The National Agenda: Moving Forward on Achieving Educational Equality for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students Texas Association for the Deaf Conference.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
RtI Response to Intervention
Advertisements

Response to Recommendations by the National Association of Child Care Resource & Referral Agencies (NACCRRA) The Massachusetts Child Care Resource & Referral.
The National Agenda for Children and Youths with Visual Impairments, Including those with Multiple Disabilities Anne L. Corn Vanderbilt University.
PD Plan Agenda August 26, 2008 PBTE Indicators Track
 A strategic plan is a guiding document for an organization. It clarifies organizational priorities, goals and desired outcomes.  For the SRCS school.
IDEA AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES Office of General Counsel Division of Educational Equity August 15, 2012.
Legal and Ethical Issues
Webinar #1 The Webinar will begin shortly. Please make sure your phone is muted. (*6 to Mute, #6 to Unmute) 7/3/20151.
Identification, Assessment, and Evaluation
Revised Illinois Professional Teaching Standards Rori R. Carson Western Illinois University.
1 Supporting Striving Readers & Writers: A Systemic Approach United States Department of Education Public Input Meeting - November 19, 2010 Dorothy S.
Summary of Performance: A New Tool for NC Teachers November 18, 2013 Dr. Valerie L. Mazzotti National Post-School Outcomes Center University of Oregon.
W isconsin E ducational S ervices P rogram for the D eaf and H ard of H earing (WESP-DHH) Outreach Program Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
Shelley Ardis Florida School for the Deaf and the Blind Outreach Services: 30 Years of Successful Services.
The National Agenda: Moving Forward on Achieving Educational Equality for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students Claire Bugen & Jay Innes National Summit April.
The National Agenda: Moving Forward on Achieving Educational Equality for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students Mary Hartnett, Mary Cashman-Bakken Deaf Education.
Administrator Checklist Research and Training Center on Service Coordination.
Meeting SB 290 District Evaluation Requirements
Early Childhood Special Education RESOURCES.  Early Childhood Special Education Early Childhood Special Education Wisconsin Early Childhood Indicators.
The Transition Process Vickie Kummer UNF SOAR Program Fall 2004.
Maximizing and Monitoring Learner Progress for Children who are Deaf, Deafblind, and Hard of Hearing and their Families.
Special Education in the United States Susie Fahey and Mario Martinez.
1 PI 34 and RtI Connecting the Dots Linda Helf Teacher, Manitowoc Public School District Chairperson, Professional Standards Council for Teachers.
Thomas College Name Major Expected date of graduation address
JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 1 Program Guidelines for Students who are Visually Impaired PRESENTATION TO: California Transcribers.
Rebecca H. Cort, Deputy Commissioner NYSED VESID Presentation to NYS Staff / Curriculum Development Network Targeted Activities to Improve Results for.
HECSE Quality Indicators for Leadership Preparation.
National Consortium On Deaf-Blindness Families Technical Assistance Information Services and Dissemination Personnel Training State Projects.
Janet M. Sloand, Ed.D. Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network (PaTTAN)
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Special Education Advisory Committee Virginia Department of Education.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
IEP Training for Kansas Schools 2013 – 2014 Kansas State Department of Education Technical Assistance System Network (TASN) Overview and Preparation for.
Minnesota FAED Project Survey Deaf Education Summit April 22, 2010.
1 RESPONSE TO INSTRUCTION ________________________________ RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION New Opportunities for Students and Reading Professionals.
The National Agenda: Moving Forward on Achieving Educational Equality for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students National Association for State Directors of.
Federal Support for World-Class Schools Gwinnett County Public Schools 4/18/13.
Communication Access and Quality Education for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children The Report of the California Deaf and Hard of Hearing Education Advisory.
Project Design Jennifer Coffey OSEP May 4,
1 Strategic Plan Review. 2 Process Planning and Evaluation Committee will be discussing 2 directions per meeting. October meeting- Finance and Governance.
1 Early Childhood Assessment and Accountability: Creating a Meaningful System.
OSEP-Funded TA and Data Centers David Guardino, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
NYSED Policy Update Pat Geary Statewide RSE-TASC Meeting May 2013.
Making an Excellent School More Excellent: Weston High School’s 21st Century Learning Expectations and Goals
Title I Program Directors WELCOME YOU!
Lorain City Schools 90 Day Entry Plan Update.
Clinical Practice evaluations and Performance Review
2015 Leadership Conference “All In: Achieving Results Together”
Types of Community Engagement Forms among Participating Institutions
Phyllis Lynch, PhD Director, Instruction, Assessment and Curriculum
Child Outcomes Summary Process April 26, 2017
Race to the Top—Early Learning Challenge Letters of Support Webinar
Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act
Karen Ann Breslow, MA, SELPA Program Coordinator
FEAPs (Florida Educator Accomplished Practices)
Eligibility and Determining Local Thresholds: Facilitated Discussion
NAEYC Early Childhood Standards
The Role a Charter School Plays in its Charter Authorizer’s Submission of the Consolidated Federal Programs Application Joey Willett, Unit of Federal Programs.
A Focus on Team Meetings
Implementation Guide for Linking Adults to Opportunity
Gifted Education Integrated in RtI Instruction Systems
CalSWEC 2014: Aging Initiative Summit
Parent-Teacher Partnerships for Student Success
School Title I Stakeholder Meeting
Researchers as Partners with State Part C and Preschool Special Education Agencies in Collecting Data on Child Outcomes Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI International.
Taylor ISD Title I Parent Meeting
What is does it mean to be a Title I School?
Lyons Central School Comprehensive District Education Plan
Assessing Students With Disabilities: IDEA and NCLB Working Together
ESSA accountability & Report Card Proposed regulations
Ellen Condon, NCDB Project Director, Montana Deaf-Blind Project
Presentation transcript:

The National Agenda: Moving Forward on Achieving Educational Equality for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students Texas Association for the Deaf Conference Claire Bugen, Superintendent, TSD June 24, 2005

What is the National Agenda? Parents, professionals, and Deaf adults who have a passion for making education services for deaf and hard of hearing children better A journey with a destination but without a complete roadmap

Why we need it Status quo is unacceptable De-fragmentation of delivery systems Evolution of the profession and views on language and culture Quality of life issues Accountability element Supplemental services Language and communication driven system Equal opportunity Benefits of synergy We need to see the forest while at the same time attending to the trees.

Need for a whole child system Socio-cultural Psycho-social Intellectual Physical Linguistic & Communicative

National Agenda Core Values Language and communication access and development is central to learning and the well being of deaf and hard of hearing children (Preamble, NA) With parents, professionals and consumers as partners we do have the power to change the educational landscape for deaf and hard of hearing children

Background (2001) A Call To Action (based on NASDSE Guidelines and COED Report) A letter to CED Organizations proposing concept of NA A topical meeting in Phoenix A steering committee and advisory committee formed and met at national conferences and meetings 8 Draft goals and outcomes are written Posted a “work in progress” for public comment www.deafed.net

Background (2001) Presentations on the National Agenda at conferences and workshops Data from over 40,000 comments reviewed by goal leaders and Steering Committee Eight goals are re-drafted based on reviews by professionals, parents, and consumers National Agenda established

Snapshot of NA Structure Steering Committee Advisory Committee Goal Leaders (for development) CED Organizations and State Departments of Education Reps. Parents, Professionals and Consumers who helped build it

National Agenda At-A-Glance

Eight Goals of the Agenda (2001-2005) Goal 1: Early Childhood Education Goal 2: Communication, Language and Literacy Goal 3: Collaborative Partnerships and Transition Goal 4: Assessment and Accountability Goal 5: Programs, Placement and Services Goal 6: Technology Goal 7: Personnel Preparation Goal 8: Research

Sample Goal Goal 4: System Responsibility: Accountability, High Stakes Testing, Assessment, and Standards Based Environments To Insure that the Education of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children is Based on Sound Systemic Procedures and Standards. Goal Statement Deaf and hard of hearing students are entitled to an educational program in which system-wide responsibility is clear and involves procedures for accountability, high stakes testing, assessment, and standards. Accountability measures must include examination of programs and services on a local and statewide basis. High stakes testing must be based on and fully incorporate the child’s communication and language needs. Assessment of deaf and hard of hearing children must be comprehensive and include testing and evaluation of the child’s communication, linguistic, academic, cognitive, psychology, physical and all other areas pertinent to the child. The entire educational delivery system for deaf and hard of hearing children must be based on clear standards or “best practices,” which reflects the best thinking regarding educational programs and services and the relationship of communication and language to literacy and educational growth.

Sample Goal Goal 4: Background Deaf and hard of hearing children have not systemically been provided an educational system with a well-reasoned and clear accountability process, assessment procedures, fair high stakes testing, and well-articulated standards. Historically state educational agencies have not had sufficient resources and in some cases a complete understanding of the needs of deaf and hard of hearing children needed to develop affective procedures for assessing and measuring all programs in their states and creating. Because deaf and hard of hearing children have truly unique communication, language and educational needs, all these areas of system responsibility must reflect the best thinking of educators, parents, and consumers and have sufficient resources to establish affective accountability and standards. Instruction for students who are deaf and hard of hearing must be data- driven, focus on multiple measures of student performance, including authentic assessment in a variety of disciplines, and lead to a diploma consistent with the student’s IEP and/or all state graduation requirements.

Sample Goal Proposed sub-goals 4.1. Assessments of deaf and hard of hearing students must be child- centered, focus on all areas of the child’s profile, and employ multiple measures that include criterion-referenced tests, standardized tests, teacher and student accountability records and other appropriate assessment tools. Assessments must take into account and reflect the child’s communication and language preference, need, and expressive and receptive skill levels. Rationale: Like all children, deaf and hard of hearing students must have well- reasoned, child-centered and objective measures for determining their levels of cognitive, psychological, emotional, linguistic, educational and other skills. 4.2. Assessment of deaf students who use ASL and English will include measures of competencies in both languages and will specifically measure expressive and receptive skills in both. Rationale: Deaf students who use both ASL and English as languages of instruction must develop proficiency in both languages. Assessment of functional levels in only one language does not provide a complete profile of the student’s language abilities.

States’ Efforts States’ Efforts Colorado New Mexico Bill of Rights A Blueprint For Closing The Gap Developing a Statewide System of Service Improvements for Students who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing The Report of The Colorado Deaf Education Reform Task Force States’ Efforts Colorado New Mexico Bill of Rights

Spin-off Projects (examples) Join Together Technology Grant Responses to No Child Left Behind Responses to IDEA Re-authorization IEP Documentation of Special Factors considerations for Communication and Language Website Development Discussions of Quality Indicators for Programs that serve children who are deaf and hard of hearing

Uses of the National Agenda Vehicle to garner political support for change State planning Support for parents Organizer for communications, e.g., newsletters to parents, position papers A Focus on what unites us Organizer for Conferences Organizer for Personnel Preparation

Benefits Encourages partnerships across the country, within the state, within the LEA, within the special schools and local programs. Facilitates parents, professionals and consumers in forming partnerships Enhances communications among professionals Empowers professionals and parents to make change (when state or government supports are not available) Leadership opportunities on national, state and local levels

Some Visions of Collaborations from the National Summit Coordinated Information services for parents and families Special Short Term Programs Coordinated Professional Development Coordinated Early Identification Efforts Coordinated position papers on issues related to highly qualified staff, assessment, etc.

Visions cont’d Tracking of Students Evaluation of Programs and services Coordinated state advocacy, (funding, interpreters, etc.) Training for special educators responsible for deaf students Collaborative promotion of standards of practice, staffing patterns and caseload recommendations

Visions cont’d Agency collaboration to include DARS agencies, Department of Health, etc. Meaningful involvement of parents Accountability, compliance and evaluation components for programs Collaboration for special populations (multiply disabled, non-English speaking families, late identified, at risk)

A New Concept

Thank You! Questions ? ? ? ? ?