1. Reducing Disproportionality in Special Education June 12, 2011 Daniel J. Reschly Vanderbilt University dan.reschly@vanderbilt.edu 615-708-7910 Reschly Disproportionality1

2. Vandy is #1 in Special Education 25 Consecutive Losing Seasons?? But 6-7 in 2012 Vanderbilt Is NOT A Football Power Reschly Disproportionality2

3. Solutions to Significant Disproportionality Understanding current legal requirements Prevention, especially improving reading –~50% of 4 th grade black students read below basic; inexcusable! Teach Reading and Math effectively!! Eligibility determination procedures and decision making –Focus on RTI and needs, consider alternatives to sp ed –Implement rigorous identification criteria Intensive interventions and special education exit for ~20% to 40% Implement RTI in sp ed –Torgesen et al. studies Overview Reschly Disproportionality3

4. Constructive Policies and Practices Based On Understanding legal requirements Appropriate statistical analyses Reasonable criteria to define “significant disproportionality” Prevention in general education Early identification-Early intervention Non-discrimination in evaluation and placement Ensuring special education effectiveness Reschly Disproportionality4

5. Traditional EHA/IDEA Legal Requirements re: Nondiscrimination Process – §300.304 Assessments and other evaluation materials used to assess a child under this part— – (i) Are selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis; – Plus extensive additional requirements in the Evaluations and Re-evaluations section – Process focus – Focus on eligibility assessment Reschly Disproportionality5

6. Problems with Non-discrimination Regulations 1975 to 1997, 2004 No definition of discrimination Focus on assessment procedures (less on decision making) Assumption that non-discrimination can be prevented through reforms in assessment, classification, and placement Attempted to resolve group representation issues through individual mechanisms Improved assessment for all, but little overall effect on minority over-representation Reschly Disproportionality6

7. Disproportionality IDEA 2004, 2006 §300.173 Overidentification and disproportionality. The State must have in effect, consistent with the purposes of this part and with section 618(d) of the Act, policies and procedures designed to prevent the inappropriate overidentification or disproportionate representation by race and ethnicity of children as children with disabilities, including children with disabilities with a particular impairment described in §300.8. Reschly Disproportionality7

8. IDEA 2004, 2006 re: 34 CFR 300.646 Disproportionality (a) General. Each State …… shall provide for the collection and examination of data to determine if significant disproportionality based on race is occurring in the State …… ‑ (1) The identification of children as children with disabilities, including the identification of children as children with disabilities in accordance with a particular impairment described in section 602(3) of the Act; and THAT IS, CATEGORY (2) The placement in particular educational settings of these children. THAT IS, LRE Profile (3) Incidence, duration, and type of disciplinary actions, including suspension and expulsion Reschly Disproportionality8

9. Disproportionality By Category 13 Categories of Disability at 34 C.F.R. 300.8 Greatest concern about MR/ID, ED, LD, OHI, and Sp/L Significant disproportionality triggers policies and procedures reviews Reschly Disproportionality9

10. Disproportionality by LRE Option Official Federal Placement Options re: Time Outside General Education – ≤20 % Full-time General Education – 21% to 60% Part-time Special Education – >60% Full-time Special Education – Public or Private Separate Setting – Public or Private Residential – Home or Hospital Reschly Disproportionality10

11. IDEA 2004, 2006 re: 34 CFR 300.646 Disproportionality, cont. (b) Review and revision of policies, practices, and procedures. In the case of a determination of significant disproportionality with respect to the identification of children as children with disabilities, or the placement in particular educational settings of these children,….., the State ….. shall provide for the review and, if appropriate revision of the policies, procedures, and practices used in the identification or placement to ensure that the policies, procedures, and practices comply with the requirements of Part B of the Act. What is “significant?” Reschly Disproportionality11

12. IDEA 2004, 2006 re: Disproportionality Expenditure of EIS funds Require any LEA identified under Section 618(d)(1) to reserve the maximum amount of funds under Section 613(f) to provide comprehensive coordinated early intervening services to serve children in the LEA, particularly children in those groups that were significantly overidentified under Section 618(d)(1); and Require the LEA to publicly report on the revision of policies, practices, and procedures described under Section 618(d)(1)(A). Focused monitoring---Disproportionality listed as one of a small number of areas Reschly Disproportionality12

13. Early Intervening Services § 300.226 Early intervening services. – LEA can use 15% of federal IDEA funds to support prevention and early identification-treatment – Purpose: minimize over-identification and unnecessary sp ed referrals – Provide academic and behavioral supports – Supports professional development and provision of interventions including early literacy instruction – Significant Disproportionality? Must spend 15% of the IDEA monies Reschly Disproportionality13

14. Summary: Legal Requirements Nondiscrimination in eligibility determination and placement still required (see PEDE 34 CFR 300. Added requirements regarding results (consistent with results focus of NCLB) Applications to both category and placement option (≤20%, 21%-60%, >60%, etc.), and disciplinary actions Emphasis on prevention and early id/early tmt Mandatory revision of policies and procedures if significant disproportionality exists Reschly Disproportionality14

15. What Constitutes “Significant” Disproportionality Over- and Under-representation? What statistical analysis? What criteria – Numerical guidelines? – Criteria varying by context? – Improvement criteria? Revisions in policies and practices? Reschly Disproportionality15

16. Disproportionality: Magnitude of the Phenomenon 17% of U.S. students are black 35% of students in the sp ed category of ID (MR) are black What percent of black students are diagnosed as MR and put in sp ed?? Choose an answer 2%; 4%; 17%; 35%; 50%; 70% Reschly Disproportionality16

17. What Statistic for Disproportionality? Risk: Percent of total group in sp ed category – 100 white in MR out of 2000 white students in the student population, 100÷2000=5% – Risk=5% Composition: Percent of sp ed category by each group – Total of 150 students in MR – White composition of MR, 100 ÷ 150=67% Reschly Disproportionality17

18. Illustration of Risk and Composition Consider gender and teaching Composition of educators by gender is heavily female, >80% “Risk” of being an educator for women is <1% Likewise with racial/ethnic group and special education representation – Composition sometimes appears large – Risk is relatively small Reschly Disproportionality18

19. Comparing Risk Statistics Across Groups Relative Risk, ratio of two risk indices Useful for determining the severity of disproportionality Two methods – Risk of minority group to risk of white group – Risk of each group compared to the combined risk of the other groups See calculation exercises Reschly Disproportionality19

20. Causes of Disproportionality National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Panel Report – http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10128.html http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10128.html Donovan, M. S., & Cross, C. T. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Reschly Disproportionality20

21. Causes of Overrepresentation Biological factors Social factors General education experiences Special education system Reschly Disproportionality21

22. Universal Screening and Prevention “ There is substantial evidence with regard to both behavior and achievement that early identification and intervention is more effective than later identification and intervention.” Nat’l Academy Report on Disproportionality p. 5 “If antisocial behavior is not changed by the end of grade 3, it should be treated as a chronic condition much like diabetes. That is, it cannot be cured, but managed with the appropriate supports and continuing intervention.” (Walker et al., 1995, p. 6) Reschly Disproportionality22

23. Snow re reading (slightly paraphrased)  Reading intervention with a 2nd grader is like changing the direction on a speedboat, with a 5th grader it is like changing the direction of an oil tanker. (Ed Week May 13, 2009, p.11 Reschly Disproportionality23

24. Analysis of Reading Results National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) – Nation’s Report Card Reading (2011) http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2011/2012 457.pdf http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2011/2012 457.pdf – Biennial examination of US achievement in selected areas (reading, mathematics, science, history, etc.) – Generally administered at 4 th and 8 th grades – Samples of students from each state – Rigorous standards-more rigorous than state standards for proficiency Reschly Disproportionality24

25. NAEP 2009 Descriptions of Achievement Categories Categories – < Basic: Less than partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills fundamental to proficient work at the grade level – Basic: Partial mastery of …….. – Proficient: Solid academic performance. Demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter – Advanced: Superior performance National Center for Educational Statistics (2009). (NCES 2010- 458). Institute of Educational Sciences, US Department of Education, Washington DC. Reschly Disproportionality25

26. Reschly Disproportionality26

27. Rising to greatness: An imperative for improving Iowa’s schools (2011). Des Moines, IA: Iowa Department of Education. Author. http://educateiowa.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=artic le&id=2333:new-report-shows-iowas-education-system-in-need-of- major-remodel&catid=242:news-releases http://educateiowa.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=artic le&id=2333:new-report-shows-iowas-education-system-in-need-of- major-remodel&catid=242:news-releases See Iowa statute establishing a reading research center on next slide Reschly Disproportionality27

28. “Sec. 32. Section 256.9, subsection 53, Code Supplement 2011, is amended by adding the following new paragraph: NEW PARAGRAPH. c. Establish, subject to an appropriation of funds by the general assembly, an Iowa reading research center. (1) The purpose of the center shall be to apply current research on literacy to provide for the development and dissemination of all of the following: (a) Instructional strategies for prekindergarten through grade twelve to achieve literacy proficiency that includes reading, reading comprehension, and writing for all students. (b) Strategies for identifying and providing evidence-based interventions for students, beginning in kindergarten, who are at risk of not achieving literacy proficiency. (c) Models for effective school and community partnerships to improve student literacy. (d) Reading assessments. (e) Professional development strategies and materials to support teacher effectiveness in student literacy development. (f) Data reports on attendance center, school district, and statewide progress toward literacy proficiency in the context of student, attendance center, and school district demographic characteristics. (g) An intensive summer literacy program. The center shall establish program criteria and guidelines for implementation of the program by school districts, under rules adopted by the state board pursuant to section 256.7, subsection 32. (2) The first efforts of the center shall focus on kindergarten through grade three. The center shall draw upon national and state expertise in the field of literacy proficiency, including experts from Iowa’s institutions of higher education and area education agencies with backgrounds in literacy development. The center shall seek support from the Iowa research community in data report development and analysis of available information from Iowa education data sources. The center shall work with the department to identify additional needs for tools and technical assistance for Iowa schools to help schools achieve literacy proficiency goals and seek public and private partnerships in developing and accessing necessary tools and technical assistance. (3) The center shall submit a report of its activities to the general assembly by January 15 annually.” Reschly Disproportionality28

29. Median Gain=5 IA Change= -4 Reschly Disproportionality29

30. Change in NAEP 4 th Grade Reading Standard Score: 1992-2011 by State Median Change=5 IA Change= -4 Reschly Disproportionality30

31. USA and IA 2011 NAEP 4 TH Grade Reading Results Reschly Disproportionality31

32. NAEP 4 th Grade Reading Standard Scores 1992-2011 Reschly Disproportionality32 IA one point above USA average

33. Explanation: Why did MA improve and IA decline ? Reschly Disproportionality33

34. 1992 1994 1998 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 NAEP 4 th Grade Reading Standard Scores 1992-2011 IA FL AL USA MD Reschly Disproportionality34

35. Explanations??? Reschly Disproportionality35

36. NAEP 4 th Grade Reading % Proficient and Advanced 1992-2011 Year 1992 1994 1998 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 Reschly Disproportionality36

37. NAEP 4 th Grade Reading Standard Scores 1992-2011 Year 1992 1994 1998 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 Reschly Disproportionality37

38. Notes: SES=Socioeconomic Status; SWD=Students with Disabilities; ELL=English Language Learner Reschly Disproportionality38

39. Iowa Population Characteristics 1.Does Iowa have a higher proportion of students who have lower NAEP scores? 2.Other IA population characteristics? Reschly Disproportionality39

40. 2009 Overall Poverty Rates and Proportions of Students Age 5-17 in Poverty Circumstances Digest of Educational Statistics (2011, Table 26, p. 48) Reschly Disproportionality40

41. 2008 Composition of Student Populations by Race/Ethnicity Digest of Educational Statistics 2011 (Table 43) Iowa is less diverse than the US and selected states Reschly Disproportionality41

42. Reschly Disproportionality42

43. USA AND IA 4TH Grade Reading Results for Asian/Pacific Islander Students USA A/PI Students Outperform IA A/PI Students Reschly Disproportionality43

44. USA Black Students Outperform Iowa Black Students Reschly Disproportionality44

45. USA and IA Hispanic Students Perform at Similar Levels Reschly Disproportionality45

46. USA AND IA NAEP 4TH Grade Reading Results for White Students USA and IA White Students Perform at Similar Levels Reschly Disproportionality46

47. USA AND IA NAEP 4TH Grade Reading Results for Students with Disabilities Reschly Disproportionality47

48. From IA DOE Report Reschly Disproportionality48

49. USA AND IA NAEP 4TH Grade Reading Results for English Language Learner Students Reschly Disproportionality49

50. Explanations: Can Something Be Done? Reschly Disproportionality50

51. What did MD, FL, AL and other states with large NAEP gains do? Reschly Disproportionality51

52. Next Steps: Adopt scientifically-based reading instruction  Reading Curricula content-Snow et al, 1998 Phonemic Awareness Phonics  FluencyVocabulary  Comprehension PLUS  Scientifically-based instruction  Direct, systematic, sequential instruction  Universal screening and formative evaluation  Problem of teacher preparation  VU-TQ Center Innovation configurations, reading, classroom behavior, inclusive services, learning strategies (Reschly, et al., 2007) Reschly Disproportionality52

53. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S. & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington DC: National Academy Press. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Reschly Disproportionality53

54. Chall, J..S. (1967). Learning to read: The great debate. New York: McGraw-Hill. Research review 1900-1965 Early Reading, K-3 Code vs Meaning Emphasis Phonics or Whole Word Code superior, especially for struggling readers Lamented the generally poor Preparation of teachers to teach reading Reschly Disproportionality54

55. Standards and Curriculum Establish standards that specify appropriate reading content Adopt reading curricula aligned with standards and reading content Develop assessments aligned with standards and curriculum Establish progress monitoring formative assessments Develop summative mechanisms with consequences to teachers, schools, and individual students Reschly Disproportionality55

56. 15% 11% 7% 11% 13% 43% IHEs and SBRI Five Components Sample N=72 5 Components Phonemic awareness Phonics Fluency Vocabulary Compre- hension Source National Council on Teacher Quality http://www.nctq.org/ N=11 N=8 N=5 N=8N=9 N=31 # of Components Taught Well 5 4 3 2 1 0 56Reschly IMPROVE TEACHER PREPARATION: PRE-SERVICE AND CPD Reschly Disproportionality56

57. Iowa Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) in Walsh et al. 2006 Study  Three Iowa IHEs Included: Number of reading components taught well InstitutionWalsh et al Score Buena Vista University4 for 5 University of Iowa0 for 5 University of Northern Iowa1 for 5 Other 0 for 5 IHEs, U of MN, Ill State, U of NC Reschly Disproportionality57

58. Centrality of Teachers and Teacher Preparation  Teacher effects are significant, especially for at-risk students and students with disabilities. Tennessee Value Added Assessment System: Three years of highly effective teachers overcome effects of low socioeconomic status Teacher qualifications (e.g., degree level) have trivial effects Teacher practices have large effects. Research-based teaching practices exist but are not taught in most teacher preparation programs.  Improved teacher preparation and professional development are prerequisites to improved achievement. 58Reschly Disproportionality

59. Preparation of Special Education Teachers in Scientifically-Based Reading Instruction in 27 IHEs (Reschly et al., 2007) PA Phonics V C SI EI Progress Monitoring SBRR NCLB Principles FL Integration Universal Screening % Reschly Disproportionality59

60. Reading Course Syllabi: Projects 1. Explain your philosophy of literacy. 2. Develop a bulletin board to motivate children to read. 3. Produce journal explaining your personal experience in learning to read. 4. Analyze the social justice implications of literacy 5. Describe the hegemony of western white males on modern literacy Reschly Disproportionality60

61. Instruction and Reading “Currently our children experience a wide range of disparate experiences that jumble together and end up requiring our youngest learners to figure them out on their own. Our children are not failing to learn. Our schools are failing to teach them effectively.” (Foundation for Child Development, 2008, America’s Vanishing Potential: The Case for PreK-3 rd Education.) See also Early warning! Why reading by the end of third grade matters (2011). Baltimore, MD: Anne E. Casey Foundation. Downloaded June 30, 2011, http://www.aecf.org/~/media/Pubs/Initiatives/KIDS%20COU NT/123/2010KCSpecReport/AEC_report_color_highres.pdf http://www.aecf.org/~/media/Pubs/Initiatives/KIDS%20COU NT/123/2010KCSpecReport/AEC_report_color_highres.pdf Reschly Disproportionality61

62. Reschly Disproportionality62 Some things do not make sense 62Reschly Behavior

63. Improve Teacher Preparation in Reading Align teacher preparation program approval standards with scientifically based reading curricula (CO, MA, AL, MD) Adopt rigorous reading content and instruction test for teacher education graduates (MA, MN, WI) Continuing professional development in reading- leverage Iowa Reading First expertise?? (MA, AL, FL) Require current teachers pass rigorous reading test as incentive for advanced status or, perhaps, for continuation of license in grades K-8 Reschly Disproportionality63

64. Reading Innovation Configuration (Smartt & Reschly, 2007) Define what should be taught in teacher preparation to ensure evidence based practices Innovation configuration: Two dimensional tables – Vertical dimension: Critical reading content with indicators – Horizontal dimension: Level of implementation Innovation configurations in reading, mathematics, classroom organization and behavior management, direct instruction, learning strategies, inclusion practices, response to intervention Reschly Disproportionality64

65. Smartt, S. M., & Reschly, D. J (2007). Barriers to the prepar- ation of highly qualified teachers in reading. Washington DC: National Comprehensive Center on Teacher Quality. http://www.tqsource.org/ publications/June2007Brief.pdf Reschly & Wood-Garnett (2009) Teacher Prep and RTI at Middle and High Schools http://www.tqsource.org/ publications/September200 9Brief.pdf Reschly Disproportionality65

66. SBRI Innovation Configuration See Handout Key Essential Component None Code = 0 Mention Only Code = 1 Mention Plus Readings/ Tests Code = 2 Plus Assignments Code = 3 Plus Supervised Practice Code = 4 Phonemic Awareness Examples Speech sounds, no letters Precursor to phonics Segmenting, blending, manipulating phonemes (sounds) ex. /b/ /a/ /t/ =bat Reading Innovation Configuration (with examples) Reschly Disproportionality66

67. SBRI Innovation Configuration, cont. See Handout Key Essential Component None Code = 0 Mention Only Code = 1 Mention Plus Readings/ Tests Code = 2 Plus Assignments Code = 3 Plus Supervised Practice Code = 4 Phonics Fluency Vocabulary Comprehension Systematic Instruction Explicit Instruction Universal Screening & Progress Monitoring Reading Innovation Configuration absent examples In each area Reschly Disproportionality67

68. Rigorous Assessment of Students’ Reading Development Universal Screening beginning Fall Kindergarten (examples follow) Curriculum-based measures, beginning in Fall of Kindergarten through 8 th grade Reference CBM results to goals using benchmarks above national norms Examine results by classroom, school, and district; Identify students below benchmarks early, intervene early when interventions are less expensive and more effective Rigorous nationally standardized tests to compare performance to national standards, with a reading scale tied to NAEP Reading Reschly Disproportionality68

69. Benchmark=25 Reschly Disproportionality69

70. Benchmark=25 Reschly Disproportionality70

71. Benchmark=35 Reschly Disproportionality71

72. Benchmark Instruction Matters!! Reschly Disproportionality72

73. Second Grade Oral Reading Fluency Benchmarks: Early 2nd =42 WCM; Winter=71 WCM End of 2 nd =90 to 95 ?? Students needing greater Gen’l Ed monitoring and Interventions Good results? Poor results? Level is unsatisfactory. Progress is good. Consider results at early 2 nd grade Reschly Disproportionality73

74. Hypothetical Iowa Goals and Hypothetical Results 4 th Grade Reading Percent Proficient and Advanced Reschly Disproportionality74

75. Reschly75 Enough Already: Time for me to sit down!! Royal Kiss? Grace van Cutsem Not Impressed

76. Sense of Humor Three things that are real: God, human folly, and laughter; The first two are beyond our comprehension So we must do what we can with the third. John F. Kennedy Best wishes to you for a great convention and year