Agenda Agenda 9:00 – 10:30 9:00 – 10:30 I Talk I Talk The Sherlock Center The Sherlock Center History of the Inclusion Institutes History of the Inclusion Institutes Conceptual Framework for Inclusion Conceptual Framework for Inclusion Some Strategies, Examples, Resources Some Strategies, Examples, Resources 10:30 – 11:00 10:30 – 11:00 We Talk – Questions We Talk – Questions and Targets and Targets 11:00 – 3:00 11:00 – 3:00 You Talk – The Plan You Talk – The Plan
Transcript
AgendaAgenda
9:00 – 10:309:00 – 10:30 I TalkI Talk
The Sherlock CenterThe Sherlock Center
History of the Inclusion InstitutesHistory of the Inclusion Institutes
Conceptual Framework for Conceptual Framework for InclusionInclusion
Some Strategies, Examples, Some Strategies, Examples, ResourcesResources
10:30 – 11:0010:30 – 11:00 We Talk – Questions and We Talk – Questions and TargetsTargets
11:00 – 3:0011:00 – 3:00 You Talk – The PlanYou Talk – The Plan
Basis for Inclusion Basis for Inclusion InstitutesInstitutes
Guralnik (1999) – Two important things:Guralnik (1999) – Two important things:
Team (General Education, Team (General Education, Special Special
Education, Parents)Education, Parents)
Common Conceptual FrameworkCommon Conceptual Framework
Most conflicts, most “ineffective” models Most conflicts, most “ineffective” models are the result of confusion or differing are the result of confusion or differing views about what Inclusion really is.views about what Inclusion really is.
• First Step – General Educator Describes CurriculumFirst Step – General Educator Describes Curriculum• Second Step – Parents (and others) Describe StudentSecond Step – Parents (and others) Describe Student• Third Step – Systematically proceed through Third Step – Systematically proceed through
curriculum domains. There are three options:curriculum domains. There are three options:- Student does it without modifications- Student does it without modifications- Student does it with modifications (decide- Student does it with modifications (decide
on situation specific modifications and on situation specific modifications and supports)supports)
- Student does something else meaningful- Student does something else meaningful
OutcomesOutcomes
• A conceptual framework for thinking A conceptual framework for thinking about inclusionabout inclusion
• Some planning strategiesSome planning strategies• A plan for “some” of the components A plan for “some” of the components
of successful inclusionof successful inclusion• Some resourcesSome resources• Some training resourcesSome training resources
Biases (based on Biases (based on evidence)evidence)
• It’s about curriculum.It’s about curriculum.• Participation in the general curriculum increases Participation in the general curriculum increases
performance on state assessments, employability, performance on state assessments, employability, adult community membership, variety of adult life adult community membership, variety of adult life activity. A birth-death perspective is good.activity. A birth-death perspective is good.
• Instruction is better than remediationInstruction is better than remediation• Some participation in the regular curriculum Some participation in the regular curriculum
(even at a significant lower level) is better than (even at a significant lower level) is better than no or minimal participationno or minimal participation
• Syracuse – Intermittent contact has the same Syracuse – Intermittent contact has the same value as no contact – that is, NO VALUE. value as no contact – that is, NO VALUE. Consistent planned contact works.Consistent planned contact works.
Context – IDEA – Finding Context – IDEA – Finding 55
What improves “educational results for children What improves “educational results for children with disabilities” (“20 years of research”):with disabilities” (“20 years of research”):
1.1. Having high expectations and ensuring Having high expectations and ensuring access to the general curriculumaccess to the general curriculum
2.2. Strengthening the role of parents and Strengthening the role of parents and ensuring that families have meaningful ensuring that families have meaningful opportunities to participate in the education opportunities to participate in the education of their childrenof their children
3.3. Coordinating with other improvement efforts Coordinating with other improvement efforts so that special education becomes a service so that special education becomes a service rather than a place where children are sentrather than a place where children are sent
Context – IDEA – Finding Context – IDEA – Finding 55
4.4. Providing services, aids, supports in the Providing services, aids, supports in the regular classroomregular classroom
5.5. Supporting professional developmentSupporting professional development6.6. Providing incentives for whole school Providing incentives for whole school
approaches and pre-referral interventions approaches and pre-referral interventions that reduce the need to label children that reduce the need to label children before their learning needs have been metbefore their learning needs have been met
7.7. Focus resources on teaching and learning Focus resources on teaching and learning while reducing paperwork and other while reducing paperwork and other requirements that do not assist in requirements that do not assist in improving educational resultsimproving educational results
Context - IDEA OutcomesContext - IDEA Outcomes
• Time in Regular ClassroomTime in Regular Classroom• Participation in State Assessment Participation in State Assessment
ProgramProgram• Performance on State AssessmentsPerformance on State Assessments• Disciplinary ActionsDisciplinary Actions• Graduation RatesGraduation Rates• Post School Outcomes (Employment, Post School Outcomes (Employment,
Post Secondary Education, Community Post Secondary Education, Community Living)Living)
Context – President’s Context – President’s Commission on Excellence Commission on Excellence
in Special Educationin Special Education• Focus on Results, not ProcessFocus on Results, not Process
• Embrace a model of prevention, not Embrace a model of prevention, not a model of failure.a model of failure.
• Consider children with disabilities as Consider children with disabilities as GENERAL EDUCATION children GENERAL EDUCATION children first.first.
Access to General Access to General CurriculumCurriculum
University of Kansas (Wehmeyer, 2004)University of Kansas (Wehmeyer, 2004)
Students with mental retardation Students with mental retardation observed in general education observed in general education classrooms working on tasks linked to classrooms working on tasks linked to grade level content standardsgrade level content standards
in general education classin general education class 97%97%
in self contained settingin self contained setting 46%46%
Access to General Access to General CurriculumCurriculum
University of Kansas (Wehmeyer, 2004)University of Kansas (Wehmeyer, 2004)
Students with mental retardation Students with mental retardation observed in general education observed in general education classrooms working on tasks linked to classrooms working on tasks linked to grade level content standardsgrade level content standards
in general education classin general education class 88%88%
in self contained settingin self contained setting 0% 0%
Context – State Context – State Improvement PlanImprovement Plan
• Connecting Early Intervention and Early Connecting Early Intervention and Early Childhood Education to General Childhood Education to General EducationEducation
• Incorporating Standards into InstructionIncorporating Standards into Instruction• Instruction to Support Diverse LearnersInstruction to Support Diverse Learners• Literacy and Reading InstructionLiteracy and Reading Instruction• Developing Quality IEPsDeveloping Quality IEPs• Staffing Models to Implement Inclusive Staffing Models to Implement Inclusive
EducationEducation
Context – State Context – State Improvement PlanImprovement Plan
• Curriculum ModificationsCurriculum Modifications• Assessment AccommodationsAssessment Accommodations• Use of Assistive TechnologyUse of Assistive Technology• Functional Analysis and Positive Functional Analysis and Positive
Other Interesting Other Interesting InformationInformation
• 76% of children with disabilities in RI 76% of children with disabilities in RI are classified as Learning Disabled or are classified as Learning Disabled or Speech/Language Impaired.Speech/Language Impaired.
• More than 90% of referrals for this More than 90% of referrals for this population are for reading/literacy population are for reading/literacy issues.issues.
• There is fluidity between the “lower” There is fluidity between the “lower” fifth of the general education population fifth of the general education population and the “upper” fifth of the special and the “upper” fifth of the special education population. (National Center education population. (National Center on Educational Outcomes) on Educational Outcomes)
What is Inclusion (Snell)What is Inclusion (Snell)
Inclusion is a PROCESS characterized by:Inclusion is a PROCESS characterized by:
1.1. MembershipMembership
2.2. Joint Responsibility shared by General Joint Responsibility shared by General Educators and Special EducatorsEducators and Special Educators
3.3. Individual Outcomes referenced to the Individual Outcomes referenced to the General CurriculumGeneral Curriculum
4.4. All services referenced to curriculum All services referenced to curriculum outcomesoutcomes
5.5. Site based (student based) Decision Site based (student based) Decision MakingMaking
Successful v. Unsuccessful Successful v. Unsuccessful SchoolsSchools
• WisconsinWisconsin• IowaIowa• CaliforniaCalifornia• VermontVermont• McGregor & VogelsbergMcGregor & Vogelsberg• Some Rhode Island ExamplesSome Rhode Island Examples
Universal Design of Universal Design of LearningLearning
Essential Features of UDL (CAST, Essential Features of UDL (CAST, 1999)1999)
• Multiple means of representationMultiple means of representation• Multiple means of expressionMultiple means of expression• Multiple means of engagementMultiple means of engagement
Addressing UDL Essential Addressing UDL Essential Functions in Instructional Functions in Instructional
DesignDesign1.1. Multiple means of representationMultiple means of representation• Alternate modes or formats: auditory, Alternate modes or formats: auditory,
• Differing levels of complexityDiffering levels of complexity• Use of digital technology to support Use of digital technology to support
varied formats (varied formats (InspirationInspiration, standard & , standard & talking WP, screen readers, text color talking WP, screen readers, text color and size, multisensory software) and size, multisensory software)
Addressing UDL Essential Addressing UDL Essential Functions in Instructional Functions in Instructional
DesignDesign2.2. Multiple means of expressionMultiple means of expression• Supports student choiceSupports student choice• Supports student preference of modeSupports student preference of mode• Offers varied acceptable options Offers varied acceptable options
motivation for learningmotivation for learning• Varied tasks/levels/complexitiesVaried tasks/levels/complexities• Flexible and challenging for each Flexible and challenging for each
studentstudent
UDL ResourcesUDL ResourcesCenter for Applied Special Technology (CAST)Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST)http://http://www.cast.orgwww.cast.orgERIC/OSEP Special Project on UDLERIC/OSEP Special Project on UDL
http://http://ericec.org/osep/udesign.htmericec.org/osep/udesign.htmTrace Research & Development CenterTrace Research & Development Center
http://http://trace.wisc.edutrace.wisc.eduEqual Access to Software & Information (EASI)Equal Access to Software & Information (EASI)
http://http://www.rit.edu?~easiwww.rit.edu?~easiOhio State University Partnership Grant on UDLOhio State University Partnership Grant on UDL
• IDEA contains no provisions for IDEA contains no provisions for caseload or class sizecaseload or class size
• 31 states have policies or 31 states have policies or regulations (Jackson, 2003)regulations (Jackson, 2003)
• Other states leave it up to the LEAOther states leave it up to the LEA
Class Size and Student Class Size and Student AchievementAchievement
• Minimal increases in reading in 1:1Minimal increases in reading in 1:1• Communication with teacher and peers Communication with teacher and peers
increases in smaller classesincreases in smaller classes• Attending behavior decreases in smaller Attending behavior decreases in smaller
classesclasses• Disruptions decrease in smaller classesDisruptions decrease in smaller classes• Reading test scores increase in smaller Reading test scores increase in smaller
classesclasses• Increases in reading in smaller groupsIncreases in reading in smaller groups• Increases in math in smaller classesIncreases in math in smaller classes• Greatest increases in elementary classrooms Greatest increases in elementary classrooms
Class Size and Student Class Size and Student AchievementAchievement
• Increased utterances in pairsIncreased utterances in pairs• Increased word usage and length of Increased word usage and length of
utterance in quartetsutterance in quartets• Instructional Time rose from 12% to 23% in Instructional Time rose from 12% to 23% in
small group compared to 1:1small group compared to 1:1• More time in “pull out” spent in non More time in “pull out” spent in non
instructional activity than instructionalinstructional activity than instructional• ““Pull out” frequently interferes with critical Pull out” frequently interferes with critical
instructional time in regular classroominstructional time in regular classroom• Teachers perceive student academic and Teachers perceive student academic and
social achievement to be greater in smaller social achievement to be greater in smaller classesclasses
Staffing ModelsStaffing Models
• Goal – to facilitate school wide implementationGoal – to facilitate school wide implementation
to facilitate pre-referral interventionsto facilitate pre-referral interventions
Co-teaching at selected grade levels usually Co-teaching at selected grade levels usually based on staff preferences, sometimes inhibit based on staff preferences, sometimes inhibit school wide models.school wide models.
Grade level teams have broadest use and Grade level teams have broadest use and application, most likely to facilitate use of application, most likely to facilitate use of grade level curriculum as basis for inclusion grade level curriculum as basis for inclusion planning.planning.
Overdependence on 1:1 aides creates barriers Overdependence on 1:1 aides creates barriers between teachers and students.between teachers and students.
• If there is direct connection between If there is direct connection between instructional accommodations used in instructional accommodations used in daily classroom instruction, assessment daily classroom instruction, assessment accommodations recommended on the accommodations recommended on the IEP, and accommodations used while IEP, and accommodations used while taking state assessments…..then, students taking state assessments…..then, students will perform better on state assessmentswill perform better on state assessments
• Accommodations Guidelines and List from Accommodations Guidelines and List from “Testing Guidelines for Rhode Island’s “Testing Guidelines for Rhode Island’s State Assessment Program” State Assessment Program”
Rhode Island Assessment Rhode Island Assessment Accommodations StudyAccommodations Study
Paul V. Sherlock Center on DisabilitiesPaul V. Sherlock Center on Disabilities
at Rhode Island Collegeat Rhode Island College
Office of Special NeedsOffice of Special Needs
Office of AssessmentOffice of Assessment
Rhode Island Department of Rhode Island Department of EducationEducation
Primary QuestionsPrimary Questions
• How do IEP Teams make decisions about How do IEP Teams make decisions about assessment accommodations.assessment accommodations.
• The relationship between (a) instructional The relationship between (a) instructional accommodations/modifications; (b) accommodations/modifications; (b) assessment accommodations as listed in assessment accommodations as listed in IEPs; and (c) use of assessment IEPs; and (c) use of assessment accommodations during state accommodations during state assessmentsassessments
• Actual Practice during state assessmentsActual Practice during state assessments
Major FindingsMajor Findings
• Many school personnel are “uncertain”.Many school personnel are “uncertain”.• Local school personnel and test Local school personnel and test
administrators are “very uncertain”.administrators are “very uncertain”.• Where assessments are administered is Where assessments are administered is
more likely to predict the accommodations more likely to predict the accommodations students receive than any other factor.students receive than any other factor.
• Accommodations tend to be bundled.Accommodations tend to be bundled.• Not enough “coherence” between IEP Not enough “coherence” between IEP
decisions, classroom instruction, and decisions, classroom instruction, and assessment administration.assessment administration.
Roles of General EducatorsRoles of General Educators
Reports from the general education respondents Reports from the general education respondents indicated that they were not fully empowered indicated that they were not fully empowered participants in the accommodation decision-making participants in the accommodation decision-making process. This seemed especially the case among the process. This seemed especially the case among the sampled high school teachers.sampled high school teachers.
• I have very little involvement as an IEP team member. I have very little involvement as an IEP team member. My input is rarely sought.My input is rarely sought.
• I am asked to sit in on IEP meetings infrequently. To I am asked to sit in on IEP meetings infrequently. To be honest, most decisions on accommodations are be honest, most decisions on accommodations are made without my input.made without my input.
• I do not have a part in this process. I don’t have the I do not have a part in this process. I don’t have the training or the knowledge. I don’t make decisions.training or the knowledge. I don’t make decisions.
• I have never been given information on how to assess a I have never been given information on how to assess a special education student, but I have requested it.special education student, but I have requested it.
1. While testing accommodation 1. While testing accommodation recommendations for students were recommendations for students were individualized according to their needs (judging individualized according to their needs (judging by differences on their IEPs), very often such by differences on their IEPs), very often such distinctions among observed students would distinctions among observed students would disappear during testing sessions. What seemed disappear during testing sessions. What seemed to influence actual testing accommodations was to influence actual testing accommodations was location, i.e., where a student took the state location, i.e., where a student took the state test, rather than the IEP. However, it was not test, rather than the IEP. However, it was not clear why some students were assigned to clear why some students were assigned to alternate locations (not recommended on their alternate locations (not recommended on their IEPs), and others were not. This finding was IEPs), and others were not. This finding was consistent across sites.consistent across sites.
2. Students who tested in alternate locations 2. Students who tested in alternate locations often all received the same accommodations, often all received the same accommodations, whether required by their IEPs or not. whether required by their IEPs or not. 3. During our observations, if students were 3. During our observations, if students were not required to have alternate locations for not required to have alternate locations for testing, other recommended accommodations testing, other recommended accommodations occasionally failed to materialize as well. occasionally failed to materialize as well. 4. Alternatively, all students in some settings – 4. Alternatively, all students in some settings – including non-disabled students – would including non-disabled students – would receive so-called accommodations, including receive so-called accommodations, including additional time for finishing tests.additional time for finishing tests.
Some IdeasSome Ideas
• Preferred means for professional development – Preferred means for professional development – (a) In-house trainings run by external trainers (a) In-house trainings run by external trainers 66.7%; (b) In-house trainings run by school 66.7%; (b) In-house trainings run by school personnel 51.6%.personnel 51.6%.
• School based sessions with leadership personnel School based sessions with leadership personnel to clarify “what is permitted”.to clarify “what is permitted”.
• Develop IEPs during same school year in which Develop IEPs during same school year in which student will participate in state assessments. student will participate in state assessments. Insure that both classroom and assessment Insure that both classroom and assessment personnel participate.personnel participate.
• Professional development re: implementation and Professional development re: implementation and use of both standard and non standard use of both standard and non standard accommodations.accommodations.
Use of Assistive Use of Assistive TechnologyTechnology
• RIATAPRIATAP• TechACCESS Center – After School TechACCESS Center – After School
Tech Nights……Other TrainingsTech Nights……Other Trainings• Sherlock Center publications and Sherlock Center publications and
trainingstrainings• Spring Semester – RIC courseSpring Semester – RIC course
• Designate a “techie”Designate a “techie”
ParentsParents
Family Centered Practices RubricFamily Centered Practices Rubric
Training OpportunitiesTraining Opportunities
www.ridoe.netwww.ridoe.net
www.sherlockcenter.orgwww.sherlockcenter.org
www.ritap.orgwww.ritap.org
Some National ResourcesSome National Resources
National Center on Education National Center on Education OutcomesOutcomes
United States Department of EducationUnited States Department of Educationwww.ed.govwww.ed.gov
Center for Applied Special TechnologiesCenter for Applied Special Technologieswww.cast.orgwww.cast.org
Strategy 1 – State Strategy 1 – State Improvement PlanImprovement Plan
• Connecting Early Intervention and Early Connecting Early Intervention and Early Childhood Education to General Childhood Education to General EducationEducation
• Incorporating Standards into InstructionIncorporating Standards into Instruction• Instruction to Support Diverse LearnersInstruction to Support Diverse Learners• Literacy and Reading InstructionLiteracy and Reading Instruction• Developing Quality IEPsDeveloping Quality IEPs• Staffing Models to Implement Inclusive Staffing Models to Implement Inclusive
EducationEducation
Context – State Context – State Improvement PlanImprovement Plan
• Curriculum ModificationsCurriculum Modifications• Assessment AccommodationsAssessment Accommodations• Use of Assistive TechnologyUse of Assistive Technology• Functional Analysis and Positive Functional Analysis and Positive
