Special Education update to the Board

Updates on priorities from last year-  New disbility categories  Changes for staff and parents  Has been positive – helps align us to the rest of the country  New IEP system  CHALLENGING (like all new computer systems) but we are seeing some better functionality

Current District Successes  Academic Successes  Compared to other “like” students in other districts  Continued implementation of co-teaching and continued training  SBG work  Graduation Rates

Our achievement compared to other districts in BOCES– Math

% of students with high growth in Math

% on track to “catch up”

Overall look at Reading

% of high growth in Reading

% on track to “catch up”

Our achievement compared to other districts in BOCES– Writing

% of high growth in writing

% on track to catch up

Reflections on Co-teaching from a SMS special education teacher  1. Gives me a real in depth look at exactly what grade level expectations are and what I should truely be aiming for with my students  2. Allows my lowest performing students to be educated along their peers, receive the same content. This pushes them to make HUGE growth.  3. Also, in an LA class, for example, you have kids who are super low readers but their ideas for writing, and even their writing itself is great, so they access the same articles through me and write these awesome essays.  4. Planning with the teams allows me to suggest and implement accommodations with every lesson.  5. While in the classroom, my co teachers and I can be very creative in grouping and presenting info. We change it up a lot and are able to really reach more kids than teaching alone can.

As we continue to re-boot SBG, special education has been a part of the analysis..  We started with an analysis of students on IEPs and their Q1 grades –  How do we make sure that we have grade level expectations for students with disabilities BUT still make sure we are addressing their individual needs?

Q1 Students on IEPs - Elementary  3,172 numeric grades  0.0 = 7 grades(0.2%)  0.5 = 83 grades(2%)  1.0 = 214 grades (6%)  1.5 = 413 grades (13%)  2.0 = 830 grades (26%)  2.5 = 1192 grades (37%)  3.0 = 342 grades (10%)  3.5 = 92 grades (2%)  4.0 = 6 grades(0.1%)

Q1 Students on IEPs - Secondary  1,158 numeric grades (SBG)  0.0 = 0 grades  0.5 = 26 grades(2 %)  1.0 = 30 grades (2 %)  1.5 = 87 grades (7 %)  2.0 = 338 grades (29 %)  2.5 = 393 grades (33 %)  3.0 = 187 grades (16 %)  3.5 = 63 grades (5 %)  4.0 = 34 grades(2 %)

Work with staff to align IEP goals with standards – “standards based IEPs”  Working with elementary and secondary to look at the process of writing standards based IEPs  WHY?  Links the IEP to gen ed curriculum  Encourages higher expectations for students with disabilities  Helps give the team an instructional road-map to help close the gap  Prepares us for possible graduation requirements for all students

Graduation rates for students with disabilities in SSD – “meets” 89.9% - state expectation of 80%

Priorities for next year –  Continue to work as a department regarding standards based IEPs  Making sure we have quality IEPs that help support student’s achievement  Needs assessment in regards to Autism – higher rates in PK  New AU work  UIP goals of “all sub groups will demonstrate adequate growth” – reading = approaching, math = approaching, writing = does not meet