Supporting All Teachers for All Students: SATFAS Evidence-based Practices Professional Development to Build Statewide Capacity

Session Outcomes By the end of this session, participants will: Understand the importance of sustainability factors in statewide initiatives Learn about successful initiatives of districts using SATFAS Develop an action plan for participants to take back to their state The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

SPDG Goals SPECIAL EDUCATORS: To increase the percentages of highly qualified special education and related services personnel employed in the state (autism). LRE: To increase the percentages of School Administrative Units (SAUs) that improve least restrictive environment (LRE) rates for children ages three to 20, and the progress of children with disabilities in the general curriculum (IDEA Indicators B5, B3). STANDARDS: To increase educators’ knowledge and instructional usage of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for children with disabilities. The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

SPDG Goals continued… EARLY INTERVENTION: To increase the percentages of children, ages birth-2, receiving timely evidence-based early intervention services in their natural environments by qualified personnel (IDEA Indicators C1, C2, C3, C7). TRANSITION: To increase the percentages of SAU special education and related services personnel who can develop and implement effective, compliant transition plans and activities within timelines (IDEA Indicators B12, B13, and C8). The project will address children ages birth to 20 with all types of disabilities throughout the state. The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

15 BIG IDEAS to Improve Initiatives (1-5) Beth A Steenwyk, CCSSO/ASES Leadership: HARD skills and Soft skills to get the job done Shared Vision & Purpose: Establish & Revisit continuously Communication: Need an intentional Plan Selection Process: Structured process to select the practice that is connected to the need Leveraging: Awareness of context & opportunity The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

15 BIG IDEAS to Improve Initiatives (6-10) Beth A Steenwyk, CCSSO/ASES Readiness: Adoption & Implementation Process Identify Critical Components: What it IS & What it is NOT Complexity of Implementation: If you can’t explain it, they can’t do it Demonstrations & Scaling: Know the difference Capacity Building: Continuously assess personnel growth to performance standards The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

15 BIG IDEAS to Improve Initiatives (11-15) Beth A Steenwyk, CCSSO/ASES Role and Function Change: This will happen, it can’t be avoided Measurement & Progress: If not measuring progress you are not implementing Feedback & Support: Can’t improve or change without it Aligned & Integrated: Activities at one level can derail activities at another level Braiding Initiatives: Relationship between practices not competition The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Build a Comprehensive evidence-based professional development plan. Our Charge: Building Capacity Statewide to Improve Learning for Students with Disabilities Build a Comprehensive evidence-based professional development plan. Sustainability Factors Partnership driven Evidence-based Definitive in roles & responsibilities Accessible statewide Leverages federal, state and local resources Meets the PD needs at the state, regional and local level Debra Begins here. The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

A Systems Approach National Center on Educational Outcomes Moving from isolated to layered: Integrating the work highlights similarities without committing to a unified approach. (RTI, SAT, UDL & Local Control) Work at all levels to improve capacity at other levels (coherence). (State, Regional, District, Building & Classroom) The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

A Systems Approach continued… National Center on Educational Outcomes Designing state/regionally developed products and tools for universal access and applicability. (Accessible: State forms, tools & resources) Intentional usage by all regional providers for a consistent process and connected set of state/regionally developed tools. (Regionally and locally focused approach) The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Applying Implementation Science Systems change framework: Exploration Initial Implementation Full Implementation Sustainability Fixen, 2009; Metz & Bartley, 2012 The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Exploration: 2011-2012 SPDG Goal 1: Need: Highly trained professionals working with students with autism & better outcomes. Creating readiness: The SPDG Goal 5: Effective Transition Planning Implementation Team Ownership: Accountability Outcome: Bi-Directional Convergent Evidence-base Practice Professional Development Model The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Building Capacity – Moving toward Sustainability A convergent bi-directional model of professional development where state and local practices work together to influence district level philosophy, beliefs, practices, and implementation. What does this look like? The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

SATFAS PD Model Supporting All Teachers for All Students Professional Development Model Sustainability Factors Partnership driven: MDOE, SAUs, family support organizations, IHEs, community-based organizations Evidence-based: NPDC-ASD, ECTA, OSEP, What Works Definitive in roles & responsibilities: Teams, Admin support Accessible statewide: Training, coaching, website Leverages federal, state and local resources Meets the PD needs at the state, regional and local level The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

ALIGNMENT OF FEEDBACK & SUPPORTS School District Regional State Feedback and Support Loops should address the following: Status/Stage of innovation implementation; Competencies needed for innovation fidelity; Leadership supports necessary for innovation sustainability; Systems necessary to support innovation implementation; Consistent cycles of improvement to insure the elimination of barriers and optimize system to improve implementation. The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Differentiated EBP PD & TA

Installation: Develop Leader Teams LRE (District Team) Autism (District team – Initial implementation) Part C (Regional site team) IEP Goal Alignment for Proficiency-based Learning (District) Post-Secondary Transition Planning (Regional) The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Installation: Finding the resources (leaders) within the state Credibility (State’s, designers, coaches, implementers) Identifying the right practice, approach to implementation (design the competencies) Finding implementers and building implementation teams (organization level) Alignment of feedback and supports (coaches) Resources: state, local, and regional The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Regional Chart of Leadership Teams

Full Implementation: Effective Practices Introduced Adopted Practiced – Coaching/Mentoring- Refined Evaluated – Coaching/Mentoring- Refined Maintained through leadership changes Improved over time – Coaching/Mentoring The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Evaluation (External Evaluator) Integrated within all SPDG Initiatives. Includes pre and post knowledge and understanding of participants. Assesses for adult learning principles and presentation. Provides continuous feedback to drive additional training needs. Longitudinal data to assess personnel development, professional development and practices. The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Highlights – Autism Maine Autism Leader Teams Advanced training and coaching 42 teams in 3 cohorts with 85% highly active Teachers/Paras report -Understanding of effective strategies -Increased implementation of those strategies -Increased understanding of individual student needs -Increased achievement of student outcomes -Increased awareness within school/district The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Highlights-Least Restrictive Environment 17 targeted districts in Year Two Tools developed by State Partnership Team Overarching questions planning tool Facilitated discussion tool Student progress monitoring data collection tool Action plans Implementation teams created Professional development tailored to district needs Onsite coaching provided to each team The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

District Highlights: LRE Augusta, ME Using the action plan… Major themes identified Data-based decision making Informational meetings Inclusionary practice assessment School-wide Positive Behavioral Intervention Supports Practitioner responsibilities reviewed and revised Student progress monitoring for long term outcomes The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

District Highlights – LRE continued Targets 2012 2013 2014 2015 ≥80% Reg. Ed Environment Target ≥65% of students 57% 58.20% 61.68% 65.28% <40% Reg. Ed Environment Target <9% of students 19.25% 17.72% 18.11% 16% <Separate School, hospital Target <3.1% 3.5% 3.97% 4.46% 4.92% The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

District Highlights – LRE Fairfield, ME Using the action plan… Major themes identified Data-based decision making Informational meetings Inclusionary practice assessment School-wide Positive Behavioral Intervention Supports Practitioner responsibilities reviewed and revised Student progress monitoring for long term outcomes The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Three Phases of Implementation Phase 3- Full Implementation 1/2017-6/2017 Full Implementation: Launch full program with revisions Monitor fidelity Recruit feedback Phase 1- Development 1/2016-6/2016 Program Installation: Formulate Team Program Outcome Measure Develop SWPBIS Handbook Update Discipline Policy Phase 2- Trial Implementation 9/2016-12/2016 Initial Implementation: Staff Training Launch Program Monitor for fidelity Recruit Feedback By June 2016, the SWPBIS team has established a positive and collaborative relationship. The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

District Highlights: LRE, CCSS & Transition Sullivan, ME Using the action plan… Major themes identified Coaching Data-based decision making Informational/Advisory meetings LRE calculation training and assessment Co-teaching Active transition planning The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Highlights: Early Intervention Evidence-based Early Intervention Model developed Consistent service delivery across 9 sites 125 EI professionals trained Fidelity of implementation with database Compliance on 11/12 IDEA indicators 5 Components Understanding the family ecology Functional family-centered needs assessment Primary service provider Support-based home visits Collaborative consultation to childcare The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Highlights – Transition Indicator 13: 94% overall compliance for districts monitored in 2015-2016 SATFAS cohort

What Did We Learn? LRE – 2 districts opted out of initial trainings and continue to struggle with LRE compliance Transition – regional-based teams not successful; change did not occur until district level teams formed Coaching – key component to a team’s success The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Conversation and Questions Why would a state need to address sustainability factors when providing evidence-based professional development? How do you address barriers to providing equitable and effective EBP-PD in your state? How do you address the retention of special educators in your state? Beth begins here The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Conversation and Team Task Reflect on the conversation. In small groups of 3 to 4: Discuss your state’s capacity building and sustainability plan for professional development. Use the facilitated discussion tool and identify 2 action steps your state can implement to move forward in this work. REPORT… Beth begins here The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Questions? Beth begins here The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government

Contact Information Deborah Rooks-Ellis, SPDG Coach & External Evaluator, University of Maine, deborah.l.rooks@maine.edu Debrajean Scheibel, SPDG Coordinator, Maine Department of Education, debrajean.scheibel@maine.gov Beth Lorigan, Special Projects Manager, Maine Department of Education, beth.lorigan@maine.gov The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government