Quality Programs for Students with Visual Impairment (QPVI) A MODEL FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND SPECIAL SCHOOLS Copyright © 2004 – Revised 8/2012 The field of education, like any other, develops buzz words or phrases around the latest BIG THING….. We’re hearing lots about accountability, progress monitoring, bang for the buck, and, still, quality! So, what’s the big deal about looking at quality??? To do it right, we have to know what’s being done, have some standards of quality, have a way of measuring it…. AND have a way of bringing staff up to that standard. This presentation tells you how QP proposes to accomplish all that for your programs for students with visual impairments.

Who cares about accountability? If you’re included in the majority of people who chose to work in this field to make a difference in the lives of students, then accountability for that outcome is important to you. It is only by collecting data to support our claims of positive outcomes that we can move from a culture of perception to a culture with the data to substantiate those claims.

Accountability timely – quality – data + data-based - decision making + effective student programming = positive student outcomes Scribe examples of: timely, quality, data, dbdm, effective student programming (research based strategies – marzano, explicit instruction, criss strategies), positive student outcomes -

Why is QPVI unique? QPVI is the only program improvement process designed specifically for this population of students. It respects & incorporates the knowledge and experience of district VI staff members and administration in setting program standards of practice. It works to provide needed supports and remove barriers to positive outcomes. A knowledgeable QP Facilitator from outside the district brings objectivity to the district’s process.

TWO PHASES OF QPVI SELF-STUDY CONTINOUS IMPROVEMENT

PHASE ONE Setting standards of practice in all key component areas MODIFIED SELF-STUDY BY A DISABILITY SPECIFIC LEARNING COMMUNITY – GRASS ROOTS PROCESS Setting standards of practice in all key component areas Establishing uniformity of practice across staff members Demonstrating positive student outcomes Identifying needed staff development

PHASE TWO CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT & ACCOUNTABILITY (Using the Results Based Accountability Process found at http://resultsaccountability.com/about/ what-is-results-based-accountability/) Validity Checks: Maintaining the Master List, Caseload Analysis, and Priorities for Change

Developing a Master List Database of Students Eligibility & Assessment Key Components of the Self-Study Developing a Master List Database of Students Eligibility & Assessment Unique Needs (ECC) Roles & Responsibilities Type & Amount of Service Workload Profile Analysis Self-Study Report

Developing a Master List (KC 1) Developing a Master List Database of Students who are blind or visually impaired, including those with additional disabilities. Analyzing this data to identify program needs and strengths. Establishing a baseline against which to measure subsequent gains.

Eligibility & Assessment (KC 2) Noting timeliness and quality of student data (as per IDEA & State Performance Plan requirements), such as eye report, FVLMA, AT, O&M and other ECC content areas as well as how eligibility decisions are made.  

UNIQUE NEEDS (KC 3) Expanded Core Curriculum(ECC) Screening Assessment Planning Instruction Evaluative data

Roles & Responsibilities (KC4) Focus on the Expanded Core Curriculum (ECC) and collaborative consultation.

Type and Amount of Service (KC 4) Standards for determining student service needs – frequency and intensity of service. (Delphi studies)

Workload Profile Analysis (KC 5) Equitable distribution of students among staff members (see Div. 16 Position Paper)

Work Group Self-Study Report (KC 6) Strengths/needs noted during the Self-Study, Action Steps for Phase 2

Phase Two: Validity Check Completed Self-Study: report written, priorities for action selected, the site is ready to move on to QPVI Phase Two. Phase Two: accountability and professional development, process tracks integrity of implementation. QPVI Facilitator, now attends three meetings: fall, mid-year, and end-of-year and is involved in planning and tracking

Phase Two: Validity Check Program Supervisor/Administrator continues site’s monthly meetings, implementing and tracking completion of action steps and sustaining both the Master List and Caseload Analysis. (During Phase Two, the district administrator who has been involved in the Self-Study assumes the major leadership role for ongoing activities)

BENEFITS OF QPVI Process for all professional staff to review and implement research based strategies and “promising practices” in the educational program Allows professional staff, including district administrators, to work together as a learning community to adopt program standards in areas such as; assessment, evaluation and skills taught

BENEFITS OF QPVI Identifies needed teacher skill building in areas such as; assessment, Braille, abacus, low vision training, slate/stylus, social skills, and other ECC content areas. Adapts itself to the unique needs of both public and special purpose schools.

BENEFITS OF QPVI Clarifies the roles of all professional, support and related service staff. Increases staff effectiveness, accountability, and satisfaction Assures carryover in the event of personnel changes

How is the process completed? Monthly meetings with the selected Work Group are held throughout the school year. Administrators are always present Outside facilitator is used for objectivity

Who Participates? All educational service personnel involved in programming for VI students, and a representative of administration supervising VI staff members make up the Work Group along with the trained QPVI Facilitator(s).

QPVI vs Problem Solving Model Systematic, Global Staff Issues Interconnecting Web Outside Current Standards Based Problem Centered, Piecemeal Prescribed Issues Organizational Model Inside Personal Choice

QPVI vs Problem Solving Model Identifies & Provides Needed Supports Proactive Learning Community Admin.Partnership Action Orientation Student Outcomes Maintain Traditional Barriers Reactive Isolated Effort Separate Efforts Planning Orientation Staff Outcomes

Length of Self Study The length of the Self-Study depends in part on the size of the program and the number and complexity of issues raised. An estimated ten to eighteen monthly meetings will be needed to complete the Self-Study.

How long does Phase Two take? Phase Two could be considered an ongoing process that becomes the program’s mechanism for effecting and tracking any practices or changes needed. As such, there is no end date to Phase Two.

How do we get started? Take a look at these websites for more information-www.qpvi.com, www.tsbvi.edu Talk to me about coming to Nashville for training Contact Karen Blankenship or Nancy Toelle to assist with a plan for your area

Which States Have Used QPVI? Public Schools: Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Michigan, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Florida, Louisiana, Washington D.C., Oregon, Pennsylvania Special Schools: Georgia, Iowa, Texas, University Programs using QPVI Materials: University of Northern Iowa, Florida State University, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, Vanderbilt University (Tennessee)

QPVI Publications Program Accountability for Students who are Blind or Visually Impaired (2008) JVIB 102 (2) 97-102. QPVI: Public and Special School Guide used in these respective processes (available with training only).

Contact information? Karen Blankenship karen@qpvi.com Nancy Toelle nancytoelle@qpvi.om Website: WWW.QPVI.com

STATES THAT HAVE IMPLEMENTED QPVI IN THE U.S. DC Representatives from Germany & Canada have also participated in QPVI training States participating in QPVI Training University Programs using QP

Now Canada APSEA