+ All Categories
Home > Documents > CURRICULUM/PARENT NIGHT - Consolidated School … Services/SNAP Curriculum Night... · STAR...

CURRICULUM/PARENT NIGHT - Consolidated School … Services/SNAP Curriculum Night... · STAR...

Date post: 07-Jul-2018
Category:
Upload: nguyencong
View: 216 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
10
CURRICULUM/PARENT NIGHT 2012-2013
Transcript

CURRICULUM/PARENT NIGHT 2012-2013

AGENDA

STAR Curriculum quick review

Technology in the classroom

PECS

Family Resources

Art/Music

Conferences/Workshops for parents

STAR

2009-2010 – Pilot STAR in Special Needs and Autism

Program (SNAP) through ARRA funds

2010-2011 – Full implementation in SNAP program

and District wide special education staff

trained Pre school-HS

2011-2012 – Program expanded to Chesak, Martin,

Heineman, HS

2012-2013 – Goal District STAR coach

ONGOING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Initial Comprehensive Training = 2 days

Refresher Training = 1 day

Parent presentation at PAC

On site coaching = 3-4 days per year In addition to attending a workshop, staff receives hands-on

consultation services:

Program / Classroom set-up

Individual Student Program set-up

Student Assessment

Hands-on work with students to provide training to staff

Small group staff training at the site (before and/or after hands-on training)

Research-based Instructional Strategies Used in the STAR Program

DISCRETE TRIAL TRAINING

PIVOTAL RESPONSE TRAINING

FUNCTIONAL ROUTINES

STAFF OUTCOMES

Lesson plans can be easily tailored to meet the needs of individual students.

Student Learning Profiles enable educators to plan lessons for each student and document progress for IEPs.

“One big positive outcome that I can see is uniformity in how we cue students, for example, across classrooms we say “Walk with me” or “Come Here” and that can help students to transition between people and classrooms, because similar cues are being used across settings.”

“A big positive for teachers is the support of the curriculum and scope and sequence. The curriculum is invaluable in helping us decide what pre-skills are necessary as foundation for higher level skills. This is very helpful when explaining to parents about student progress and when determining IEP goals for students.

The consultation of the STAR trainers has been wonderful and their assistance with individual students and general classroom routines has meant a lot.

Improved ability to demonstrate progress through organized and consistent data collection across the 4 different classrooms

Well-defined scope and sequence

STUDENT OUTCOMES

The program meets the needs of students at various developmental levels with the three levels of the STAR Program

Improved ability to imitate gross motor movements

Improved ability to demonstrate language comprehension for functional objects, pictures, people and concepts (shapes, colors, etc.)

Improved ability to develop language expression through a hierarchy of verbal expression i.e. babbling, sound pairing, verbal imitation, requesting, etc. (PRT)

Supports student engagement in stations and use of positive reinforcement

Students demonstrate mastery of skills before moving on

Students learn to generalize skills within different educational settings

PARENT OUTCOMES

Allows for concrete data to discuss with parents to develop IEP goals and services

Open communication though the use of a data binder

Parents can receive information about the program and strategies from staff. STAR also offer a parent training.

Parents can see mastery of skills and progress from their child.

REFERENCES

References for Teaching Functional Routines:

Falco, R., Jansen, J., Arick, J. and M. Deboer (1990). J. B.

Ganz (2007), R. Lovannone, G., Dunlap, H. Huber, and D. Kincaid (2003), B.T. Ogletree, T. Oren, & M.A.

Fisher (2007), Brown, Evans, Weed, & Owen, (1987). Cooper, et. Al., (1987). McClannahan & Krantz, (2000). Olley, (1987). Arick, J., Young, H., Loos, L., Krug, D., Gynse, M., and Johnson, S. (2003).

References for Pivotal Response Training:

Koegel, R., O=Dell, M., & Koegel, L. (1987). Koegel, R., Schreibman, L., Good, A., Cerniglia, L., Murphy, C., & Koegel, L. (1989). Laski, K., Charlop, M., & Schreibman, L. (1988). Schreibman, L., & Koegel, R. (1996). Pierce, K., & Schreibman, L. (1997). Arick, J., Young, H., Loos, L., Krug, D., Gynse, M., and Johnson, S. (2003), Hupp and Reitman (2000).

References for Discrete Trial Training:

Krug, D., Arick, J., Almond, P., Rosenblum, J., Scanlon, C., &

Border, M. (1979). Krug, D., Rosenblum, J., Almond, P., & Arick, J. (1981). Leaf, R., & McEachin, J., (2000). Lovaas, O. (1981). Lovaas, O. (1987). Smith, T. (2001). Arick, J., Young, H., Loos, L., Krug, D., Gynse, M., and Johnson, S. (2003).

Thank You for Coming


Recommended