RTI and Behavior Process Improvement Group Facilitators: Bill Trant, Susan Cole, & Leigh Gates.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services United States Department of Education O S E R S Disproportionality What Is It? What Can We Do About.
Advertisements

R T I Progress Monitoring Module 6 RI RTI Initiative 2007.
Disproportionality Stakeholder Meeting Oct , 2008.
Addressing the Disproportionate Representation of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Students in Special Education SPR&I Regional Training.
Navigating the SPR&I Database Oregon Department of Education Fall
Angela Tanner-Dean Diana Chang OSEP October 14, 2010.
April 2009 Copyright © 2008 Mississippi Department of Education Instructional Programs and Services Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CEIS) April.
Presentation by Rebecca H. Cort, Deputy Commissioner Office of Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities Statewide Briefing,
IDEA Reauthorization and Disproportionality Sammie Lambert, DECS KYCASE Summer Institute Lexington, Kentucky July 16, 2007.
State Performance Plan Annual Performance Report SPP/APR State Systemic Improvement Plan SSIP / Indicator 17.
Why RTI? Understanding Response to Intervention Prepared by Liz Angoff, PhD Response to Intervention Coordinator Oakland Unified School District
RTI and Behavior Process Improvement Group Facilitators: Bill Trant, Susan Cole, & Leigh Gates.
Core Concepts. Essential Elements  High Quality Classroom Instruction For All Students  Tiered Instruction & Intervention  Ongoing Student Assessment.
Pre-service Performance Standard Selection Process (c) At least 10 percent of the total number of enrollment opportunities in each grantee.
Dr. John D. Barge, State School Superintendent “Making Education Work for All Georgians” FY2012 Data Collections Conference Special Education.
Indicator 4A & 4B Rates of Suspension & Expulsion Revised Methodology Identification of Significant Discrepancy DE-PBS Cadre December 1, 2011.
Collecting and Using Data: to Improve RtI Implementation: RTI and Behavior Process Improvement Bill Trant, NHCS Executive Director of Special Education.
Continuous Improvement Performance Plan (CIPP) New Hanover County Schools Students with Disabilities Data Story.
RTI Best Practices Institute Special Education Eligibility & RTI Bill Trant New Hanover County Schools September 29, 2010.
Monitoring Significant Disproportionality in Special Education Systems Performance Review & Improvement Fall Training 2011.
1 Accountability Conference Education Service Center, Region 20 September 16, 2009.
Responding to Special Education Disproportionality Understanding your Data Presenters: Nancy Fuhrman & Dani Scott, DPI.
IDEA & Disproportionality Perry Williams, Ph.D. Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
Data Slides for Children & Students with IEPs in 2010 Michigan Department of Education Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services.
An Introduction to the State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report.
June 21, 2012 Cultural Responsiveness and Disproportionate Representation The Role of the Special Educator CUI 4450 Education and Psychology of Exceptional.
Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools Programs for Exceptional Children State Performance Plan/ Annual Performance Report/Continuous Improvement Performance.
RTI and Behavior Process Improvement Group Facilitators: Bill Trant, Susan Cole, & Leigh Gates.
CCSD Discipline Analysis Daniel Reschly  Disciplinary Infractions 58 categories used.
RtI and PBS Dr. Patricia Drake Wayne RESA September 17, 2010.
Response to Intervention Up the Tiers to Special Education Dr. Meg Carroll Professor, Saint Xavier University, Chicago RtI.
Navigating System Performance Review and Improvement (SPR&I) Oregon Department of Education Fall
Choose a category. You will be given the answer. You must give the correct question. Click to begin.
Kentucky Continuous Monitoring Process Spring 2012.
KETTLE MORAINE (KM) SCHOOL DISTRICT: Ryan Meyer.
Office of Special Education & Early Intervention Services 2008 LEA Determinations: Final Data Based on 2006–2007 from the February 2008 APR.
Review Vaughn’s Data from & Provide Your Input & Next Steps October 28, 2015.
Annual Desk Audit (ADA) March 31, 2015 Webinar. Agenda  Purpose/Introduction of the ADA  Indicator Reviews  With Five-year trends  Navigating the.
Semester Discipline Data Data Source: District Online Discipline System December 15,
Life After the Pilot: Transition Back to Categorical Placements Bill Trant, Director of Special Education NHCS Nancy Kreykenbohm, RTI Coordinator NHCS.
State Performance Plan/ Annual Performance Report/Continuous Improvement Performance Plan (SPP/APR/CIPP) Buncombe County Schools 2013.
+ Behavior RTI An Introduction. + Behavior RTI A General Education Initiative Mandated in the district framework Intended to teach prosocial behaviors.
CASE KDE UPDATE Division of Learning Services March 11, 2011.
Agenda 1:00 Introductions and ZOOM Webinar reminders 1:05 Topics: Statewide Field Test for Fiscal State Application for Title VI-B, RTI Resources, and.
Continuous Improvement Performance Plan (CIPP) New Hanover County Schools Students with Disabilities Data Story.
Special Education School District Profile Slinger School District Lynda McTrusty.
Agenda Part I Recap of the Final Rule Part II Standard Methodology Part III Remedies Part IV Dates Part V Questions.
WELCOME What is on your table? Agenda for both days
What Data Can Tell Us – and What It Can’t
What is “Annual Determination?”
Disproportionality: Tier Two Monitoring Activities
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004
DISPROPORTIONALITY REGULATIONS
New Significant Disproportionality Regulations
CClick here to get started
CONNECTICUT STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Surveillance. Public Health Approach Surveillance What is the Problem ? Problem Risk Factor Identification : What Is the Cause ? Intervention Evaluation.
Disproportionality Institute March 29-30, 2018 Little Rock, Arkansas
General Education First!
Name of School.
CHAPTER 2: Steps in the Assessment Process
Using Family Survey Data for Program Improvement
Data Update State of California
RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION
Using Family Survey Data for Program Improvement
OSE-EIS MAASE Summer Institute 2010
Disproportionality Prevention Support
Significant Disproportionality Fiscal Webinar
Significant Disproportionality Stakeholder Meeting
Significant Disproportionality
Presentation transcript:

RTI and Behavior Process Improvement Group Facilitators: Bill Trant, Susan Cole, & Leigh Gates

Agenda – Presentation of the Data – Description of the Process – What Works? Small Group Discussion & Whole Group Share – What Needs to Work Better? Small Group Discussion & Whole Group Share – Wrap-up

THE STATE-LEVEL PERSPECTIVE The Continuous Improvement Performance Plan Indicator 4b Indicators 9 and 10

Indicator 4b Significant Discrepancy of > 10 Day Suspensions by Race/Ethnicity Due to Data – 1,073 total students suspended – 78 (7.3%) students with IEPs – More than 2 times discrepant in the number of suspensions by race/ethnicity (African American)

Indicator 9 & 10 Disproportionate Representation by Race/Ethnicity in Disability Categories That is a Result of Inappropriate Identification Data – 2 categories: ID-MI (82/133) and SED (63/105). – ID-MI risk ratio: 6.2% NHCS > 5.36% State – SED risk ratio: 6% NHCS > 5% State – Disproportionate in the identification of African American students in these two categories

THE DISTRICT-LEVEL PERSPECTIVE RTI from a system perspective A break down of data in terms of Behavior Intervention A break down of Behavior Intervention in terms of Tiers

Entitlement Data

Entitlements by Behavior State Child Count (SED/Total)= 4% At: 0 Ag: 0 2 B: B:4(5.63%) At: 3 Ag: 1 2 B: B:4(3.77%) At: 3 Ag: 1 2 B: B:5(2.36%) At: 1 Ag: 3 2 B: B:22(6.49%) At: 7 Ag: 9 2 B: B:21(4.05%) At: 7 Ag: 8 2 B: 6 KEY: B= Behavior; At= Entitled in Attention; Ag: Entitled in Aggression; 2 B= Entitled in 2 Behaviors

K-5 Students Provided Interventions in Tiers ,501* (30% ADM) in RTI 1,696 (48%) intervention info. 639** (38%) cases = behavior 539 * (84%) tier information * Based on 25 schools **Based on 25 sch. w/3-4 w/<50% of data 89 (17%) 193 (36%) 237 (37%) 3 (1%) ,250* (29% ADM) in RTI 1,261 (39%) intervention info. 345** (27%) cases = behavior 292 * (85%) tier information * Based on 25 schools **Based on 20 sch. w/8-9 w/<50% of data 51 (17%) 122 (42%) 112 (38%) 7 (2%)

6-8 Students Provided Interventions in Tiers * (8% ADM) in RTI 197 (47%) intervention info. 24** (12%) cases = behavior 24* (100%) tier information * Based on 7 schools **Based on 7 sch. w/2 w/<50% of data 0 (0%) 17 (71%) 6 (25%) 1 (4%) * (17% ADM) in RTI 401 (44%) intervention info. 71** (18%) cases = behavior 63* (89%) tier information * Based on 7 schools **Based on 5 sch. w/3 w/<50% of data 12 (19%) 14 (22%) 36 (57%) 1 (2%)