyAdvocacy/CECProfessio
nalPolicies/Position_on_Special_Education_Teacher_Evaluation_Background.pdf
National
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Blueprint to Elevate and Transform the Teaching Profession RESPECT (Recognizing Educational Success, Professional Excellence, and
Collaborative Teaching) http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-releases-blue
print-elevate-and-transform-teaching-profes
Early Learning Initiative (USDE) In the fact sheet outlining the President’s early learning proposal (found at http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/early-learning-overview.pdf) IDEA programs
are included as one of the successes of the first term that these new early learning investments hope to build upon.
National
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
CO Graduation Guidelines (SBE Approval Pending) http://www.cde.state.co.us/SecondaryInitiatives/GraduationGuidelines.htm
CO Content Collaborative (assessments designed to determine EE) http://www.coloradoplc.org/assessment/assessments
READ Act (CO) http://www.cde.state.co.us/coloradoliteracy/ReadAct/
Parent Engagement Bill (SB 13-193 CO) http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2013a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/E3067C862EE41F1
387257AEE00570F0A?open&file=193_rer.pdf
Colorado
SEAC FORMUM - APRIL 2013
Resolve issues early – ESSU InitiativeFacilitated IEPsParent Organization
(involvement/collaboration)Parent to Parent Assistance
ESSU Intermediary/Parent Liaisonhttp://odr-pa.org/parents/consultline/
EARLY DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
These final regulations change the existing parental consent requirements in new 34 CFR §300.154(d)(2)(iv) and add a parental notification requirement in new 34 CFR §300.154(d)(2)(2)(v). For further information on these new requirements please see the Non-Regulatory Guidance on the IDEA Part B Regulations Regarding Parental Consent for the Use of Public Benefits or Insurance to Pay for Services under IDEA at: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/reg /idea/part-b/part-b-parental-consent.html
Part B Insurance Regulations
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
U.S. Department of Education’s (Department) plan for improving the implementation of equitable services requirements under applicable programs authorized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
aligns with current statutory and regulatory requirements, demonstrates the Department ’s commitment to ensure effective implementation of these equitable services provisions.
The plan does not place new requirements on State and Local Educational Agencies (SEAs and LEAs).
focuses on how the Department will support the collaborative work of State and local public school officials and private school leaders to ensure the efficient and effective implementation of these requirements and the delivery of services.
Equitable Services Implementation Plan
Letter to the Chiefs, March 14, 2013
Special Education Directors' Conference Spring 2013
Stand your Ground
Sniff Out Opportunities
Use Your Strengths
Live Large
Cherish the Wilderness
Know When to Slow Down
If i t Itches, Scratch It!
Advice from the GrizzlyThank You for All You Do!
Have a Great Summer!
