erral

7/27/2019 erral

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/erral 1/45

The Pre-Referral and Referral

Process: Appropriate interventions

and identification

National Center for Culturally

Responsive Educational Systems

National Staff Development Council

December, 2005

Elizabeth Kozleski

Shelley Zion

www.nccrest.org

7/27/2019 erral


The Pre-Referral and Referral

Process: Appropriate

interventions and identification

Academy One:

Culturally and LinguisticallyResponsive Pre-referral Interventions

7/27/2019 erral


Learning Outcomes

• Understand Early Intervening,

• Three Tier RtI, and

• Prereferral Processes

7/27/2019 erral


What is PreReferral?

7/27/2019 erral


Demographic Context

• In 2003, 42% of public school students were part of an ethnic

or racial minority, and 19% of all school age children spoke a

language other than English at home. (NCES, 2005)

• In 2000, 8% of all public school children were labeled as

having mental retardation (MR), emotional disturbance (ED),

or a specific learning disability (SLD). Boys are twice as

likely as girls to receive one of these labels. Black students

account for 17% of the public school population, but are

disproportionately represented in all three categories,

accounting for 33% of students classified as MR, 27% of students classified as ED, and 18% of students classified as

SLD.

7/27/2019 erral


Although examining rates of representation can alert

educators to the existence of a problem, ultimately a key

question in dealing with disproportionality in specialeducation is

“Are we identifying and serving the

„right‟ students?”

7/27/2019 erral


What is pre-referral

intervention?

•Emerged in the 70’s, in response to concerns about

inappropriate identification and labeling

•Has been presented in a variety of models

•Focuses on differentiating between academic and

behavioral difficulties that are a result of inappropriate or

inadequate instruction and those that are a result of

disability

•Assumes that interventions will be attempted prior to

referral to special education

•Often is seen as a first step to special education

7/27/2019 erral


Response to intervention

Tier 3:

SPED

Tier 2:

Focused Intensive Instruction

Tier 1:Robust Scientifically Based Instruction

7/27/2019 erral


CR RtI

• When RtI is implemented with culturally andlinguistically diverse learners, it is critical that theprereferral intervention process is culturally andlinguistically responsive; that is, educators mustensure that students’ socio-cultural, linguistic,racial/ethnic, and other relevant backgroundcharacteristics are addressed at all stages,including reviewing student performance,

considering reasons for student difficulty or failure, designing alternative interventions, andinterpreting assessment results (Ortiz, 2002).

7/27/2019 erral


Reasons for Academic

Difficulty

• Inadequate match between student’s

learning characteristics and the learning

environment

• Lack of effective modifications

• Disabilities that impede academic

performance

7/27/2019 erral


Key Elements of Culturally and Linguistically

Responsive

Pre-Referral Intervention

• Prevention of school underachievement and

failure of CLD students

• Early intervention for struggling learners

• Diagnostic/prescriptive teaching

• Availability of general education problem-

solving support systems(Garcia & Ortiz, 2004)

7/27/2019 erral


Activity

• Code the responses for the first question,

―what are pre referral interventions‖ using

the following ideas:

– Prevention of school underachievement and failure

of CLD students

– Early intervention for struggling learners

– Diagnostic/prescriptive teaching

– Availability of general education problem-solving

support systems

7/27/2019 erral


Key Element 1: Preventing School

Underachievement and Failure Among

culturally and linguistically diverse Learners

ALL Educators are

responsible for educatingALL students

Collaborative relationships

with families

On Going PL for

culturally responsive practices

Wide range of education

services and programs

7/27/2019 erral


ALL Educators are

responsible for educating

ALL students –Basic philosophy that ALL students can learn, and all adults areresponsible for ensuring success

–Educators have high expectations for all students, regardless of

cultural, linguistic, economic, or other characteristics – Additive view of culture and language

–Student success or failure is seen as a result of match/mismatchbetween learning environment and learning needs

–Teachers have regular opportunities to plan and coordinate

services –Curricula and instruction is culturally responsive and builds onstudents ―funds of knowledge‖

–Students are actively engaged in the instructional process, indialogue with teachers

7/27/2019 erral


Wide range of education

services and programs

• Special education is less likely to be

viewed as the logical alternative for

struggling students if a wide array of

programs and services are available-

– Early childhood education

– Title I

– Bilingual/ESL

– Community based programs

7/27/2019 erral


Collaborative relationships

with families and communities

• See families as valuable resources to

school improvement efforts, student

support, and academic progress

• Work from a framework of cultural

reciprocity

• Value language, culture, educational

goals

7/27/2019 erral


On Going Professional Learning for

Culturally Responsive Practices

• Cultural self awareness

• Attitudes/expectations

• Beliefs, knowledge, and skills

7/27/2019 erral


Key Element Two: Early Intervention for

Struggling Learners

• Instead of waiting for students to fail, early

intervention must happen as soon as

learning difficulties are noted….

7/27/2019 erral


Activity

• Activity: Classroom Scenarios of Struggling

Learners

• Time Limit: 35 minutes

• Step 1: Think about Struggling Learners in your classroom (5-10 mins.)

• Step 2: Discuss scenarios in small groups (15

minutes)• Step 3: Large group debriefing (10-15 mins.)

7/27/2019 erral


Focus Questions For Scenarios

1. Based on the information provided, what doyou think is going on? If there is a problem,what do you think it might be?

2. What do you see as possible schoolwide,

classroom, and learning factors contributing tothe student's academic and/or behavioraldifficulties?

3. How do you think the teacher should address

these issues? Who should be involved in this process?

K El t 3

7/27/2019 erral


Key Element 3:

Diagnostic/Prescriptive Teaching

• Learner Assessment

• Curriculum and Instruction

• Learner Assessment• Refined Curriculum and Instruction

– What, How, When, How long, how much

practice, the nature of scaffolds

7/27/2019 erral


P

L

P

r

i

n

c

i

pl

e

s

Context

Individual

Community &

Institutional Histories

Discourse, social, &

cultural factorsParticipants, artifacts, &

structures

Power Relationships

Dominant &

SubordinatedViewpoints

Sociocultural

histories

Psychological

characteristics and

temperament

K El t 4

7/27/2019 erral


Key Element 4:

Availability of General Education Problem-

Solving Support Systems

• Peer or Expert Consultation

• Sharing Instructional Resources

• Co-Teaching• Cognitive Coaching

• Teacher Assistance Teams

• Professional Learning Communities – Data Driven Conversations

N t St

7/27/2019 erral


Next Steps:

What happens after pre-referral?

• Haven’t been taught

• Data driven referrals

– Prevention, Robust Classroom Instruction

– Scaffolded, Direct Instruction

7/27/2019 erral


ReferencesReferences

Anderson, L. W., & Pellicer, L. O. (1998). Toward an understanding of unusually successfulprograms for economically disadvantaged students. Journal of Education for StudentsPlaced at Risk, 3(3), 237 –263.

Barron, V., & Menken, K. (2002, August). What are the characteristics of the shortage of teachers qualified to teach English Language Learners? AskNCELA No. 14. Retrieved May31, 2004 from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/expert/faq/14shortage.htm.

Chalfant, J., Pysh, M., & Moultrie, R. (1979). Teacher assistance teams: A model for within—building problem solving. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2 (3), 85 –96.

Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering language minority students. Harvard Educational Review,56 , 18 –36.Donovan, M. S., & Cross, C. (Eds.). (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Report of the National Research Council’s Committee on Minority Representationin Special Education. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Erickson, F. (2001). Culture in society and in educational practices. In J. Banks & C. M.Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (pp. 31 –58). New York, NY:Wiley.

7/27/2019 erral


ReferencesFletcher, J. M., Barnes, M., & Francis, D. (2002). Classification of learning disabilities: An evidence-based evaluation. In R. Bradley, L.Danielson, & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 185 –250). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.

García, S. B. (2002). Parent-professional collaboration in culturally-sensitive assessment. In A. J. Artiles & A. A. Ortiz (Eds.), Englishlanguage learners with special needs: Identification, assessment and instruction (pp.87 –103). Washington, D.C.: Center for AppliedLinguistics and Delta Systems Co., Inc.

García, S. B., & Guerra, P. L. (2004). Deconstructing deficit thinking:Working with educators to create more equitable learningenvironments. Education and Urban Society, 36 (2), 150 –168.

García, S. B., Wilkinson, C. Y., & Ortiz, A. A. (1995). Enhancingachievement for language minority students: Classroom, school, andfamily contexts. Education and Urban Society, 27 , 441 –462.

Kalyanpur, M. & Harry, B. (1999). Culture in special education.Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

King-Sears, M. E., Burgess, M., & Lawson, T. L. (1999). Applyingcurriculum-based assessment in inclusive settings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32 (1), 30 –38.

7/27/2019 erral


References

Leinhardt, G. (1992). What research on learning tells us aboutteaching. Educational Leadership, 49(7), 20 –25.

Lynch, E. W., & Hanson, M. J. (Eds.). (1998). Developing cross-cultural competence: A guide for working with young children and their families (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., & Neff, D. (1992). Funds of knowledgefor teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homesand classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31, 132 –141.Oakes, J., & Lipton, M. (1999). Teaching to change the world .Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Ortiz, A. A. (1997). Learning disabilities occurringconcomitantly with linguistic differences. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 321 –332.

7/27/2019 erral


References

Ortiz, A. A. (2002). Prevention of school failure and early intervention for English Language Learners. In A. J. Artiles & A. A. Ortiz (Eds.), English Language Learners with special education needs: Identification, assessment,and instruction (pp. 31 –63). Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems Co., Inc.

Ortiz, A. A., & García, S. B. (1990). Using language assessment data for language and instructional planning for exceptional bilingual students. In A. Carrasquillo & R. E. Baecher (Eds.), Teaching the bilingual special education student (pp. 25 –47). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context . New York, NY: OxfordUniversity.

Rueda, R., Artiles, A. J., Salazar, J., & Higareda, I. (2002). An analysis of special education as a response to thediminished academic achievement of Chicano/Latino students: An update. In R. R. Valencia (Ed.), Chicano

school failure and success: Past, present, and future (2nd ed.) (pp. 310 –332). London: Routledge/Falmer.Santamaría, L. J., Fletcher, T. V., & Bos, C. S. (2002). Effective pedagogy for English Language Learners ininclusive classrooms. In A. J. Artiles, & A. A. Ortiz (Eds.), English language learners with special educationneeds: Identification, assessment, and instruction (pp. 133 –157). Washington, D.C.: Center for AppliedLinguistics and Delta Systems Co., Inc.

Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. A. (1989). What works for students at risk: A research synthesis. Educational Leadership, 46 (5), 4 –13.

Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (Eds.). (2003). Redefining LD as inadequate response to instruction: The promiseand potential problems [Special issue]. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18 (3) 137 –146.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.Wang, M. C., & Kovak, J. A. (1995). Bridging the achievement gap in urban schools: Reducing educationalsegregation and advancing resilience-promoting strategies. In B. Williams (Ed.), Closing the achievement gap: Avision to guide change in beliefs and practices (pp. 9 –24). Philadelphia, PA: Research for Better Schools.

7/27/2019 erral


www.nccrest.org

7/27/2019 erral


7/27/2019 erral


Identifying

School-wide

Patterns of

Student

Performance

Looking at

Student

Work to

Target

Instruction

Referral

Process

Strength

Based

Assessment

Exploring

Culturally

Responsive

Pedagogy

Applying

Culturally

Responsive

Practices

and

Pedagogy

Practicing

Cultural

Respons-

ivity

Mining

Meaningful

Data

Tiered

Literacy

Intervention

Intensive

Literacy

Instruction

in the

Classroom

Culturally

Responsive

Literacy

Practices

Pre-referral

Process

Appreciating

Culture and

Cultural

Responsive-

ness

Uncovering

Diversity

Creating

Culturally

Responsive

Systems

Fostering

Team

Leadership

Engaging

Stakeholder

s in

Culturally

Responsive

Systems

Culturally

Responsive

Practices

Data

Mining

English

Language

Learners

The Special

Education

Process

Cultural

Responsivity

Collaborative

Leadership

Teams

Spotlighting

Issues of

Power and

Privilege to

Create

Change

A C A

D E M I E S

7/27/2019 erral


Principle 1

Professional Learning is focused on

improving learning within a diverse,

multicultural community.

The diverse, multicultural context that characterizes most

contemporary communities must be grounded in the

outcomes, content, and activities of any professional

learning activity.

7/27/2019 erral


Principle 2

Professional Learning engages educators in

joint, productive activity through discourse,

inquiry, and public practice.

Effective professional learning is reached by continuous,

collaborative interaction with colleagues through

discussion, knowledge development and understanding,

and directed inquiry around practice.

7/27/2019 erral


Principle 3

Professional Learning is a facet of daily

practice, not a compartmentalized activity.

Since professional learning is embedded within practice, it

becomes part of daily discourse, shared discussions about

student learning and student products, as well as more

formalized mentoring and coaching, meetings, study

groups, and examination of evidence from inquiry cycles.

7/27/2019 erral


Principle 4

Professional Learning results in improvedlearning for students who have been

marginalized from the academic and social

curricula of the US public school system.

Professional learning scaffolds teacher learning so that the influence of individual cultural identity and values on individual and systems

practices are understood, mediated by expanding professionalknowledge of the sociocultural dimensions of learning, and its impactassessed through student involvement and performance in academicand social curricula.

7/27/2019 erral


Principle 5

Professional Learning influences decisions

about what is taught and why.

Since professional learning is generative, educators’ knowledge will

expand and become more complex as it develops. It is expected that

professional learning will result in examination and improvements to the

content and process of instruction for culturally and linguistically diverselearners.

7/27/2019 erral


Principle 6

Professional Learning is focused on the diffusion

of professional knowledge to build sustainable

educational communities focused on improving

learning outcomes for students and their familieswho are culturally and linguistically diverse.

As educators gain knowledge, they also have the responsibility for

sharing and mentoring others both in the practice of professionallearning and in the expanded knowledge that comes from such activity.

7/27/2019 erral


7/27/2019 erral


Facilitator’s Manual • Academy Abstract

• Academy Outcomes

• Academy Agenda

• Academy Materials

• Appendices and Enclosed CD• NCCRESt Academies

• Facilitator Note

• Tips for Facilitating Leadership Academies

• Professional Learning Principles• Special Facilitation Tips

• Academy

• Glossary

• Resources

7/27/2019 erral


Material Design

• Tips for getting started

• Tips for moving things along

• Tips for managing activities

• Tips for lecturettes

• Tips for participant questions

• Tips for leave-taking

7/27/2019 erral


7/27/2019 erral


7/27/2019 erral


7/27/2019 erral


Features

7/27/2019 erral


Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	shoukahmed
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

erral

Documents