Update on the Online Conversion Process for AEPSi:

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Update on the Online Conversion Process for CC.net and GOLD: Implications for OSEP Reporting.
Advertisements

Refresher: Background on Federal and State Requirements.
State Directors Conference Boise, ID, March 4, 2013 Cesar D’Agord Regional Resource Center Program WRRC – Western Region.
Update on Child Outcomes for Early Childhood Special Education Lynne Kahn ECO at UNC The Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) Center The National Association.
Early Childhood Outcomes ECO Institute Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI Robin Rooney ECO at FPG Prepared for the Office of Early Learning and School Readiness.
1 Measuring Child Outcomes: State of the Nation. 2 Learning objective: To gain new information about the national picture regarding measuring child outcomes.
Highs and Lows on the Road to High Quality Data American Evaluation Association Anaheim, CA November, 2011 Kathy Hebbeler and Lynne Kahn ECO at SRI International.
Family Outcome Principles and Measurement Approaches Melissa Raspa Don Bailey ECO at RTI International International Society on Early Intervention (ISEI)
The Results are In! Child Outcomes for OSEP EI and ECSE Programs Donna Spiker Early Childhood Outcomes Center at SRI International October 13, 2011 (CCSSO-SCASS.
Update on Part C Child Outcomes Lynne Kahn ECO at UNC The Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) Center June 2011 Kathy Hebbeler ECO at SRI International.
Presented at Division for Early Childhood National Harbor, Maryland November, Child Outcomes: What We Are Learning from National, State, and Local.
Updates on APR Reporting for Early Childhood Outcomes (Indicators C-3 and B-7) Western Regional Resource Center APR Clinic 2010 November 1-3, 2010 San.
Child Outcomes Data July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009.
Considerations for Establishing Baseline and Setting Targets for Indicators C3 and B7 Kathy Hebbeler, Lynne Kahn, Christina Kasprzak ECO/NECTAC June 16,
Early Childhood Outcomes Center Using the Child Outcomes Summary Form February 2007.
The Current Status of States' Early Childhood Outcome Measurement Systems Kathy Hebbeler, SRI International Lynne Kahn, FPG Child Dev Inst October 17,
Partnering with Local Programs to Interpret and Use Outcomes Data Delaware’s Part B 619 Program September 20, 2011 Verna Thompson & Tony Ruggiero Delaware.
ENHANCE Update Research Underway on the Validity of the Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process ECO Center Advisory Board Meeting March 8, 2012 Arlington,
How to Explain the Numbers: Helping Staff, Parents, and Other Stakeholders Understand the Results of the NCSEAM Surveys for Part C and 619 Batya Elbaum,
Child Outcomes: Understanding the Requirements in order to Set Targets Presentation to the Virginia Interagency Coordination Council Infant &
Module 5 Understanding the Age-Expected Child Development, Developmental Trajectories and Progress Every day, we are honored to take action that inspires.
1 Quality Assurance: The COS Ratings and the OSEP Reporting Categories Presented by The Early Childhood Outcomes Center Revised January 2013.
IDEA 2004 Part B Changes to the Indicator Measurement Table.
Understanding and Using Early Childhood Outcome (ECO) Data for Program Improvement Kansas Division for Early Childhood Annual Conference Feb. 23rd 2012.
Early Childhood Outcomes Center Orientation to Measuring Child and Family Outcomes for New People Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI Lynne Kahn, ECO at FPG/UNC.
Critical Markers of High Quality Child Outcomes Data ECO Advisory Board March, 2012.
Summary Statements. The problem... Progress data included –5 progress categories –For each of 3 outcomes –Total of 15 numbers reported each year Too many.
What the data can tell us: Evidence, Inference, Action! 1 Early Childhood Outcomes Center.
Update on the Online Conversion Process for AEPSi: Implications for OSEP Reporting.
Child Outcomes Measurement Tools & Process A story of 3 conversions.
Approaches for Converting Assessment Data to the OSEP Outcome Categories Approaches for Converting Assessment Data to the OSEP Outcome Categories NECTAC.
Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI Lynne Kahn, NECTAC and ECO at FPG
Looking at Data Presented by The Early Childhood Outcomes Center
OSEP Project Directors Meeting
Part C State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report:
OSEP Project Directors Meeting
Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process Module
Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI International AUCD Meeting Washington, DC
Using Family Survey Data for Program Improvement
Early Childhood Outcomes Data (Indicator C3 and B7)
Building a Quality Measurement System
Integrating Outcomes Learning Community Call February 8, 2012
OSEP Initiatives on Early Childhood Outcomes
Christina Kasprzak, ECTA/ECO/DaSy September 16, 2013
Update on the Online Conversion Process for CC.net and GOLD:
Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process Module
Building State Systems to Produce Quality Data on Child Outcomes
Webinar for the Massachusetts ICC Retreat October 3, 2012
Using outcomes data for program improvement
Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process Module
Why Collect Outcome Data?
The Basics of Quality Data and Target Setting
Building Capacity to Use Child Outcomes Data to Improve Systems and Practices 2018 DEC Conference.
Early Childhood and Family Outcomes
Update from ECO: Possible Approaches to Measuring Outcomes
Researchers as Partners with State Part C and Preschool Special Education Agencies in Collecting Data on Child Outcomes Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI International.
Trends in Child Outcomes (C-3 / B-7) and Family Outcomes (C-4)
Using Family Survey Data for Program Improvement
Gathering Input for the Summary Statements
Target Setting for Child Outcomes
Kathy Hebbeler, Lynne Kahn, Christina Kasprzak ECO/NECTAC
Measuring EC Outcomes DEC Conference Presentation 2010
Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process Module
Measuring Part C and Early Childhood Special Education Child Outcomes
Refresher: Background on Federal and State Requirements
Child Outcomes Data July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009
Christina Kasprzak Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute
Measuring Child and Family Outcomes Conference August 2008
Early Childhood Outcomes Data (Indicator C3 and B7)
Presentation transcript:

Update on the Online Conversion Process for AEPSi: Implications for OSEP Reporting

Rationale States using 7-point online conversions noted a larger than expected proportion of typically developing children. Expert practitioners (Nebraska) chart review demonstrated that some of the children who were rated a 6 or 7 were performing below what would be considers typical development for their age. Discussions with Brookes to review the analyses for the cut-scores for the 7 point scale.

Conversion Process: Partnership with Brookes and ECO Reviewed the original conversion process Developed a set of methods to revise and validate a new process

Details of the Analysis Process Assessment data from children with and without disabilities were used in the sample (from original research) Age expected performance was used to benchmark the 7 points along a range of typical development for each age band

Analysis Process: Continued A sample of children with disabilities performance was compared to the benchmarks Validation of the new cut scores were based on previous research and federally reported state data

Early Childhood Outcomes Center Running OSEP Reports Current online reports do not yet reflect these revised cut scores but will soon. Brookes has programming into the online system underway. Reports based on the revised cut scores may be requested from Brookes and are quickly available Early Childhood Outcomes Center

What changed? Children need to have higher scores to be rated as performing similar to same age peers

How to explain the changes in APR and to Stakeholders Stress the importance of having numbers that are a more accurate representation of the status of the children Changes in the summary statements may not reflect a change in performance but a change in the measurement This could be a rationale for modifying your state’s targets for 2011-2012.

How does this impact the OSEP Child Outcomes Reports OSEP reports will have smaller proportions of children in the D and E categories Size of the effect will depend on the: % of children that being assessed with AEPSi in your state Ability level of the children in your population