Idaho RESULTS Work OSEP Visit 2011 Richard Henderson Idaho State Department of Education Division of Federal Programs Division of Special Education

Here we have Idaho…. There are ~132 districts and 730 sites in Idaho. There are ~ 275,000 students in Idaho. We educate ~ 28,000 students with disabilities. That is about 10.1% of the student population. 81% are White 14% are Hispanic 1.6% are Native American 1.3% are Asian 1.2% are Black

System Focus "You don't change performance without changing the instructional core. The relationship of the teacher and the student in the presence of content must be at the center of effort to improve performance. If you can't see it in the classroom, it's not there.” Richard Elmore Harvard University

In the Beginning…. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires every state to have "a statewide system of intensive and sustained support and improvement for districts and schools" that ensures the necessary supports are in place at every level of the educational system so students are getting the help they need to reach their full potential. "You can put the best teachers up against the weakest system, and the system will win every time. So we're out to change the system." Presentation to the Idaho Legislature, Dr. Marybeth Flachbart

In the Beginning In 2007, the state determined that there was a need for increased support and technical assistance to Idaho schools and districts. Especially in relation to those in school improvement, corrective action, or restructuring Special Education was a factor, but not a focus.

Idaho SSoS Instructional Core Focus Visits helped target areas of concern. Although successful in increasing achievement in many districts and schools, another problem emerged. For districts to truly turnaround, SWD would have to be part of future planning.

Idaho SSoS Division of Special Education became a full partner in SSoS. Utilized Evaluation Process from CII SPED “Platform Audit” Cycle of Inquiry Develop of Problem of Practice Theory of Action Logic Model

Idaho SPED Platform Audit Performed by WRRC/RRCP Jim Leinen, Anita Pierce, Cesar D’Agord and Susan Hayes Completed in June 2011 Two Part Assessment Self Assessment done via SEA staff Interviews of LEA Special Education Directors representing the demographics of Idaho

Platform Audit – Division Functions Looking at Capacity and Effectiveness in 6 areas: Providing Information Setting Standards Distributing Resources Monitoring Compliance Assisting District Improvement Intervene to Correct Deficiencies

Then along came OSEP…. Lets do this thing called Results…

Clear Intentions

OSEP Results Work OSEP asked States to identify one performance area to improve OSEP would leverage USDOE Resources to work with States Access to USDOE TA-D Resource Centers State develop a 5 yr Plan to targeted area

Student Performance Top Priority Idaho Annual Performance Report – Submitted February 1, 2011 Indicator 3: FAPE in the LRE Specifically, Indicator 3A: Performance of students with disabilities on both Reading and Math in Statewide Assessments

Student Performance Indicator 3A What was required: What we did: Target/Goal: 59% About 38 out 63 districts meeting n What we did: Actual: 8% 5 out of 63 districts meeting n

Student Performance A look further back.. Indicator 3C (State data) Baseline of 34% on the 05-06 school year, 4% in 06-07, 14% in 07-08, 18% in 08-09, and back down to 8% in 09-10. Indicator 3C (State data) SWD have never made proficiency in Reading SWD made Proficiency in Math once (48.1%/48%)

Performance of SLD Students on ISAT Baseline Data: 2010-2011 Performance of SLD Students on ISAT Data Sources: Idaho State Department of Education www.IdeaData.org

Performance of SLD Students on ISAT SY 2010-2011 ISAT Language Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced Null Total SLD Students 2,975 2,219 1,398 100 19 6,711 % by Performance Level 44.3% 33.1% 20.8% 1.5% 0.3% 100.0% ISAT Mathematics 2,296 2,160 1,899 354 20 6,729 34.1% 32.1% 28.2% 5.3% ISAT Reading 1,863 1,912 2,577 405 21 6,778 27.5% 38.0% 6.0% ISAT Science This is the baseline data for Idaho’s result area. It is the performance of students with specific learning disabilities in the ISAT. We do not have longitudinal data due to a recent change in student identification codes. Although this is our official baseline data, once we have a second year of data we may need to change the baseline to fit only the students who will have two years worth of data, and so forth for the third and subsequent years of this priority. This is our starting point.

Statewide ISAT Language Results 2010-11 (SLD Students) Performance in the ISAT language.

Statewide ISAT Mathematics Results 2010-11 (SLD Students) Performance in the ISAT Mathematics.

Statewide ISAT Reading Results 2010-11 (SLD Students) Performance in the ISAT Reading.

Statewide ISAT Science Results 2010-11 (SLD Students) Performance in the ISAT Science.

Idaho Regions Region 1: Bonners Ferry, Sandpoint, Coeur d'Alene Region 2: Moscow, Lewiston, Orofino, Grangeville Region 3: McCall, Boise, Mountain Home Region 4: Hailey, Jerome, Burley, Twin Falls Region 5: Pocatello, Soda Springs, American Falls, Dayton Region 6: Salmon, Rexburg, Idaho Falls, Rigby

ISAT Results by Region % SLD Students Proficient 2010-11 Language Mathematics Reading Science # SLD Students % SLD Students Proficient Region 1 797 27.10% 798 39.97% 801 51.56% 316 19.94% Region 2 420 24.29% 422 32.70% 418 45.22% 161 18.63% Region 3 2842 22.38% 2847 2872 44.81% 1057 19.77% Region 4 593 23.27% 592 34.29% 39.80% 217 19.35% Region 5 1074 18.90% 1084 27.95% 1085 38.25% 409 18.83% Region 6 985 20.61% 986 36.41% 1009 43.81% 369 18.43% State 6711 22.32% 6729 33.48% 6778 44.00% 2529 19.34%

ISAT Language Results by Region % SLD Students Proficient 2010-11

ISAT Mathematics Results by Region % SLD Students Proficient 2010-11

ISAT Reading Results by Region % SLD Students Proficient 2010-11

ISAT Science Results by Region % SLD Students Proficient 2010-11

SLD Identification Rate, 2008-2010 (Idaho and National Data, 3-21) 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 All Disabilities Specific Learning Disabilities Idaho 27,930 8,919 27,787 8,334 27,045 7,604 50 states, D.C., and P.R. 6,593,220 2,536,780 6,608,446 2,497,581 6,552,766 2,422,688 We would like to bring the attention of the stakeholders and others who will be following our progress, the reasons why we need to follow only the progress of students that continue in the system. With the implementation of RTI and other similar initiatives across the state, there may be a reduction on the number of students with SLD. This is also a national trend.

SLD Identification Rate, 2008-2010 (Idaho and National Data, 3-21) 1.51% 3.80% And Idaho is ahead of this curve, with a higher reduction on the identification rate of students with SLD when compared to the national average.

SLD Identification Rate, 2008-2010 (School Districts Implementing RTI vs. State) 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 All Disabilities SLD State 27,931 8,920 27,787 8,330 27,388 7,712 RTI 3 Years (5 school districts) 1,296 479 1,311 465 1,255 406 RTI 2 Years 950 389 921 365 889 328 A possible impact of such reduction might affect the performance of the group of students identified under the SLD classification. As an example, we are showing here three sets of data: one is statewide SLD rates for the last three years in Idaho. The other two sets are of five school districts only, that have been implementing RTI with some level of state assistance, for the last two and three years.

SLD Identification Rate, 2008-2010 (School Districts Implementing RTI vs. State) 4.05% 4.61% 3.80% These two sets of five districts (RTI 3 years and RTI 2 years) have shown a larger decrease in SLD identification rates than the state average in the last years.

Performance on ISAT vs. RTI Implementation (SY 2010-11) ISAT Language Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced Null Total % Proficient and Advanced State 2,975 2,219 1,398 100 19 6,711 22.32% RTI 3 Years 182 119 67 1 370 18.38% RTI 2 Years 137 91 70 2 301 23.92% ISAT Mathematics 2,296 2,160 1,899 354 20 6,729 33.48% 133 131 87 - 28.65% 106 88 83 12 290 32.76% ISAT Reading 1,863 1,912 2,577 405 21 6,778 44.00% 120 117 115 373 36.46% 84 110 9 296 40.20% ISAT Science 19.34% 60 48 5 18.05% 66 30 14 113 14.16% This may impact the performance of SLD students as a group. The reasons may be that as districts implement RTI, the reduction of improper referrals

ISAT Language

ISAT Mathematics

ISAT Reading

ISAT Science

LEA RTI Year 3 & 2 v. 3A and 3C RTI 3rd Year 3A 3C District 1 No Yes n/a District 5 RTI 2nd Year Mix

Idaho’s Results Goal For the past five years, Idaho has stalled or demonstrated slippage in the performance of students with disabilities on statewide assessments as noted in indicator 3A. Starting from a baseline of 34% on the 05-06 school year, the percent proficient dropped to 4.62% in 06-07, 14% in 07-08, 18% in 08-09, and back down to 8% in 09-10. All stakeholders believe it is important to the future of Idaho that students with disabilities meet the proficiency targets.

Idaho Results Goal Given Students with Disabilities who are identified with a Specific Learning Disability residing in Idaho districts whom have failed to achieve AYP in the subgroup of SWD, districts will increase the academic performance of SWD who have been identified with a Specific Learning Disability, through increased collaborative leadership, focused progress monitoring, targeted interventions, and greater connection of IEP Goals to General Education Standards, to 60% combined proficiency within 5 years.

OSEP Results Work Further drill down Focus on one category: SLD 2 years of SLD Implementation Data Progressive vs. Individual Analysis Finding where we went off the road 2 main areas arise as sources Tier 2 Interventions Progress Monitoring

Idaho Results Goal: Next Steps Need for collaborative approaches SPED, SSoS, Federal Programs, RTI, working with leadership to give them the support and resources needed. Tier 2 and Progress Monitoring: SESTA will focus its SLD TA resources on these 2 areas and work with both national and local experts to inform and equip Idaho districts Connection of IEP Goals to Standards: SDE/SESTA will design and implement training.

A call to act…. “Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.” ― Theodore Roosevelt

Contact Information: Richard Henderson Idaho State Department of Education Division of Federal Programs Division of Special Education (208) 332-6806 rhenderson@sde.idaho.gov