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

2. Objectives for the day 1. Gain in-depth understanding of data for academic achievement of students with disabilities 2. View other districts’ data wall/root cause analysis for feedback and insight 3. Share and exchange information from other districts to continue this work when back in district 4. Identify districts in need of/requesting more targeted support in January 2

3. What we will be doing today: Overviews – Focused Monitoring Teaming with fellow districts, collaborating, sharing Working with your own team for next steps SDE staff – scoring 3

4. Who is in the room? public school districts Directors of Special Education Whomever oversees curriculum/instruction Building Principals Others CSDE consultants SERC consultants CPAC staff 4

5. What is Focused Monitoring? “A process that purposefully selects priority areas to examine for compliance/results while not specifically examining other areas for compliance to maximize resources, emphasize important variables, and increase the probability of improved results.” 5 National Center for Special Education Accountability Monitoring (NCSEAM)

6. Focused Monitoring Steering Committee  Stakeholder group - district representatives, parents, other Department staff, Bureau staff, State Advisory Council, SERC, CPAC  Meets 2 – 4 times annually  Evaluate prior year  Determine next area of focus (Key Performance Indicator, KPI) 6

7. Data The sources that may be used to help identify a district for focused monitoring 7 SEDAC PSIS ED 166 Assessment (CMT/CAPT) Due Process ECO Evaluation Timelines SPP/APR Indicators

8. Indicator 3 Participation of students with disabilities on statewide assessments: A. number of districts that met the State’s AYP objectives for progress for disability subgroup; B. participation rate for children with IEPs; and C. proficiency rate for children with IEPs. 8

9. 2010-11 School Year Key Performance Indicator 9 Improve the effectiveness of efforts to educate students with an IEP as demonstrated by: procedural compliance with IDEA; participation in statewide assessments; and performance on statewide assessments.

10. What data were looked at to get you here? AYP reports and indicator 3 APR data: 2007-08, 2008-09, and 2009-10 special education subgroup, Percent meeting proficiency Under 60% by the 2009-10 school year (10) Over 60% by the 2009-10 school year and made Safe Harbor (6) ▫Priority districts and those already with an active focused monitoring improvement plan were not included 10

11. October 29: How to do a data wall November 10: Data wall showcase January – April: site visits and improvement planning 2011-12 school year: implement improvement plan 11 This year’s process

12. What if you receive a visit? Average 3 days in length Educational Benefit Review Process Interviews: Parents, students, staff Classroom observations IEP review ▫We are REQUIRED to address noncompliance if we see it, even if its in an area other than the one we’re out there for. Improvement plan Resources/support (SERC and CPAC) 12

13. Objectives for the day 1. Gain in-depth understanding of data for academic achievement of students with disabilities 2. View other districts’ data wall/root cause analysis for feedback and insight 3. Share and exchange information from other districts to continue this work when back in district 4. Identify districts in need of/requesting more targeted support in January 13

14. Celebrate! All district’s data for students with disabilities moved in the upward direction, in reading, in the 2009-10 assessment!!! Our focus: ▫Rate of progress ▫Gap w/ General Education 14

15. Feedback Form 15 Complete for each district you visit. Left panel discussion Middle panel discussion Right panel discussion (if applicable) Final thoughts