Instructing Students  with Complex Support Needs Within a Standards Aligned System

Instructing Students with Complex Support Needs Within a Standards Aligned System PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 178 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

PaTTAN's Mission. The mission of the Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network (PaTTAN) is to support the efforts and initiatives of the Bureau of Special Education, and to build the capacity of local educational agencies to serve students who receive special education services.. 2. PDE

Download Presentation

Instructing Students with Complex Support Needs Within a Standards Aligned System

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


1. Instructing Students with Complex Support Needs Within a Standards Aligned System July 14, 2011 AYP Conference State College PA

2. PaTTAN’s Mission The mission of the Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network (PaTTAN) is to support the efforts and initiatives of the Bureau of Special Education, and to build the capacity of local educational agencies to serve students who receive special education services. 2

3. PDE’s Commitment to Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) Our goal for each child is to ensure Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams begin with the general education setting with the use of Supplementary Aids and Services before considering a more restrictive environment. 3

4. Objectives Participants will define a process for aligning instruction for students with complex support needs to grade level content and standards Participants will identify participation options that provide access to grade level content while addressing the instructional level of targeted students 4

5. Objectives Participants will define strategies for embedding instruction of individualized high priority functional goals within the context of general education curriculum. 5

6. Students 6 Think Pair Share – Who are students with complex support needs? Think Pair Share – Who are students with complex support needs?

7. Students with Complex Support needs: Are those student with disabilities who comprise about 1 – 2 % of all students; and, Are most often are assessed via the PASA, rather than the PSSA; and, May include students who have intellectual disabilities and/or may need life skills support, multiple disabilities support, autistic support or physical support; and, May require augmentative communication systems and assistive technology in order to access, participate and progress in learning. 7

8. Students and Learning Presume Competence Viewing students through the lens of abilities will increase the likelihood of nurturing individual talents and providing all students the opportunities to learn what other students their age are learning in the general education classroom. (adapted from Jorgensen, McSheehan & Sonnenmeier, 2007) 8 purple is stated in terms of what people can do instead of in terms of disability purple is stated in terms of what people can do instead of in terms of disability

9. Competence and Communication The ability to talk is not as important as the ability to communicate 9

10. Competence and Instruction Rigorous Instruction Aligned to Grade Level Content Standards Should Occur In All Settings 10

11. Where are we now? Standards Aligned Content Driven Functional Skill Focus for some students 11

12. IDEA A statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services, based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable, to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child, and a statement of the program modifications or supports for school personnel that will be provided to enable the child-- (i) To advance appropriately toward attaining the annual goals; (ii) To be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section, and to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities; and (iii) To be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and nondisabled children in the activities described in this section; [§300.320(4)] 12

13. IDEA A statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services, based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable, to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child, and a statement of the program modifications or supports for school personnel that will be provided to enable the child-- (i) To advance appropriately toward attaining the annual goals; (ii) To be involved in and make __________in the _______________________in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section, and to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities; and (iii) To be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and nondisabled children in the activities described in this section; [§300.320(4)] 13

14. What can access to the general education curriculum look like for a student with complex support needs? 14

15. Accessing the General Education Curriculum 15

16. Accessing the General Education Curriculum 16

17. Supports that Provide Opportunities for Student Achievement Collaboration Consideration of Instructional Design, Delivery and Assessment Embedding Functional Skills per the IEP Teaching Self-Determination Skills 17

18. Partnerships Create and Support Partnerships Between General and Special Education 18

19. Realities Professionals may have limited opportunities to collaborate General educators focus on the delivery of grade level content curriculum Special educators focus on specially designed instruction across grade levels 19

20. Realities Not all special educators have access to a general educator 20

21. Possible Solutions Create connections and shared knowledge between general and special education Increase special educator knowledge of grade level general education curriculum (SAS) Increase general educator knowledge of specially designed instruction and differentiation. General and special educators implement a process to develop and deliver instruction linked to grade level general education curriculum to all students, including those with IEPs. 21

22. Achievement for Students with Complex Support Needs 22

23. Aligning to Content Standards 23

24. Instructional Design Standards Aligned System Understanding Depth of Knowledge Defining Level of Communication 24

25. Instructional Design Considerations Determine the learning target aligned to grade level content Define the student’s instructional level 25

26. Accessing Grade Level Content, Standards and Curriculum All students What are the desired outcomes? Have the principles of universal design been considered when designing units/lessons for all? What classroom based assessment is planned? Target student with Complex Support Needs Which outcomes will be prioritized for direct instruction and monitoring? What will formative assessment look like? What supports & strategies are needed to address barriers? What IEP goals can be addressed? 26

27. 27 Thinking About Content

28. 28 Content Curriculum Framework Big Ideas Concepts Competencies Essential Questions

29. Reducing Complexity Depth of Knowledge 29

30. Depth of Knowledge This is what we ‘do’ with information 30

31. 31

32. 32 Why Depth of Knowledge? No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requires assessments to “measure the depth and breadth of the state academic content standards for a given grade level” (U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 12)

33. 33 Depth of Knowledge Webb’s Depth of Knowledge levels: Recall and Reproduction: Level 1 Skills & Concepts: Level 2 Strategic Thinking: Level 3 Extended Thinking: Level 4

34. Let’s Take a Closer Look Activity 34

35. Near links & far links 35

36. Let’s begin with the instructional level What do we know about target student’s strengths and skills?? 36

37. Communication How does the student communicate? 37

38. Next we need to have our target Big Idea Identified Concepts and Competencies Identified IEP Goals and Objectives Depth of Knowledge Identified 38

39. Are all students expected to demonstrate learning of grade referenced academic content? Is it academic? Content referenced: reading, math, science Is the learning target typical of a student the same age working on the same content? Is the level of performance typical of a student the same age working on the same content? Is it meaningful? 39

40. Is it what we think it is? Looking at how complexity builds to fully meet the standard Initial activity Building knowledge and skills Meeting the standard 40

41. Is it what we think it is? Looking at how complexity builds to fully meet the standard Initial activity – learning target may be linked to a similar standard from another grade level and is considered a Far Link Building knowledge and skills Meeting the standard – learning target is linked to the appropriate grade level standard and is considered a Near Link 41 I I

42. Linking to the Grade Level Content Standards: 8th Grade Students: Algebra and Functions Competencies: Use linear functions, linear equations, and linear inequalities to represent, analyze, and solve a variety of problems Use the appropriate graphical data representation and extend understanding of the influence of scale in data interpretation. 42

43. Is it what we think it is? Is it academic/mathematics? Is the task typical of a student the same age working on the same content? Is the level of performance typical of a student the same age working on the same content? 43

44. Is it what we think it is? 44

45. Is it what we think it is? Is it academic/mathematics? Is the task typical of a student the same age working on the same content? Is the level of performance typical of a student the same age working on the same content? 45

46. Is it what we think it is? 46

47. Is it what we think it is? Is it academic/mathematics? Is the task typical of a student the same age working on the same content? Is the level of performance typical of a student the same age working on the same content? 47

48. Is it what we think it is? 48

49. Key Components For Planning That Will Guide Instruction Identify the Learning Target (Standard and/or Big Idea) Know What All Students are Expected to KNOW and DO With the Content Know Each Student’s Receptive and Expressive Communication Level 49

50. Key Components For Planning That Will Guide Instruction Aim for the Target by Building From the Instructional Level (Near and Far Links) Assess, Assess, Make Changes, Assess to Mastery of the Learning Target 50

51. Planning Document: Know Your Targets 51

52. Planning Document: Know Your Targets 52

53. Planning Document: Considering Near and Far Links 53

54. Planning Document: Considering the IEP 54

55. Sample IEP Goals Student will demonstrate effective use of vocabulary to build upon social and academic knowledge as documented in 8 out of 10 opportunities Student will be able to answer questions by collecting, representing and analyzing data as demonstrated in 8 out of 10 opportunities 55

56. Instructional Delivery Universal Design for Learning Participation Options for Individual Students Rethinking Functional 56

57. Guiding Questions Is the student actively participating in each part of the instructional activity? Are the activities moving the student toward outcomes linked to the grade level content standard? Can the student access instruction? Is targeted information provided in student’s mode of communication? Can the student interact with instruction and materials? Does the student have the means to demonstrate knowledge, skills, and concepts acquired? What will engage the student in the activity? How will the student remain motivated long enough to learn? 57

58. 58

59. 59

60. Menu of Functional Skills Read Accessing information Receptive Communication Vocabulary/Concept development Comprehension Find information Read: Receptive communication Asking questions/asking for help Expressive communication Record information Writing Expressive communication Follow directions Listening Receptive Communication Comprehension Contribute/Share ideas Turn taking Expressive communication Work with others Social interactions 60

61. Assessment Considerations Formative Summative Diagnostic Benchmark 61

62. Assessment Considerations Use informal assessment to guide instruction Does the assessment cause us to change ‘how’ we are instructing to ensure the student meets the target Ensure assessment is measuring the identified target Are we measuring the achievement linked to the content or ‘what’ the student is doing functionally to reach the content Align assessments to the assessments that may be used by all Reduce the complexity but maintain the depth of knowledge 62

63. What might formative assessments look like? Response cards: Use of picture/object cues instead of written words Whip Around: Student participates with pre-programmed/pre-selected message with his/her assistive technology device Compare and Contrast: Match picture/object cues and sort into the determined classifications See and Speak: Using a diagram and locate or label specific components Completion of an oral presentation with visual/supporting cues (including the assessed facts) using the student’s preferred means of communication 63

64. Formative Assessment during Instruction Three minute Pause - Provides a chance for students to stop, reflect on the concepts and ideas that have just been introduced, make connections to prior knowledge or experience, and seek clarification Pair a student with complex support needs with a student without a disability to elicit feedback. Adults providing support to the student with a disability should facilitate the interaction between peers rather than eliciting the response. 64

65. Formative Assessment after Instruction Ticket Out the Door: A ticket out the door is aligned to the content determined for the student with complex support needs. The method or mode of this ticket is matched to the student’s strength and means of communication. 65

66. Summative Assessment Using student’s main mode of communication, the summative assessment may look similar to the formative assessment tools Assess over time 66

67. Accountability is MOST important!!!! 67

68. References Browder, D. M., Spooner, F., Wakeman, S. Y., Trela, K., & Baker (2006). Aligning instruction with academic content standards: Finding the link. . Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 309–321. Carter, E. W., & Kennedy, C. H. (2006). Promoting access to the general curriculum using peer support strategies. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 284–292. Cushing, L. S., Carter, E. W., Clark, N. M., & Kennedy, C. H.  (2011). Effects of peer support interventions on the social interactions and learning of students with and without severe disabilities. Unpublished raw data. Lee, S.H., Wehmeyer, M.L., Palmer, S.B., Soukup, J.H., & Little, T. D. (2008). Self-determination and access to the general education curriculum. The Journal of Special Education, 42, 91-107. Spooner, F., Dymond, S. K., Smith, A., & Kennedy, C. (2006). What we know and need to know about access the general curriculum for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 277–283. 68

69. References Wehmeyer, M. L., Field, S., Doren, B., Jones, B., & Mason, C. (2004). Self-determination and student involvement in standards-based reform. Exceptional Children, 70, 413-425. Wehmeyer, M. L., Smith, S., & Davies, D. (2005). Technology use and students with intellectual disability: Universal design for all students. In D. Edyburn, K. Higgins, & R. Boone (Eds.), Handbook of special education technology research and practice (pp. 309–323). Whitefish Bay, WI: Knowledge by Design. Wehmeyer, M. L., Smith, S., Palmer, S., & Davies, D. (2004). Technology use by students with intellectual disabilities: An overview. Journal of Special Education Technology, 19(4), 7–22. 69

70. Contact Information www.pattan.net Sharon L. Leonard Educational Consultant [email protected] Jeannine H. Brinkley State Lead Inclusive Practices [email protected] 70

  • Login