Growing Effective Special Education Leaders/Directors Mississippi Department of Education Office of Special Education Cindy Taylor, Ed.S. and Margret Ellmer, Ph.D.

2019 OSEP Leadership Conference OSEP Disclaimer 2019 OSEP Leadership Conference DISCLAIMER: The contents of this presentation were developed by the presenters for the 2019 OSEP Leadership Conference. However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474)

Mississippi School Districts 144 Public Schools 9 Charter Public Schools 3 Specialized Schools Total = 156 School Districts

Identification of Need for Mentoring Program High Turnover of Special Education Directors across state During 2015-2016 school year MDE held a New Directors Training series for directors with 3 or less years of experience Over 150 district staff participated Three year data trend indicated 25% - 35% of Special Education Director positions were vacant at the end of the school year Vacancies were due to retirement, burnout, and other various reasons

Mentoring Program for New Special Education Directors: Program Development Mississippi Department of Education/Office of Special Education (MDE/OSE recognized need for current practitioners to serve as mentors for new directors 2 Special Education Directors were hired to provide mentoring for a program under an employment model called “Educator in Residence” Program designed to provide monthly on-site job embedded professional development and technical assistance to new special education directors

Mentoring Program for New Special Education Directors: Program Development Professional development and technical assistance under the mentoring program would include: Policy and procedures related to compliance Fiscal guidance such as funding applications Resolution to formal and due process complaints Programming for improvement of student outcomes Improvement of results driven accountability Parental involvement Other issues related to the carry out provisions of IDEA The intent was to design a program to meet the unique needs of each new special education director

Mentoring Program for New Special Education Directors: Employment Model MDE employment model for mentors: Educator in Residence (EIR) EIRs are technically employees of the host district, but are supervised and report directly to the Office of Special Education’s State Director MDE/OSE enters an MOU with host district to provide a grant to fund EIR positions

Districts Served by Mentoring Program Year 1 Cohort: 32 Public Schools, 1 Charter School = 33 School Districts 21.15% of Districts Served in the State Year 2 Cohort: 23 School Districts 14.74% of Districts Served in the State Year 3 Cohort: 23 Public Schools, 1 Charter School = 24 School Districts 15.38% of Districts Served in the State

Districts Served by Mentoring Program First 3 years of Mentoring Program = 80 Districts Served 51.28% of Districts in the State Served by Mentoring Program over last 3 years

Districts Served by Mentoring Program

Retention Rates for Mentoring Program Year 1: 4 of 33 Directors did not return Reason for Departure: Lack of district level support Year 2: 7 of 56 Directors did not return: 3 of 7 were 1st year directors Reason for Departure: 2 Directors - Lack of District Support, 1 Director - Declined Mentoring Services, took another position in the district 4 0f 7 were 2nd year directors Reason for Departure: 3 Directors - Lack of District Support, 1 Director - Retired due to District Consolidation Year 3: 11 of 80 Directors did not return

Retention Rates for Mentoring Program

Special Education Administrator Survey Results 70 recipients of the 80 New Special Education Directors were sent a survey (10 had unknown email addresses) Purpose of Survey: To determine the effectiveness of the program and continued need, as well as program improvements 54 of 70 recipients responded to survey 12 Survey Questions: 9 multiple choice, 3 open ended

Special Education Administrator Survey Results

Special Education Administrator Survey Results

Special Education Administrator Survey Results

Special Education Administrator Survey Results

Special Education Administrator Survey Results

Special Education Administrator Survey Results

Special Education Administrator Survey Results

Special Education Administrator Survey Results

Special Education Administrator Survey Results Greatest Challenge as Special Education Director Common Responses included the following: Budgeting such as funding applications and amendments Finding and retaining competent personnel (i.e. teachers and other staff were specially named), lack of teacher training Discipline Lack of Related Service Providers and student services IEP implementation Advocate Groups and Parents Compliance Monitoring

Special Education Administrator Survey Results Greatest Challenge as Special Education Director Common Responses included the following: Lack of Knowledge other administrators have concerning IDEA Time Management, Deadlines and timelines Cooperation from General Educators and shifting the paradigm from special education teachers not viewed as “babysitters” and teacher assistants Child Count (Mississippi Student Information System-MSIS) Policies and Procedures Formal State Complaints

Special Education Administrator Survey Results

Special Education Administrator Survey Results Respondents Suggestions /Comments for Program Effectiveness and Improvement: Continue having Mentors that were previous Special Education Directors Need for 2 Mentors, “ I still needed assistance my second year” “Services provided by Mentors leads to greater success and longevity” “Program needs to continue and include monthly webinars” “Needs set schedule and area meetings” “I would have quit the job without my mentor”

Special Education Administrator Survey Results Respondents Suggestions /Comments for Program Effectiveness and Improvement: “The program was an absolute treasure!!!” “The program was awesome…I would recommend it time and time again for new directors” “I gained confidence through this program and I am so thankful” Meet more frequently The program should be mandatory for three years

Special Education Administrator Survey Results Respondents Suggestions /Comments for Program Effectiveness and Improvement: “My mentor was available 24 hours a day” “ This is a much needed and beneficial program… Its too important of a job for our state not to provide intense guidance and support for new directors to be able to stay in this position long term” “My mentor was an asset and I really believe this program is the reason I am still here” “I found the services of my mentor to be a life-saver” “Clone my mentor”

Special Education Administrator Survey Results Respondents Suggestions /Comments for Program Effectiveness and Improvement: “The mentoring program has been a survival training” “Without my mentor, I would not have survived” “The program is great and the best thing that the MDE-Special Education Department does” “ The mentoring program should not be limited to 2 years. If there are not enough mentors to go around, then hire more” “This program has been a saving grace for new directors. My mentor goes above and beyond to help her new mentees”

Special Education Administrator Survey Results Respondents Suggestions /Comments for Program Effectiveness and Improvement: “Keep this program in place…new directors must have it to make it” “This mentoring program was vital to me being able to survive my first year...I appreciate MDE putting this program in place and hope it continues” “The program is excellent. It is individualized to our needs. This program is the best thing MDE has provided to districts.”

Growing Effective Special Education Leaders/Directors Questions and/or Comments

Presenter Contact Information Dr. Margaret Ellmer, Interim State Director margaret.ellmer@mdek12.org Cindy Taylor, Educator In Residence: New Special Education Director Mentor ctaylor@mde.k12.ms.us Mississippi Department of Education Office of Special Education 662-359-3498

2019 OSEP Leadership Conference OSEP Disclaimer 2019 OSEP Leadership Conference DISCLAIMER: The contents of this presentation were developed by the presenters for the 2019 OSEP Leadership Conference. However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474)