SLD Evaluation Process

Vision: Every child in every district receives the instruction that they need and deserve…every day.

Oregon Response to Intervention

Vision: Every child in every district receives the instruction that they need and deserve…every day.

Salem, OregonJanuary 14th, 2014

www.oregonrti.org

RTI for SLD

Targets

• SPED Referral: When does it occur and what’s the process?

• What are the key questions we need to answer in a comprehensive evaluation for SLD?– Does the student have significantly low skills?– Does the student make slow progress despite

intensive interventions?– Does the student have an instructional need?– Are the struggles primarily due to one of the

exclusionary factors?

www.oregonrti.org

Special Education Evaluation Process

• Referral• Evaluation planning meeting• Conduct comprehensive evaluation• Eligibility meeting• IEP meeting

Research-Based Core Curriculum w/ Strong Instruction

Tier 2/3 Supplemental Intervention

ASSESSMENT

Formal DiagnosticAs needed

Progress MonitoringWeekly-Monthly

Universal Screening3 times/year

DATA-BASED DECISION MAKING

Individual Problem Solving Team

Schoolwide Screening reviewed

3 times/year

INSTRUCTION

Tier 2/3 Supplemental Intervention

Intervention Review Team

6-8 weeks

Tier 3 Individualized Intervention

Individual Problem Solving Team

6-8 weeks

SPED referral?

www.oregonrti.org

Is there suspicion of a disability?

Suspicion of a Disability

Team Referral

www.oregonrti.org

Parent Referrals

• The team must consider the referral–Cannot refuse the referral due to RTI (OSEP,

2011)–Can refuse the evaluation if there is good

evidence (i.e., data) indicating the student can be successful with general education supports–Must provide written notice to parents if the

request to evaluate is refused

Parents have a right to make a referral at any time

www.oregonrti.org

What happens after a referral is made?

Relevant information is collected/consolidated along with a SPED referral form:• Intervention data, developmental history, problem

solving form(s), progress monitoring data, diagnostic data (ICEL), language info

An Evaluation Planning Meeting is conducted to determine if a student needs to have a comprehensive evaluation.

www.oregonrti.org

Evaluation Planning Meeting

• Do you need to conduct a Special Education evaluation?

• What additional information you need as a team? (Permission to Evaluate Form)–Get caregiver consent 60 school day timeline

begins• Provide caregiver with Parents Rights

brochure

www.oregonrti.org

Comprehensive Evaluation

A comprehensive evaluation is always required to determine if a student qualifies for Special Education service, regardless of your model of identification.

Simply using screening and progress monitoring data to determine SPED eligibility (i.e., “RTI only”) is unethical, illegal, and a very poor interpretation of RTI practice and law.

www.oregonrti.org

Comprehensive Evaluation

(10) "Evaluation" means procedures used to determine whether the child has a disability, and the nature and extent of the special education and related services that the child needs.

Oregon Administrative Rules, 581-105-2000

Comprehensive SLD Eval:Regardless of Eval Model

a) Academic assessmentb) Review of recordsc) Observation (including regular education

setting)d) Progress monitoring datag) Other:

A. If needed, developmental historyB. If needed, an assessment of cognition, etc.C. If needed, a medical statementD. Any other assessments to determine impact of

disabilityOregon Administrative Rules, 581-015-2170

Comprehensive SLD Eval:RTI Model

e) …documentation of:A. The type, intensity, and duration of scientific,

research-based instructional intervention(s)…B. …rate of progress during the instructional

intervention(s);C. A comparison of the student's rate of progress to

expected rates of progress.D. Progress monitoring on a schedule that:

i. Allows a comparison of the student's progress to… peers;

ii. Is appropriate to the student's age and grade placement;

iii. Is appropriate to the content monitored; andiv. Allows for interpretation of the effectiveness of

intervention.Oregon Administrative Rules, 581-015-2170

www.oregonrti.org

Talk Time

• How does your district currently define “comprehensive evaluation” for SLD eligibility? What components are typically included?

• Does it provide comprehensive information that leads to effective instructional decision making?

www.oregonrti.org

Three key questions

Slow Progress

Low Skills

Instructional Need

SPED Entitleme

nt Decision

Is the student significantly different from peers?

Does the student make less than adequate progress despite interventions?

Does the student need specially designed instruction?

=Exclusionary Factors

Guidelines for

Comprehensive

Evaluation

www.oregonrti.org

Evaluating Low Skills

Low Skills

www.oregonrti.org

Low Skills: Is the student significantly different from

peers?

How big of a discrepancy is significant?

Data Source General Suggestions*

OAKS • Very low? Low? Does not meet?• Below the 16th percentile (1 SD below the mean)? 10th percentile?

CBM’s(screening

assessments)

• In the Intensive/Well Below Benchmark range?• Below the 16th percentile as compared to national and/or local

norms (1 SD below the mean)? 10th percentile?• More than 2 times discrepant from peers/benchmark?

Standardized (norm-referenced) Achievement Tests

• Below the 16th percentile (1 SD below the mean)? 10th percentile?• Below a standard score of 85 (1 SD below the mean)?

Core Program Assessments

• In bottom 20% as compared to peers? Bottom 10%?

*These suggestions should be used as approximate guidelines and NOT as rigid cut scores

Calculating Magnitude of Discrepancy

Absolute discrepancy:

Discrepancy Ratio:

Expected performance Current performance–

÷Larger Number Smaller Number

72 wcpm (Winter 2nd Grade) 32 wcpm

= -40 wcpm–

72 wcpm (Winter 2nn Grade) 32 wcpm÷

2.25 times

discrepant

www.oregonrti.org

What if the data is mixed?

Consider divergent data source(s) and possible explanations• For Example:– Group administered vs. Individual

administered?– Timed vs. Untimed?–Multiple chances vs. One-time assessment?– Accommodations vs No Accommodations

What if the data are mixed?Questi

on Evidence from Assessment/Score Low?Discrepan

t From Peers?

Does the student exhibit LOW SKILLS?

CBM/Screening:All Intensive Y N Y N

Core Program:40% average, class average 90% Y N Y N

Intervention:Passed 65% of checkouts, peers passed 70%

Y N Y N

OAKS:Did not meet (8th %ile) Y N Y N

Achievement Tests:29th %ile overall (SS: 79), 40th %ile on 2 reading subtests (SS: 96)

Y N Y N

Other: Phonics Screener: 15% of sounds correct Survey Level Assessment: Instructional Level 3 grades below

Y N Y N

Preponderance of Evidence? Y NAdditional Information Needed?

www.oregonrti.org

Evaluation Report: Low Skills

Include a description of the following:1. Student’s level of performance– CBMs, OAKs, Standardized assessments, Core

Program assessments2. Expected level of performance– Benchmarks, Local norm, National norm

3. Magnitude of the discrepancy– Times discrepant, difference score, percentile

rank as compared to average range, etc.

www.oregonrti.org

Eval Report Example: Low Skills

In all areas of easyCBM, Student falls in the below average range or below the 10th%ile. Average rate of improvement for a typical 2nd grade student in passage reading fluency is 1.5 words per week or approximately 54 total word gain in one year’s time. Student’s average rate of improvement was .5 words per week or 18 total words.

Student has also been progress monitored in the areas of word reading and passage reading fluency. Student falls in the below the 10th%ile in all areas.

www.oregonrti.org

Team Time

• What assessments do you currently have that you can use to evaluate lows skills?

• Do you have district guidelines for what is significantly low?– If not, how will those be developed?

www.oregonrti.org

Evaluating Slow Progress

Slow Progress

www.oregonrti.org

Slow Progress: Does the student make inadequate progress

despite intervention?

www.oregonrti.org

How much progress is enough?

• How much growth should we expect?– National growth norms• What does typical growth look like, on

average?

National Growth Rates: Reading

Average ORF

Growth (WCPM)*

Ambitious ORF

Growth (WCPM)*

Average Maze

Growth (WCR)**

1 2 3 0.42 1.5 2 0.43 1 1.5 0.44 0.85 1.1 0.45 0.5 0.8 0.46 0.3 0.65 0.4

*Fuchs et al (1993), **Fuchs & Fuchs (2004)

www.oregonrti.org

Comparison to Similar students

• How does a student’s growth compare to students with similar educational difficulties?– DIBELS Pathways to Progress– AIMSWEB

www.oregonrti.org

• How much growth should we expect?– National growth norms• What does typical growth look like on

average?– Local growth norms• What does typical growth look like in your

district, school, classroom, or intervention group?

Typical growth rate:1.4 wcpm per weekStudent in intervention making “typical” growth

Students in interventions must make more progress than the typical student in order to close the gap.

Typical growth rate:1.4 wcpm per weekStudent in intervention making ambitious growth:2 wcpm per week

Students in interventions are receiving more instructional support than the typical student.

Typical growth rate:1.4 wcpm per weekStudent in intervention making ambitious growth:2 wcpm per week

Slow ProgressQuestion Evidence from Assessment/Score

Slow Progre

Discrepant From Peers?

Does the student exhibit SLOW PROGRESS?

Progress Monitoring: Y N Y N

Diagnostic Assessments: Y N Y N

Core Assessments: Y N Y N

Intervention Assessments: Y N Y N

Intervention Matched to Student Need? Y NIntervention Time & Intensity Appropriate? Y NIntervention Delivered with Fidelity? Y N

www.oregonrti.org

Progress Monitoring Data

Slow Progre

Progress Monitoring:1.1 WCPM/week (Typical = 1.5, Local norm = 2)

Y N Y N

Diagnostic Assessments: Phonics ScreenerFrom 10% to 15% sounds correct in 20 weeks

Y N Y N

Core Assessments:From 35% average to 40% average in 20 weeks

Y N Y N

Intervention Assessments:From 45% to 65% in 20 weeks Y N Y N

39Oregon Response to Intervention

www.oregonrti.org

VocabularyReading

Comprehension

Phonemic Awareness

Phonics(Alphabetic Principle)

Oral ReadingAccuracy &

Fluency

Interventions Matched to Student Need

Slow Progre

Y N Y N

www.oregonrti.org

Intervention Time & Intensity Appropriate

• In addition to 90 minutes of research-based core instruction–Minimum of 30-45 minutes of daily,

supplemental/targeted interventions using:• Explicit, systematic, research-based

curricular materials• Research-based instructional

strategies

Slow Progre

Y N Y N

www.oregonrti.org

Intervention Delivered with Fidelity

• Were the interventions delivered as intended?

• Did we do what we said we would do?

www.oregonrti.org

Intervention Delivered with Fidelity

• Wickstrom et al studied 33 intervention cases.

• Teachers agreed to do an intervention and were then observed in class.

• 33/33 on a self report measure indicated that they had used the intervention as specified by the team.

• 0/33 Teachers had fidelity above 10%.

Slide taken from a presentation by Joseph Witt

Slow Progre

Y N Y N

www.oregonrti.org

Evaluation Report: Slow Progress

Include a description of the following:1. For each intervention provided:– Student rate of progress– Expected rate of progress– A description of the intervention– What intervention strategies resulted in

the largest amount of growth– Fidelity data

www.oregonrti.org

Eval Report Example: Slow Progress

www.oregonrti.org

Eval Report Example: Slow Progress

Student has been intervened with in the area of reading since the beginning of her 2nd grade school year. During her 3rd grade school year, the intervention was intensified two different times, once she was moved back for additional review and the 2nd time she was moved into a smaller group and placed with a certified teacher. Student’s performance was not at a rate comparable to her peers, thus she was supported through various methods of intensifying the instruction. In addition, Student started her 2nd and 3rd grade year in Reading Mastery Classic lesson. Her performance supports a picture of a skill deficit in reading that is resistant to instruction.

www.oregonrti.org

Team Time

• Does your district have guidelines for how “adequate progress” is defined?

• How can you determine that interventions are:– Appropriately matched?– The right time and intensity?– Delivered with fidelity?

Lunchtime!Please remember to complete the evaluation form for this session

www.oregonrti.org

Disability is not enough

• A diagnosis from a doctor or clinician (i.e., dyslexia, etc) does not automatically qualify a student for special education services.

• The student must have an instructional need for specially designed instruction

www.oregonrti.org

Three key questions

Instructional Need

www.oregonrti.org

Colby’s Needs

www.oregonrti.org

Does the student need Specially Designed Instruction?

www.oregonrti.org

What is Specially Designed Instruction?

• Federal Definition: adapting the......... – Content–Methodology

and/or – Delivery of instruction

www.oregonrti.org

What is Specially Designed Instruction?

Additional components: 1. Needs to be truly necessary rather

than merely beneficial2. Designed or implemented by

certified special education personnel3. Not available regularly in general

education

www.oregonrti.org

What conditions result in the most growth: ICE?

30 Minutes daily Reading Mastery (8 students)

Reduce group size to 4, increase OTR’s

Increase to 45 minutes daily, add behavior plan

www.oregonrti.org

Question: Evidence/Data of Need Different than typically provided in general ed?

Does the student have an Instructional Need for special education services?

Instruction/Methodology Y N

Curriculum/Content Y N

Environment/Delivery Y N

Additional Information Needed? Beyond what general ed can provide? Y N

Instructional Need?

www.oregonrti.org

Instructional Need?

www.oregonrti.org

Content/Curriculum

• The knowledge and skills being taught to the student are different than those that are taught to typically developing same aged peers– Example• a student with an IEP may be working on

increasing the number of words that he can spell correctly while typically developing peers are being taught to write short stories with complete paragraphs.

www.oregonrti.org

Content/Curriculum Needs?

How can you determine if skill needs are significantly below grade level

standards?Need intervention curriculum to make progress

Diagnostic information Progress monitoring data

In program assessments

www.oregonrti.org

Instruction/Methodology: Y N

Instructional Need?

Intervention: Reading Mastery (65% passing rate)Diagnostic: 15% sounds (cvc)PM: ORF (1.1 WCPM/week)OAKS: 8th percentile

www.oregonrti.org

Instructional Need?

www.oregonrti.org

Methodology/Instruction

• Different instructional strategies and approaches are being used to teach content to the student than are used with typically developing, same-aged peers. – Example• Using Reading Mastery to teach a student to

read – Increased modeling, guided practice, corrective

feedback, and independent practice/application

www.oregonrti.org

Methodology/Instruction Needs?

How can you determine if instructional needs are “different” than what is typically provided within general

education?Intervention program: explicitness, pacing, engagement Intervention program assessments

Observations Progress monitoring data

www.oregonrti.org

Instructional Need?

Reading Mastery 5 days a week/ 60 minutes in addition to core: increased explicitness, OTRs

www.oregonrti.org

Instructional Need?

www.oregonrti.org

Delivery/Environment

• The way in which instruction is delivered is different than what is provided to typically developing peers. – Examples• Needs to be taught in small group• Needs to have more frequent reinforcement

www.oregonrti.org

Delivery/Environmental Needs?

How can you determine if environmental needs are “different”

than what is typically provided in special education?Observation: needs small group,

behavior supports, accuracy rate Progress monitoring data

Teacher interview/ info

www.oregonrti.org

Instructional Need?

Small group instruction: group of 4

www.oregonrti.org

Instructional Need?

How do you distinguish if it is an instructional need (i.e. Beyond the

scope of what general education can provide)?

www.oregonrti.org

How you determine instructional need?

• It comes down to the balance: How does the weight of the intervention compare to the rate of progress?

www.oregonrti.org

3rd grader• Fall Benchmark: 70

DORF– Iris: 25 DORF

• Winter Benchmark: 86 DORF– Iris: 30 DORF

Typical/Ambitious gain: 1.0/1.5 words/week

• Iris: .6 words/week • Cohort: 1.5 words/week

• Core Program: HM• 60 minutes

Reading Mastery Classic 5 days a week

www.oregonrti.org

2nd Grader• Fall Benchmark: ORF 52

– Susie: 22 ORF• Winter Benchmark: ORF

72– Susie: 33 ORF

• Typical/Ambitious gain: 1.5/2.0 words per week– Susie’s Gain: 1.25

words/week– Cohort: 1.3 words/week

• 90 min. MacMillan• Phonics for Reading 45

min a day and Read Naturally 20 min. per day

• Reduce intervention to just Read Naturally– PM: Susie 37 ORF– Susie’s gain: .5

words/week– Cohort gain: 1.4

words/week

Susie # 1

www.oregonrti.org

2nd Grader• Fall Benchmark: DORF 52

– Susie: 22 DORF• Winter Benchmark: DORF

72– Susie: 33 DORF

• Typical/Ambitious gain: 1.5/2.0 words per week– Susie’s Gain: 1.25

words/week– Cohort gain: 1.3 words/week

• 90 min. MacMillan• Read Naturally 20

min. per day

Susie # 2

www.oregonrti.org

Instructional Need?

Intervention: Reading Mastery (65% passing rate)Diagnostic: 15% sounds (cvc)PM: ORF (1.1 WCPM/week), cohort (2.2 wcpm)OAKS: 8th percentile

Small group instruction: group of 4

www.oregonrti.org

Learner

• What additional supports are needed to help the student be successful?– Family collaboration– Assistive technology– Community supports

www.oregonrti.org

Evaluation Report: Instructional Need

Include a description of the student’s needs:1. Instruction– The strategies that resulted in the most student growth

2. Curriculum– The specific skills/strategies that the student needs to master

3. Environment– The learning environment that the student needs to be

successful4. Additional learning supports– Any additional supports/collaborations that are needed

If found eligible, this section of the report should be directly tied to the student’s IEP (e.g., specially-designed instruction, related services, accommodations, and supplementary aids and services)

www.oregonrti.org

Eval Report Example: Instructional Need

Student’s skills and rate of progress are significantly below grade level. The student does appear to benefit from repeated instruction, repeated modeling, high rates of having an opportunity to respond to instruction (10 opportunities per minute), and frequent positive feedback for correct academic responding of identified skills in reading for 60 additional minutes per day. This support is beyond the scope of what general education supports can provide.

www.oregonrti.org

Talk TimeHow can your team begin to address/refine your data collection in these areas?1. Instruction– The strategies that resulted in the most student growth

2. Curriculum– The specific skills/strategies that the student needs to

master3. Environment– The learning environment that the student needs to be

successful4. Additional learning supports– Any additional supports/collaborations that are needed

www.oregonrti.org

Three key questions

Exclusionary Factors

www.oregonrti.org

Exclusionary Factors: Has the student had ample

opportunity to learn?

www.oregonrti.org

Primary cause is not due to Lack of Appropriate Instruction

• Misconception– Need to be at 80% on universal screening

assessments to indicate student has had appropriate instruction

• Fact– Cannot deny an evaluation solely based on the

percentage of students at benchmark• What if the district is at 50% of students at

benchmark?, 30%? – does not mean there are no students who need special

education services)

www.oregonrti.org

What do we mean by appropriate instruction?

(i) A lack of appropriate instruction in reading , including in the essential components of reading instruction

Explicit & systematic instruction in the Big 5........– Phonemic awareness– Phonics– Vocabulary development– Reading fluency– Reading comprehension strategies

www.oregonrti.org

What evidence do we have of appropriate instruction:

Core/Intervention?Questions Data Sources?1. Was the student provided

instruction in the Big 5?2. Was the instruction provided

with a reasonable degree of fidelity?

3. Is there evidence that other students are benefitting from the instruction?

www.oregonrti.org

Primary cause is not due to Limited English Proficiency

• English language development– Are they making progress?– Does the ELD match their academic

level?• Acculturation• Cohort groups• How do their skills and growth compare

to students with similar language, acculturation, etc.?

www.oregonrti.org

Factors• Attendance• Vision/hearing• Motor impairment• Emotional Disturbance• Cultural Factors• Environment or

Economic Disadvantage

Data sources• Health screenings• Medical reports• Developmental history• Parent interviews

Primary cause is not due to other factors

Is there any other possible reason why the student is struggling?

www.oregonrti.org

Evaluation Report: Exclusionary Factors

Include a description of the following:1. The effectiveness of general ed instruction

(e.g., fidelity, instructional strategies observed, etc)

2. Attendance3. English proficiency & acculturation (if

appropriate)– Growth as compared to peers with similar

backgrounds4. Evidence from developmental history,

medical reports, health screenings, parent interviews that rule out other exclusionary factors.

www.oregonrti.org

Eval Report: Exclusionary Factors

Student has passed her most recent hearing and vision screenings. Overall, Student is very healthy and only goes to the doctor when needed. It was noted in the problem solving meeting that she has a hard time focusing and will get distracted by others around her. Student met most of her developmental milestones on time other than talking, Ms. Uranga noted on the developmental history that she talked late, and her first word was “Elmo”.

www.oregonrti.org

Three key questions

Slow Progress

Low Skills

Instructional Need

SPED Entitleme

nt Decision

=Exclusionary Factors

www.oregonrti.org

SLD Decision Making

How confident would you be in using this method to make a student eligible

for special education under the SLD category?

What do you or your district need to do to gain confidence in using this

method?

www.oregonrti.org

Questions?

Break TimePlease remember to complete the evaluation form for this session

SLD Evaluation Process

Documents

PK ˝.ˆˆˇ SLD ˇ | PK ˝.ˆˆˇ SLD | PK ˝. ˆˇ SLD HIGHER

Process Evaluation

PK 21.501 SLD 1 | PK 24.001 SLD 5 | PK 21.501 SLD 3

SLD Booklet

SLD Motivation SLD Epitaxial Growth and Fabrication Carrier … · 2020. 2. 13. · SLD Motivation SLD Epitaxial Growth and Fabrication Ashwin K. Rishinaramangalam, Arman Rashidi,

Serv1830 Sld

BY THE SLD: This SLD

SLD Eligibility Guidance Document Web viewSLD Eligibility Guidance Document ... Determining a child eligible for SLD utilizing the RtI process requires the collection of data and

JrnSiiL & £ SLd

SLD-resolution Introduction Most general unifiers SLD-resolution Soundness Completeness

a job evaluation report....evaluation process

NC Teacher Evaluation Process. Teacher Evaluation Process

USAC Solicitation for Consulting Services to Support SLD ...€¦ · contractor to provide consulting services to support USAC’s Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) Business Process

Charlevoix-Emmet ISD Eligibility Guidelines Specific Learning Disability (SLD) Evaluation Procedures September, 2012

PK 21.501 SLD 1 | PK 21.501 SLD 3 | PK 24.001 SLD 5

PK 17.001 SLD 1 | PK 17.001 SLD 3 - Zapler

Experts Briefing Part 2 The Evaluation Process€¦ · Experts Briefing Part 2 The Evaluation Process. The Evaluation Process Your role as independent experts The Individual Evaluation

Personnel Evaluation Process

A Performance Evaluation of NoC-based Multicore Systems: From Trafﬁc Analysis …sld/publications/performanc… · · 2016-01-26Performance Evaluation of NoC-based Multicore Systems:

Introduction to Considerations in SLD Evaluation and ... · Introduction to Considerations in SLD Evaluation and Identification September 2011 Leah Nellis, Ph.D., Co-Project Director