Doing Inclusion Inclusively (and using EBP to do it well) Michael S. Kelly, Ph.D. Loyola University Chicago Casper School Social Work Dept.

About Casper, WY Schools: The Directive Pop. ~50,000, School District has 11, 500 students, 34 schools, 12 School Social Workers School District was charged with increasing the number of students in Inclusion settings across all IEPs Thanks, Stimulus $$!

Recent Research Available at Amazon.com and Oxford’s Social Work website Published in early 2010 by Oxford: This book models the EBP process to increase the use of evidence-informed practices across all 3 tiers of intervention (with a special focus on SEL-based interventions)

Questions towards Developing an Inclusion Group Model for Casper Natrona District Questions Should inclusion differ based on diagnosis? What targeted behaviors are best suited to work on in an inclusive environment? Does putting regular ed and SPED kids together in a tx count as inclusion? Can it be in other settings (hall, cafeteria)? Who are the staff in my school that might have inclusion expertise? Does mixing services with different IEP kids count as inclusion? How can we do inclusion with disruptive kids? Can we adopt a flexible posture with inclusion (small group, classroom, individual)? What are the other disciplines doing? How can we write goals to maximize inclusion options?

Key Initial Findings From EBP Process Fall 2010 Our focused answerable question: “What are the characteristics of effective inclusion models for schools with social-emotional needs in their IEPs?” Preliminary answers: #1 It starts with the IEP team and the creation of the IEP itself (Keyes & Owens-Johnson, 2003) #2 Low-level evidence indicates that a combined pull-out/inclusion model is most effective (Marston, 1996)

Key Initial Findings From EBP Process Fall 2010 Our focused answerable question: “What are the characteristics of effective inclusion models for schools with social-emotional needs in their IEPs?” #3 A number of promising ideas for doing effective inclusion of IEP students exist (Circle of Friends, MAPs) but limited evidence exists on these approaches’ effectiveness (Pryce et al., 2001) #4 Ongoing professional development, parent support groups, and structured teacher consultation time are emphasized (Bauer et al., 2009; Vaughn & Schrumm, 1995) but initial search reveals little strong evidence for these approaches

Our Steps (So Far) First Meeting early August 2010 September/October 2010: Looked at caseloads determine “best fit” for piloting inclusion, think about teachers to pilot with you, identify BASS teachers to collaborate with to increase graduation rates, work on increasing teacher collaboration November/December 2010: Compiled specific information on caseload (who was getting inclusion SSW services, who was in full resource support) January 2011 (MK visits, Consultation with SpEd administration, 1 st development of draft of Inclusion Model) February-May 2011 (Piloting, refining Inclusion Model) Summer 2011 (Development of Inclusion Role Plays, Final Consultation with Other External Partners in August 2011)

Student Background Variables School Characteristics Teacher Characteristics Family Characteristics Classroom Characteristics Student Characteristics Assessment Activities Special Education Eligibility Inclusion Assessment Assessment possibilities Family history and Student Clinical Interview Strengths-based Assessment using BERS-2 Additional assessment tool options: BASC, Child Behavior Checklist, Hopelessness Scale, Youth Coping Index, SASSI-2 Classroom observation to observe 1) potential need for inclusion and 2) potential “fit” with student, teacher to do inclusion Consultation and collaboration with mental health professionals and others through a “wraparound model” as indicated Student involvement in goal setting and charting progress (when possible)

Assessment Activities Special Education Eligibility Inclusion Assessment Inclusion rule in/rule out variables to assess each time Student possesses significant social skills deficits that are best addressed in a reg. ed setting Hygiene and other personal issues that require 1-on- 1 time Teacher interest Significant parent involvement in the intervention (either by support or replicating it at home) Grade Level Issues (if K, inclusion is first option; if 8 th grade and HS, transition planning and wrap services 1 st option)

Different Options for IEP Service Delivery Service Options Outcomes Full Inclusion Services  1 st month: classroom observation, student interview goal setting  Selection of program to address student needs in classroom  Rehearse, Practice, Assess, Repeat  Increase student peer support Full Resource  IEP services delivered in office or other small group setting  For each student, an EBP process to select an intervention or strategy for the year Hybrid Inclusion/Resource  1 st month: classroom observation, student interview goal setting  2 nd month: interview with teacher, goal setting with teacher and student, classroom goal (selection of program)  Identification of two “class allies”  Rehearsal of skill 2x a month in class, 2 x in office  If possible, classroom full or exit ssw Improve academic performance Improve student attendance Decrease behavior disruptions Increase emotional functioning Decrease disciplinary actions Improve transition outcomes Measured by at least one standardized measure, ODR, and classroom observational rubric

Questions, Comments, “Yeah, buts”?....