To identify current practices in dropout prevention for students with disabilities in Florida

To acquire in-depth knowledge of the NDPC-SD Dropout Prevention Intervention Framework

2

“Following nearly 13,000 Philadelphia students over a number of years, researchers found that 60% of students in the study who dropped out of high-poverty schools could be identified by one or more of four indicators in the 6th grade:◦ Failing English◦ Failing math◦ Attending school 80% of the time or less◦ Receiving at least one out-of-school

suspension”Ballfanz, R., Herzog, G., & MacIver, D., in The Progress of Education Reform 2007: Dropout Prevention, July 2007, downloaded

December 30, 2009 from http://www.ndpc-sd.org/documents/ECS/ECS-Dropout-Prevention-2007.pdf.

The freshman year matters! 9th grade Red flags◦ Off-Track - Failing two or more semester courses

or accumulating less than the number of credits required to move to 10th grade◦ Failures - One or more failed courses◦ Grades/GPA - 2.0 or lower on a 4-point scale◦ Absences - Missing 10% or more of instructional

timeWhat Matters for Staying On-Track and Graduating in Chicago Public Schools: A Focus on Students with Disabilities, (December 8, 2010), downloaded January 28, 2010 from http://www.betterhighschools.org/webinar/default.aspx

5

SPP◦ Mandated by the

Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)◦ Developed for

2005-2010◦ Required of all

states◦ Updated annually

Submitted to OSEP annually. State determinations are made based on the

review of each state’s annual performance reports.

• APR– Reflects progress or

slippage in meeting the measurable and rigorous targets established in the SPP

– Includes revisions to the state’s targets, improvement activities, timelines or resources in the SPP and justifications for the revisions

Indicator 1 – Graduation rate Indicator 2 – Dropout rate Indicator 13 – Transition elements in the IEP Indicator 14 – Post-school outcomes

7

Quality IEPs Staying in School

GraduatingAchieving post-school outcomes

Paula Kohler, Welcome to Getting the GIST, February 2008

Post-School Outcomes~Indicator 14~

Postsecondary education and/or training Employment Independent living

Dropping Out~Indicator 2~

Why? Appropriate programs? Address student and family needs?

Graduation~Indicator 1~

Expectations and standards? Various pathways available? Linkage to post-school environments?

What’s the Quality of Our IEPs?~Indicator 13~

Measurable post-school and annual goals Transition-related assessments Course of study, services, and activities Coordination of services

Not so good? Good?

Why? Why Not?

Percent of youth who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they left school, and were:

A. Enrolled in higher education within one year of leaving high school.B. Enrolled in higher education or competitively employed within one year of leaving high school.C. Enrolled in higher education or in some other postsecondary education or training program; or competitively employed or in some other employment within one year of leaving high school.

2009-10: 56.7% Target2008-09: 50.4% (11,136/22,100) Actual

Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high school in 2008-09 with a regular diploma.◦ States must report using the graduation

rate calculation and timeline established by the Department under the ESEA.

2009-10: 43.5% Target

2008-09: 43.0% (10,836/25,203) Actual

New Baseline 43.0% (2007-08 rate)

Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school in 2008-09. ◦ The percentage of students in grades 9-

12 (from the year’s total enrollment) who have withdrawn from school and have been assigned a dropout withdrawal reason code.

2009-10: 3.75% Target

2008-09: 4.2% (5,202/122,688) Actual

100% percent of youth aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet the postsecondary goals.

◦ 2007-08: 24% of 389 IEPs reviewed met requirements◦ 2008-09: 61% of 601 IEPs reviewed met

requirements

Data reflects the total number of IEPs reviewed that met requirements.

◦ Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high school in 2007-08 with a regular diploma at a rate below the state target of 40.3% AND◦ Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high

school in 2007-08 at a rate above the state target of 4.0% AND◦ Districts with findings of systemic noncompliance

(greater than 75%) on the ESE Compliance Monitoring 2007-08 Self Assessment Transition (STB-16) AND◦ Percent of youth exiting in 2006-07 found

employed and/or in continuing education in fall of 2007-08 at a rate below the state target of 55.7%

14

Transition Indicators are like car tires…

…if they’re flat, you’re not going far.

Level 1 – all districts complete identified self-assessments

Level 2 – in addition to Level 1, newly selected targeted districts complete focused self-assessment

Level 3 – in addition to Levels 1 and 2, on-site monitoring

16

17

Use a systems focus to improve and facilitate the individual student focus

Think outside the box Implement a team problem-solving process Start at the elementary level Use evidence-based practices Increase family involvement

18

Seek and provide training, technical assistance, and support◦ FDOE – BEESS, Dropout Prevention◦ Discretionary projects – Project 10, FDLRS, FIN◦ Resources – National Centers, BEESS Weekly Memo

Develop, implement, and monitor a plan

19

The TAXONOMY forTRANSITION

PROGRAMMING

Student-Focused Planning•IEP Development•Student Participation•Planning Strategies

Family Involvement•Family Training•Family Involvement•Family Empowerment

Student Development•Life Skills Instruction•Career & Vocational Curricula•Structured Work Experience•Assessment•Support Services

Program Structure•Program Philosophy•Program Policy•Strategic Planning•Program evaluation•Resource Allocation•Human Resource Development

Interagency Collaboration•Collaborative Framework•Collaborative Service Delivery Kohler (1996)

Model for Extending Transition ResearchKohler, P., (February 2008). Florida Transition Steering Committee Presentation

Effective Transition Practices

Increase Capacity to Implement Effective Transition Practices

Facilitate Implementation of Effective Transition

Practices

Data-Based Decision Making

Professional Development

Policy Analysis and Change

Technical Assistance

File plan on General Supervision website◦ Data◦ Policies and Procedures◦ Training and Professional Development◦ Technical Assistance

Florida Department of EducationBureau of Exceptional Education and Student ServicesSheila.Gritz@fldoe.org(850) 245-0478

Sandra Covington SmithMay 25, 2010

Clemson UniversityNational Dropout Prevention Center for Students with Disabilities

© 2007 National Dropout Prevention Center for Students with Disabilities at Clemson University – All rights reserved

Data analysis

Matching of needs to evidence-based strategies

Development of plans and support for strategy implementation

Monitoring of adult practices and student progress

2626

27

Knowledge TransferTraining Modules

On-site Training

Coaching

Consultation

Increased Understanding

Expanded practices

Improved capacity

Increased School Completion

•What are the critical gaps to address?

•What EBPs best address the need?•What is my plan of action?

•Who drops out and Why?•What is working?•What do I need to change?•Did I reach my target?

Implement and Evaluate Data Analysis

Prioritize Needs

Select Matching

Interventions and Develop Action Plan

Essential Questions

29

Implement Plan & Collect Data

Understand the Research & Contextualize

Select Evidence-BasedStrategies &

Embed Family Engagement

Analyze School DataIdentify risk and

protective factorsStep 1 Step 2

Step 3Step 4

29

District and school demographics Student performance (graduation,

dropout, course completion, AYP) District/school infrastructure Assessment, curriculum, and

instructional systems Current initiatives and partnerships Professional development Parent/family engagement

Academic content and instruction (reading, math, science, writing)

Behavior (classroom management, behavior supports)

Attendance and truancy prevention School climate Self management (self determination,

problem solving) Mentoring (employment, service learning) Parent/family engagement

Identify any trends in the data over time◦ Which targets were made/missed last

year?◦ How about the year before?

Are things getting better or worse? See what patterns the data show

among the schools in the district Look for patterns among classes and

students at the school level Use the trends and patterns you see

to identify needs and determine level of intensity for interventions

Is the school meeting all of its students’ needs?

Do curriculum and instruction adequately address areas of weakness?

Are policies or procedures pushing students out?

What additional resources are needed at school?

Are there staff development and training needs?

What programs/interventions are now in place?◦ How are these working and why?

Once you’ve identified your school’s needs, try to prioritize them◦ Which one(s) are most critical and require

immediate intervention? …which can wait a while? …which might be solved by addressing another need?◦ Which ones can be addressed with the resources

available to you?◦ Remember that your plan probably can’t address

everything at once… Don’t try! Set practical, achievable goals: pick two or three issues to address at first. Develop your plan with a reasonable scope.

Developing a School Intervention Plan

Expand your core team to include other school & community members who can help maximize your likelihood of success◦ Identify your leader, determine roles &

responsibilities◦ Meet regularly, share ideas, keep the momentum

Work together and develop an improvement plan◦ Identify the desired outcomes, determine the

activities that will make it happen, develop timelines, and identify additional resources you will need and where/how to acquire the resources

Promote and facilitate the implementation of evidence-based strategies that support:◦ School attendance◦ Academic success◦ Prosocial behaviors◦ A positive school climate◦ Student engagement ◦ Parental involvement

The most frequent intervention strategies [that enhance school completion for students with disabilities] were categorized as academic engagement, psychosocial skills development, mentoring, and parent/teacher behavior management training.

The more promising practices appeared to involve academic or multi-component programs (Prevatt and Kelly, 2003)

Conduct baseline measures Train the teachers, staff and other people

who will be involved in the project Begin implementing the interventionsOngoing checks for fidelity of implementationOngoing data collection for progress

monitoring and documentation Report ongoing progress at school and to

the community – Share your successes!

Academic Achievement Attendance Behavior Family Engagement

But don’t forget to look at all the others!

Remember… Collect data at every step of the way!

This is the best way for you to be able to clearly demonstrate progress!◦ Baseline data◦ Ongoing measures of progress◦ Summative data at the end of a project cycle

© 2007 National Dropout Prevention Center for Students with Disabilities at Clemson University – All rights reserved

44