DARC Presentation from Special Education

1
DARC Presentation from Special Education

• November 27, 2006

2
Agenda

• Whats new in IDEIA 2004
• ASPIRE Grant overview
• D108 and RtI
• Additional information for future meetings

3
Whats new in IDEIA 2004 How we act upon
requests for evaluation

• The IDEA 1997 regulations allowed a service team
  to complete paperwork that indicated whether or
  not an evaluation would be conducted. That
  process is not included in the new regulations.
• IDEIA 2004 regulations say that a district has 14
  calendar days from the date of a request for
  evaluation to conduct a domain meeting.
• We hold a domain meeting to discuss which, if
  any, evaluation components need to be completed
  for an individual student in each of 8 domains
  (health, vision, hearing, social/emotional,
  general intelligence, academic performance,
  communication, and motor abilities).
• The parent, teacher, and service team members are
  invited.
• This meeting is not an IEP meeting, so no 10-day
  notice is needed.
• We now have 60 calendar days to complete the
  evaluation from date of signed parent consent,
  not 60 school days as with the old regulations.

4
Current D108 LD Eligibility Criteria

• Our district has not determined LD eligibility by
  using a strict discrepancy model for many years
• Our district service teams consider the
  difference between ability and achievement (the
  discrepancy) along with processing abilities,
  classroom performance, medical factors, and any
  other relevant student information.

5
Whats new in IDEIA 2004 LD Eligibility Criteria
under IDEIA 2004

• The federal law states that states must not
  require the use of a discrepancy model and must
  permit the use of response to intervention when
  developing their learning disability criteria.
• A learning disability exists if
• the student doesnt meet state standards
• doesnt progress in response to research-based
  intervention or has patterns of strengths and
  weaknesses relevant to a learning disability
• AND
• has no exclusionary factors (limited English
  proficiency, cultural factors, environmental or
  economic disadvantage, or other disability of VI,
  HI, PI, ED).
• A learning disability cannot be due to lack of
  appropriate reading instruction.
• The group must consider data to show appropriate
  regular education instruction by a highly
  qualified teacher and documentation of repeated
  achievement assessments of student progress
  during instruction that was provided to parents.
• Citation Federal Register 300.307, 300.309,
  300.310, 300.311

6
Whats new in IDEIA 2004 LD Eligibility Criteria
under IDEIA 2004 Continued

• Since LD is a neurologically-based definition,
  the District 108 service teams recommend
  continuing some degree of ability and processing
  evaluation, both to help determine eligibility
  and also to plan a course of intervention.

7
Response to Intervention (RtI) Model

• Response to Intervention (RtI) is now allowed by
  IDEIA. RtI is a three-tiered model with 3
  essential components at each levelinterventions,
  problem-solving method, and data collection to
  inform decisions. Students who are discrepant
  from other students in achievement and who fail
  to demonstrate significant improvement with
  high-quality general education programs and
  research-based interventions are considered for
  special education eligibility, or entitlement.

8
ASPIRE Grant Overview

• ISBE awarded this grant to Willow School to
  provide technical assistance, professional
  development, an external coach, and interventions
  to schools beginning to implement a
  problem-solving, or Response to Intervention
  (RtI) process.
• Fall, 2006 ASPIRE grant activities at Willow
  School
• Professional development and awareness for all
  staff members
• Core team identification and additional training
• Core team begins developing a school Constitution
  and Building Plan, which includes vision,
  outcomes, referral procedures, logistics,
  building resources, parent involvement, and data
  collection statements
• Ensure alignment of all grant activities with
  district ARC process (Example ARC
  problem-solving meeting)
• Basic RtI beliefs
• RtI is an integrated system of service delivery,
  not an eligibility system
• RtI is effective for students at risk of school
  failure, not limited to special education students

9
D108 and RtI

• The D108 ARC model includes many components of a
  Response to Intervention system now allowed by
  IDEIA 2004.
• The special education office conducted an RtI
  study last year and recommended continuing to
  monitor the development of ARC and IDEIA
  regulations, which finally were adopted and went
  into effect on Oct. 13, 2006.

10
D108 and RtI

• Many factors make this year a good opportunity to
  keep moving forward with RtI development in D108
  less ARC anxiety across the district, growing
  systems of support and intervention for students
  at the building level, and adopted federal
  regulations.
• The Willow ASPIRE grant also provides an
  excellent opportunity to investigate, prepare,
  and develop a Pekinized application of RtI that
  can be replicated in other schools in the future
• This moment in time is our best opportunity to
  investigate and make thoughtful decisions about
  developing an RtI model in D108 while this
  movement is occurring across the nation.
• The special education service teams will continue
  to gather federal and state information about RtI
  applications, will participate in the ASPIRE
  grant, and will continue to keep Cabinet and DARC
  informed.

11
Additional Information handouts today and
possibilities for future meetings

• Articulation between ARC and service teams
• Reviewed reading programs for core curriculum and
  targeted and intensive interventions
• Matrix of research-based reading interventions by
  grade and area of reading
• Chart of IDEIA 2004 timelines
• Discipline checklist