TATN Survey Results 2010-2011 Statewide Survey Results for Quality Indicators for Assistive Technology Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

1 Quality Indicators for Device Demonstrations April 21, 2009 Lisa Kosh Diana Carl.

Advertisements

The IEP Individualized Educational Program. The IEP is the process and document that outlines what a free appropriate public education (FAPE) is for an.

Region 3 Monitors April What is a REED? It is a “process” whereby the IEP team reviews existing evaluation data to make evaluation decisions about.

Considering Assistive Technology and the AT Plan Sara Menzel, ATP UCP Michigan Assistive Technology Center

Continuing QIAT Conversations Joan Breslin Larson Follow up webinar post Feb for AT Conference for AT Teams Hosted by Oklahoma.

IEP Amendment Podcast Script Shirley Young, Consultant, OSE-EIS January 13,

Section 1 Demographic Information Podcast Script Laura LaMore, Consultant, OSE-EIS July 13,

Evidence-Based Bullying Prevention Program RISCA Annual Conference Bryant University April 9, 2011 Karen Carnevale, Elementary School Counselor Leslie.

Office of Special Education & Early Intervention Services Webinar—General Information Training will begin in a moment; all phone lines are currently muted.

Building a Special Education Infrastructure Through a Joint Power Authority.

…Promoting a collaborative partnership among families, schools and communities to create positive educational outcomes for Virginia’s school children.

The Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems April Regionals Multiple Measures: Gathering Evidence 1.

Family Resource Center Association January 2015 Quarterly Meeting.

Office of Special Education Services Instructional Leaders Roundtable Oct. 16, 2014 John R. Payne, Director.

TELL Colorado Post-Survey Webinar Andrew Sioberg New Teacher Center.

N C E O National Center on Educational Outcomes 2003 State Special Education Outcomes: Marching On Results of NCEO’s Survey of State Directors of Special.

Program Evaluation Plan Report Board of Education Meeting, 2011 June 9, 2011.

Federal Consulting Group August 2004 Department of Labor Civil Rights Center 2004 Satisfaction Study - Recipients.

1 EEC Board Policy and Research Committee October 2, 2013 State Advisory Council (SAC) Sustainability for Early Childhood Systems Building.

Partnering with Local Programs to Interpret and Use Outcomes Data Delaware’s Part B 619 Program September 20, 2011 Verna Thompson & Tony Ruggiero Delaware.

1 Early Childhood Special Education Connecticut State Department of Education Early Childhood Special Education Maria Synodi.

Continuing QIAT Conversations Planning For Success Joan Breslin Larson Third webinar in a series of three follow up webinars for.

ENHANCE Update Research Underway on the Validity of the Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process ECO Center Advisory Board Meeting March 8, 2012 Arlington,

Are We making a Difference

Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Rob Horner, and George Sugai University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill University of Oregon University of Connecticut Scaling.

GSA OGP Advisory Committee Engagement Survey ACES 2004 Overall Results September 23, 2004.

January 31, 2014 Data Use Information and Guide. Copyright © 2014 New Teacher Center. All Rights Reserved. What is “TELL Oregon” ? TELL Oregon is an anonymous.

The Team Approach for Considering Assistive Technology Melanie Tervo, UCP Michigan Assistive Technology Center/MARESA Sara Menzel, UCP.

Eight Steps to Improving Career Services in Schools, Colleges, and Agencies James P. Sampson, Jr. National Career Development Association Global Conference.

Global APC Content Review Project Update February 2015.

“Every Child a Graduate” Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction SPECIAL EDCATION FRAMEWORK FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Life-long learning and continuous.

Chase Bolds, M.Ed, Part C Coordinator, Babies Can’t Wait program Georgia’s Family Outcomes Indicator # 4 A Systems Approach Presentation to OSEP ECO/NECTAC.

Overview Continuous Improvement & Focus Monitoring.

Committee of Practitioners ESEA Flexibility Waiver Review June 25, 2014.

ND Early Childhood Outcomes Process Nancy Skorheim – ND Department of Public Instruction, Office of Special Education.

Lesli Scott Ashley Bowers Sue Ellen Hansen Robin Tepper Jacob Survey Research Center, University of Michigan Third International Conference on Establishment.

A Report on the Texas Parent Survey for Students Receiving Special Education Services DataSource: Statewide Survey of Parents of Students Receiving Special.

Introducing the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)

March 26-28, 2013 SINGAPORE CDIO Asian Regional Meeting and Workshop on Engineering Education and Policies for Regional Leaders Programme Evaluation (CDIO.

Focused Monitoring November 10, 2010 Bureau of Special Education 1.

Special Education Law for the General Education Administrator Charter Schools Institute Webinar October 24, 2012.

Debra Brockway, Beth McGrath, Mercedes McKay Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education Analysis of a Statewide K-12 Engineering Program:

Revision of Initial and Continued Approval Standard Guidelines for Educational Leadership Programs Presentation to FAPEL Winter Meeting Tallahassee, FL.

DEVELOPING AN EVALUATION SYSTEM BOB ALGOZZINE AND STEVE GOODMAN National PBIS Leadership Forum Hyatt Regency O’Hare Rosemont, Illinois October 14, 2010.

Data Driven Decision Making Across All Content Areas WI PBIS Network Summer Leadership Conference Rachel Saladis Lynn Johnson The Wisconsin RtI Center/Wisconsin.

9/26/20121 SLP Advisory Committee. 11/29/20152 Purpose The purpose for Region 4 sponsored advisory committees is to receive current national, state, regional,

CT Speech Language Hearing Association March 26, 2010.

2009 OSEP Project Directors Meeting Martha Diefendorf, Kristin Reedy & Pat Mueller.

Texas State Performance Plan Data, Performance, Results TCASE Leadership Academy Fall 2008.

Kentucky Continuous Monitoring Process Spring 2012.

Data Report July Collect and analyze RtI data Determine effectiveness of RtI in South Dakota in Guide.

Building Bridges: Embedding outcome evaluation in national and state TA delivery Ella Taylor Diane Haynes John Killoran Sarah Beaird August 1, 2006.

Writing a Professional Development Plan.  Step 1–Identify Indicators to be Assessed  Step 2 –Determine Average Baseline Score  Step 3 –Develop a Growth.

COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM OF PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT Roger Berman, SETRC Supervisor Denise Jaffe, SETRC Trainer Alison Telsey, SETRC Trainer.

Evaluation Results MRI’s Evaluation Activities: Surveys Teacher Beliefs and Practices (pre/post) Annual Participant Questionnaire Data Collection.

Region 4 ESC1 SLP Advisory Committee. Region 4 ESC2 Introductions.

Sharing the Work of The QIAT Community QIAT Conversations ATIA, 2006.

TAIS: Root Cause Analysis Keela McGraw, Billy Schewee ESC Region 11.

Anderson School Accreditation We commit to continuous growth and improvement by  Creating a culture for learning by working together  Providing.

[Presentation location] [Presentation date] (Confirm ABT logo) Building Bridges and Bonds (B3): An introduction.

Improving Instruction for Students with Severe Disabilities William Sharpton Richard Hall University of New Orleans.

Wisconsin Personnel Development System Grant Click on the speaker to listen to each slide. You may wish to follow along in your WPDM Guide.

The Special Education Process

Kimberly Baumgardner (210)

Zelphine Smith-Dixon, State Director of Special Education

Structures for Implementation

Using outcomes data for program improvement

Building Capacity to Use Child Outcomes Data to Improve Systems and Practices 2018 DEC Conference.

February 21-22, 2018.

Part B: Evaluating Implementation Progress and Impact of Professional Development Efforts on Evidence-Based Practices NCSI Cross-State Learning Collaboratives.

Presentation transcript:

TATN Survey Results Statewide Survey Results for Quality Indicators for Assistive Technology Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4 Revised 09/21/2011 1

“Almost 30 years of research and experience has demonstrated that the education of children with disabilities can be made more effective by… supporting the development and use of technology, including AT devices and AT services, to maximize accessibility for students with disabilities.” Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of What Do We Know?

However… With frustrating frequency, what continues to be seen is students who are marginally involved in educational activities and devices that are underutilized or abandoned. 3

PEIMS Statewide AT Data Analysis YearTotal Students in Texas Special Education Students Percent Special Education of Total Students Coded as Using AT Percent of Special Education Coded as Using AT Percent of Total Students Coded as Using AT ,059,000483, , ,600,000487, , ,825,000435,000947, ,934,000443,000951,700121

Purpose of Statewide Survey To improve educational outcomes for students with disabilities who need AT devices and services to benefit from FAPE.

Objectives Gain a statewide perspective regarding the provision of AT devices and services in Texas public schools Use the information obtained as a needs assessment for systemic statewide and regional planning of improvement activities Produce a year-to-year status report to gauge Texas’ efforts in providing effective AT devices and services 6 Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4

Surveys Submitted

Suggestions for Revision of Survey TATN network members comments such as: –Survey too long –Length of time to complete too long –Minimal changes in scores from year to year Suggestions for revision include: –Reevaluate the composition of the survey –Focus on specific areas of need determined by TATN –Change the weight of the indicators TATN activities for continuous improvement: –All ESCs will seek increased participation in survey –Data will be analyzed to provide trends for planning for improvement and providing AT services in schools 8 Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4

QIAT Indicator Areas 1.Consideration 2.Assessment 3.AT in the IEP 4.Implementation 5.Evaluation of Effectiveness 6.Transition 7.Administrative Support 8.Professional Development and Training 9 Please refer to the full indicator and intent statements as found on the QIAT Web site [ Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4

What Did We Learn in Lowest area ratings: –Transition –Administrative Support –Professional Development

Adapted QIAT Survey Focus on Professional Development only Less complex survey in Survey Monkey Open from March 4 – July 1, 2011 (after the conference) Incentive of free admission to TATN Conference ESCs could offer incentive if desired

Adapted QIAT Survey Respondents asked to rate indicator by –District –Educational Service Center –TATN Rating scale –0 don’t know –1not in evidence –2 emerging –3partially implemented –4`usually implemented –5consistently implemented

Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4 Respondents by Regional ESCs

Respondents by Position Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4

Respondents by District Size

Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4 16

Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4

Surveys Submitted * (328 started)

Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4 Professional Development Average ranking of respondents on a scale of 1 (lowest variation of performance) to 5 (highest variation of performance)

Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4 What Did We Learn? 25

Ongoing QIAT Developments… Leveraging the Quality Indicators for Greatest Impact Introduction to the Structured Dialogic Design Process

Structured Dialogic Design Process Engages stakeholders in disciplined dialogue around triggering questions in a way that enables participants to harness their collective wisdom and power to construct the future. Developed by Alexander Christakis and introduced to QIAT by Jeff Diedrich, Michigan Integrated Technology Supports

Structured Dialogic Design Triggering Question for QIAT Work Look at pairs of indicators within an area… –If we make progress on Option A –Would that significantly influence progress on Option B? Influence is NOT the same as importance Results used to create Influence Maps

Next Steps Where do we go from here? –Improvement planning? –Survey for ?

Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology Network (TATN) and Region 4 Thanks to … For more information on this project please contact Kirk Behnke, M.Ed., ATP Senior Education Specialist, Region 4 Education Service Center