To identify current practices in dropout prevention for students with disabilities in Florida
To acquire in-depth knowledge of the NDPC-SD Dropout Prevention Intervention Framework
2
“Following nearly 13,000 Philadelphia students over a number of years, researchers found that 60% of students in the study who dropped out of high-poverty schools could be identified by one or more of four indicators in the 6th grade:◦ Failing English◦ Failing math◦ Attending school 80% of the time or less◦ Receiving at least one out-of-school
suspension”Ballfanz, R., Herzog, G., & MacIver, D., in The Progress of Education Reform 2007: Dropout Prevention, July 2007, downloaded
December 30, 2009 from http://www.ndpc-sd.org/documents/ECS/ECS-Dropout-Prevention-2007.pdf.
The freshman year matters! 9th grade Red flags◦ Off-Track - Failing two or more semester courses
or accumulating less than the number of credits required to move to 10th grade◦ Failures - One or more failed courses◦ Grades/GPA - 2.0 or lower on a 4-point scale◦ Absences - Missing 10% or more of instructional
timeWhat Matters for Staying On-Track and Graduating in Chicago Public Schools: A Focus on Students with Disabilities, (December 8, 2010), downloaded January 28, 2010 from http://www.betterhighschools.org/webinar/default.aspx
5
SPP◦ Mandated by the
Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)◦ Developed for
2005-2010◦ Required of all
states◦ Updated annually
Submitted to OSEP annually. State determinations are made based on the
review of each state’s annual performance reports.
• APR– Reflects progress or
slippage in meeting the measurable and rigorous targets established in the SPP
– Includes revisions to the state’s targets, improvement activities, timelines or resources in the SPP and justifications for the revisions
Indicator 1 – Graduation rate Indicator 2 – Dropout rate Indicator 13 – Transition elements in the IEP Indicator 14 – Post-school outcomes
7
Quality IEPs Staying in School
GraduatingAchieving post-school outcomes
Paula Kohler, Welcome to Getting the GIST, February 2008
Post-School Outcomes~Indicator 14~
Postsecondary education and/or training Employment Independent living
Dropping Out~Indicator 2~
Why? Appropriate programs? Address student and family needs?
Graduation~Indicator 1~
Expectations and standards? Various pathways available? Linkage to post-school environments?
What’s the Quality of Our IEPs?~Indicator 13~
Measurable post-school and annual goals Transition-related assessments Course of study, services, and activities Coordination of services
Not so good? Good?
Why? Why Not?
Percent of youth who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they left school, and were:
A. Enrolled in higher education within one year of leaving high school.B. Enrolled in higher education or competitively employed within one year of leaving high school.C. Enrolled in higher education or in some other postsecondary education or training program; or competitively employed or in some other employment within one year of leaving high school.
2009-10: 56.7% Target2008-09: 50.4% (11,136/22,100) Actual
Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high school in 2008-09 with a regular diploma.◦ States must report using the graduation
rate calculation and timeline established by the Department under the ESEA.
2009-10: 43.5% Target
2008-09: 43.0% (10,836/25,203) Actual
New Baseline 43.0% (2007-08 rate)
Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school in 2008-09. ◦ The percentage of students in grades 9-
12 (from the year’s total enrollment) who have withdrawn from school and have been assigned a dropout withdrawal reason code.
2009-10: 3.75% Target
2008-09: 4.2% (5,202/122,688) Actual
100% percent of youth aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet the postsecondary goals.
◦ 2007-08: 24% of 389 IEPs reviewed met requirements◦ 2008-09: 61% of 601 IEPs reviewed met
requirements
Data reflects the total number of IEPs reviewed that met requirements.
◦ Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high school in 2007-08 with a regular diploma at a rate below the state target of 40.3% AND◦ Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high
school in 2007-08 at a rate above the state target of 4.0% AND◦ Districts with findings of systemic noncompliance
(greater than 75%) on the ESE Compliance Monitoring 2007-08 Self Assessment Transition (STB-16) AND◦ Percent of youth exiting in 2006-07 found
employed and/or in continuing education in fall of 2007-08 at a rate below the state target of 55.7%
14
Transition Indicators are like car tires…
…if they’re flat, you’re not going far.
Level 1 – all districts complete identified self-assessments
Level 2 – in addition to Level 1, newly selected targeted districts complete focused self-assessment
Level 3 – in addition to Levels 1 and 2, on-site monitoring
16
17
Use a systems focus to improve and facilitate the individual student focus
Think outside the box Implement a team problem-solving process Start at the elementary level Use evidence-based practices Increase family involvement
18
Seek and provide training, technical assistance, and support◦ FDOE – BEESS, Dropout Prevention◦ Discretionary projects – Project 10, FDLRS, FIN◦ Resources – National Centers, BEESS Weekly Memo
Develop, implement, and monitor a plan
19
The TAXONOMY forTRANSITION
PROGRAMMING
Student-Focused Planning•IEP Development•Student Participation•Planning Strategies
Family Involvement•Family Training•Family Involvement•Family Empowerment
Student Development•Life Skills Instruction•Career & Vocational Curricula•Structured Work Experience•Assessment•Support Services
Program Structure•Program Philosophy•Program Policy•Strategic Planning•Program evaluation•Resource Allocation•Human Resource Development
Interagency Collaboration•Collaborative Framework•Collaborative Service Delivery Kohler (1996)
Model for Extending Transition ResearchKohler, P., (February 2008). Florida Transition Steering Committee Presentation
Effective Transition Practices
Increase Capacity to Implement Effective Transition Practices
Facilitate Implementation of Effective Transition
Practices
Data-Based Decision Making
Professional Development
Policy Analysis and Change
Technical Assistance
File plan on General Supervision website◦ Data◦ Policies and Procedures◦ Training and Professional Development◦ Technical Assistance
Florida Department of EducationBureau of Exceptional Education and Student [email protected](850) 245-0478
Sandra Covington SmithMay 25, 2010
Clemson UniversityNational Dropout Prevention Center for Students with Disabilities
© 2007 National Dropout Prevention Center for Students with Disabilities at Clemson University – All rights reserved
Data analysis
Matching of needs to evidence-based strategies
Development of plans and support for strategy implementation
Monitoring of adult practices and student progress
2626
27
Knowledge TransferTraining Modules
On-site Training
Coaching
Consultation
Increased Understanding
Expanded practices
Improved capacity
Increased School Completion
•What are the critical gaps to address?
•What EBPs best address the need?•What is my plan of action?
•Who drops out and Why?•What is working?•What do I need to change?•Did I reach my target?
Implement and Evaluate Data Analysis
Prioritize Needs
Select Matching
Interventions and Develop Action Plan
Essential Questions
29
Implement Plan & Collect Data
Understand the Research & Contextualize
Select Evidence-BasedStrategies &
Embed Family Engagement
Analyze School DataIdentify risk and
protective factorsStep 1 Step 2
Step 3Step 4
29
District and school demographics Student performance (graduation,
dropout, course completion, AYP) District/school infrastructure Assessment, curriculum, and
instructional systems Current initiatives and partnerships Professional development Parent/family engagement
Academic content and instruction (reading, math, science, writing)
Behavior (classroom management, behavior supports)
Attendance and truancy prevention School climate Self management (self determination,
problem solving) Mentoring (employment, service learning) Parent/family engagement
Identify any trends in the data over time◦ Which targets were made/missed last
year?◦ How about the year before?
Are things getting better or worse? See what patterns the data show
among the schools in the district Look for patterns among classes and
students at the school level Use the trends and patterns you see
to identify needs and determine level of intensity for interventions
Is the school meeting all of its students’ needs?
Do curriculum and instruction adequately address areas of weakness?
Are policies or procedures pushing students out?
What additional resources are needed at school?
Are there staff development and training needs?
What programs/interventions are now in place?◦ How are these working and why?
Once you’ve identified your school’s needs, try to prioritize them◦ Which one(s) are most critical and require
immediate intervention? …which can wait a while? …which might be solved by addressing another need?◦ Which ones can be addressed with the resources
available to you?◦ Remember that your plan probably can’t address
everything at once… Don’t try! Set practical, achievable goals: pick two or three issues to address at first. Develop your plan with a reasonable scope.
Developing a School Intervention Plan
Expand your core team to include other school & community members who can help maximize your likelihood of success◦ Identify your leader, determine roles &
responsibilities◦ Meet regularly, share ideas, keep the momentum
Work together and develop an improvement plan◦ Identify the desired outcomes, determine the
activities that will make it happen, develop timelines, and identify additional resources you will need and where/how to acquire the resources
Promote and facilitate the implementation of evidence-based strategies that support:◦ School attendance◦ Academic success◦ Prosocial behaviors◦ A positive school climate◦ Student engagement ◦ Parental involvement
The most frequent intervention strategies [that enhance school completion for students with disabilities] were categorized as academic engagement, psychosocial skills development, mentoring, and parent/teacher behavior management training.
The more promising practices appeared to involve academic or multi-component programs (Prevatt and Kelly, 2003)
Conduct baseline measures Train the teachers, staff and other people
who will be involved in the project Begin implementing the interventionsOngoing checks for fidelity of implementationOngoing data collection for progress
monitoring and documentation Report ongoing progress at school and to
the community – Share your successes!
Academic Achievement Attendance Behavior Family Engagement
But don’t forget to look at all the others!
Remember… Collect data at every step of the way!
This is the best way for you to be able to clearly demonstrate progress!◦ Baseline data◦ Ongoing measures of progress◦ Summative data at the end of a project cycle
© 2007 National Dropout Prevention Center for Students with Disabilities at Clemson University – All rights reserved