Data, Data, DATA!

The number of parent referrals for special education make me think that someone has written my email on the bathroom stall of every single establishment within the ten mile radius of my school. Better yet, there may have been a mailing or TV commercial.

As our latest cycle of SRBI interventions has begun, report cards are around the corner, and the 100th day of school came and went, I have had an influx of teacher requests for meetings to discuss testing. Often these students are behind academically and do present with some concerns. However, how do we triage to meet the needs of students in our building and on our caseload?! How do you "pick" which child gets tested first?!

My team is working to ensure that we have data to back up a referral, especially when you review eligibility guidelines (!), but often what teachers say is: 

They have been in Tier 3 since October and haven't made much progress!

This raises some red flags: (1) are they being provided with intensive, individualized instruction with fidelity?, (2) October was 4 months ago and since then we have had two vacations and 7 snow days, (3) what is "much progress?" how much? what's the trendline? do you have graphs (!), (4) have we changed up the intervention if they are not making expected gains to ensure we are pinpointing the correct skills?

My school leans towards two measures of progress monitoring data: DIBELS ORF and Cloze Maze. I have concerns with this. Interventions are not always targeting student needs. Not all teachers are doing Tier 1 probes beyond the Fountas and Pinnell and rely heavily on the ORF and Cloze Maze to track progress. What about the Core Phonics Survey? Developmental Spelling Assessment? ANY OTHER CBM MEASURE!!??

Please check out this resource from Elmbrook Schools on progress monitoring: here. 

After you have done your diligence to collect some data, these kids are often trumped by parent requests that come through. I am required to schedule a Planning and Placement Team meeting within a reasonable time (i.e., 5 days). This may bump kids down the list until our staff is more available to be able to meet testing demands. However, as we enter into Annual Review season, I do not forsee my schedule freeing up any time soon. #lesigh

So...what's a first year school psych to do? 

This young professional has been seeking supervision and attempting to keep her supervisor apprised of all the referrals coming through and where our testing load is at. However, this is not necessarily a building-based issue; our entire department is struggling. 

I really feel that there is a systemic change that needs to occur, even if in our building alone. I have been probing to start the conversation about examining our tiered supports and see if we need to strengthen Tier 1, as well as our Tiers 2 and 3. We also need to educate staff and parents about the types of data we need to collect and to ensure that the interventions we provide are targeting skills. Moving between tiers should be based on DATA not on the length of time spent in an intervention, especially when jumping to special ed. Some kids might just need tiered levels of support; doesn't make them special ed!

Does anyone have any advice to share about how to deal with this issue or the system you have in your schools?

Until next thyme, 

Erika

New State, New Rules

So. Here we are. Week Three. Only 922 hours left to go (give or take).

Not a whole lot has changed since my last post. Things are still relatively slow, but this could also be a result of the shortened weeks I’ve had. Thanks to Labor Day, going back to Boston, Rosh Hashanah, and Yom Kippur I have yet to/will not have a full week this month. I know, I live a difficult life :)

Something I have been really trying to sink my teeth into is the differences (and similarities) between my home training state (Massachusetts) and my current internship state (Connecticut). They are two different ways of approaching Response to Intervention (RtI) and special education, but are united by the foundational principles and Federal Laws and Regulations.

Here in CT, IEP meetings are actually called Planning and Placement Team meetings (PPT’s for short). I did some research as to the whole process to understand it from the student support team level to the referral process and special education eligibility.

As in many other states, Connecticut is working to develop a Scientific Research-Based Intervention framework (SRBI aka RtI). SRBI looks just like the mainstream notion of RtI, three tiers and all. As a refresher: Tier One includes universal interventions available to all students; Tier Two includes extra support for students in addition to the general education curriculum; and Tier Three includes more intensive and individualized instruction for children who need more support. The tiers are meant to be fluid, allowing children to move between them as needed. That means schools are NOT to label a child as a “Tier Two kid.” Instead, the child may receive Tier Two support in only math and access the rest of his education as would be expected. Also, Tier Two and Three interventions are meant to be short-term and catch students up in areas they may be falling behind. Constant data collection is essential in order to determine whether or not an intervention is working. Depending on student response to Tier Three interventions, the TEAM determines whether or not the special education evaluation process would be necessary.

(Image from Using Scientific Research-Based Interventions: Improving Education forAll Students)

So, this all sounds familiar, right? Good.

Now its time to trip you up… just a little.

Once a referral gets made, either by the teacher or parent, a PPT is scheduled and notice is given 5 school days prior. But wait! A new special education law in CT mandates that a Pre-PPT meeting be held for initial evaluations to go over the PPT process and parent concerns. This can be held immediately before the referral PPT and can include only the coordinator and/or other key people.

At the referral PPT meeting the TEAM determines whether or not an initial evaluation is necessary. This would be the time to pull out the data you had been collecting during the intervention periods according to SRBI. If the TEAM decides to go forward then the consent is signed at the meeting for the appropriate evaluations (e.g., psychological, educational, speech, etc). At this point in time the school has 30 school days to complete the evaluations. Once the evaluations have been completed within the given time, the PPT will meet again to go over the results. Parents have the right to evaluations two days prior to this meeting. At this PPT meeting the TEAM must decide whether or not the student is eligible for special education, and if so under what disability category. The TEAM will then discuss appropriate goals and service delivery in order to help the student make academic/social/emotional/behavioral progress. It is important that the implementation dates are accurate on the student’s IEP.

After the PPT meeting the IEP must be sent to the parents within 5 school days. The timeline between the completion of the evaluation and the receipt of the IEP is 45 school days. After the receipt of the IEP, parents/guardians have 30 days to respond to either accept or reject the plan in whole or part. Once the parent responds accepting the IEP, the school will implement the proposed services. Based on this timeline it has been recommended that the implementation date be listed as five school days after the meeting date. It is also important to note that the implementation date and end date of services are the same thing. The end date should not be the next meeting date. This allows services from a previous IEP to continue while the school awaits acceptance of the new IEP, thus remaining in compliance.

Now, this isn’t that confusing or different. (Although, the IEPs look incredibly different!). The same premise still exists, as well as all mandated timelines. The major differences between MA and CT process are the Pre-PPT and referral PPT meeting.

(Image from IEP Manuals and Forms)

For more information on the CT Planning and Placement Team process, check out the following resources:

A Parent’s Guide to Special Education

Using Scientific Research-Based Interventions: Improving Education for All Students 

IEP Manual and Forms 

Special Education Timeline 

Until next thyme,

Erika