1 / 59

Ardmore City Schools

Ardmore City Schools. Inclusive Education. Inclusion District Participants. Charles Evans Elementary Mrs. Denise Brunk , Principal Mr. Jake Falvey, Assistant Principal Mrs. Kara Wendell, Assistant Principal Charles Evans Elementary Teachers and Students Jefferson Elementary

kana
Download Presentation

Ardmore City Schools

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ardmore City Schools Inclusive Education

  2. Inclusion District Participants Charles Evans Elementary Mrs. Denise Brunk, Principal Mr. Jake Falvey, Assistant Principal Mrs. Kara Wendell, Assistant Principal Charles Evans Elementary Teachers and Students Jefferson Elementary Mrs. Kristie Jessop, Principal Jefferson Elementary Teachers and Students Lincoln Elementary Mrs. Ellen Patty, Principal Lincoln Elementary Teachers and Students Mr. Sonny Bates, Mrs. Missy Storm, Superintendent Assistant Superintendent

  3. What is inclusion? Inclusion is the welcoming and acceptance of all students to participate in the general education classroom without being separated from their peers.

  4. The Basic Foundation • Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) • Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) • Services • Accommodations/Modifications • 504 or Individual Education Plan (IEP) • Differentiation

  5. Free Appropriate Public Education • FAPE is defined as “the provision of regular or special education and related aids and services that are designed to meet individual needs of handicapped persons as well as the needs of non-handicapped persons are met and based on adherence to procedural safeguards outlined in the law.” 34 CFR 300.101

  6. Least Restrictive Environment • To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are not disabled, and special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. • 34 C.F.R. §300.114(a)].

  7. Why are we participating in inclusion at Ardmore City Schools? • Higher expectations for student participation • Reduce transition between classes • Implementation of Common Core Standards • Overuse of Oklahoma Modified Alternative Assessment Program (OMAAP) in the state of Oklahoma • Phasing out of the OMAAP assessment in math and reading • Rigorous instruction in general education classrooms

  8. What Does Inclusion look like?

  9. Every educator is committed to the goal of helping all students achieve their potential. There is cohesive cooperation among all teachers. Special education does not exist as a separate entity. Differentiation is considered the rule, not the exception. The term inclusion is rarely needed because it is such an integral part of the school culture.

  10. What instructional strategies are in place for inclusion at Ardmore City Schools? • Curriculum Mapping • Teacher Collaboration • Title Programs • REAC3H • Increase in personnel • Technology • Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID)

  11. Accommodations • Accommodations – Changes in materials or procedures that enable students to meaningfully access instruction and assessment. Assessment accommodations do not change the construct that is being measured. •Accommodations mediate the effects of a student’s disability and do not reduce learning expectations.

  12. Modifications • Modifications – Changes in materials or procedures that enable students to access instruction and assessment. Assessment modifications do change the construct that is being measured. •Modifications create challenges for assessment validity

  13. Differentiation What is it? • Consistently using a variety of instructional approaches to modify content, process, and/or products in response to learning readiness and interest of academically diverse students Tomlinson, C. (2009). The goals of differentiation. In M. Scheerer, Ed. Supporting the whole child: Reflections on best practices in teaching, learning, and leadership. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, pp3-11.

  14. Why is it important? • Regardless of ability level, the majority of students are spending more and more time within a general education setting. With this trend comes a vast level of student interests, readiness and learning styles and therefore teachers need to accommodate their curriculum to meet the needs of ALL students.

  15. Did he show differentiation?

  16. Challenges during our journey… Scheduling, IEP Content and Paperwork -Special Education Teachers daily schedules -Paraprofessionals schedules -General Education Teachers class schedules -The service pages of the IEP had to be reviewed and revised. -There were inconsistencies with the IEP correlating with the class schedules and special education teacher -Paraprofessional’s schedule

  17. Parent and teacher concerns Parents who did not agree with inclusion. Difficulty explaining inclusion to parents. Parents requesting their child continue to be “pulled out” of the general education classroom. Parents’ complaints with the state department. How Students with Disabilities are being supported in an inclusive classroom General education and special education teachers who were not confident in the process of inclusion. Special education teachers no longer have “their own classroom.”

  18. Services Page of the IEP(Continuum of Placement) • Regular class full time (more than 80% of the day) • Part time classes (40-79% of the day including lab/resource) • Less than 40% of the day in a regular setting • Separate class (full time) • Special school/homebound/correctional facility

  19. Questions of accountability • Who teaches what? • What is the role of the paraprofessional? • Are the paraprofessionals co-teaching? • Transition from the OMAAP to OCCT • “They can’t pass that test. Why do they have to take the regular test.” • Teacher referrals for initial Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) and Intellectual Disabilities (ID) • Increase in the ID classrooms. • Put all ID students in the ID classroom • iPads, what if the general education students break one of my iPads?

  20. Who is responsible? • Who is really the teacher of record? • Who assigns the grades? • Who will be accountable for their OCCT/OMAAP test scores? • Board Meeting attendance increased from the general public mostly consisting of the general education teachers who were in protest of inclusion.

  21. Staffing, Funding and Transitions Personnel - Staffing Transitions Increase in funding to support the extra personnel. ($$$) There was a delay in posting the positions, interviewing and completing the process with board action. With the delay there was concern of compliance and the IEP. Increase of enrollment district wide of students on an IEP indicating special education teachers being over caseload Service times scheduled during restroom breaks and transition to elective classes.

  22. General Education teacher concerns about discipline of students with disabilities (SWD) • Lack of confidence in behavioral procedures for SWD. • General education teachers are no longer allowed to send the students with an IEP to the resource room for a time-out. • Teachers sense of being unqualified to deal with this population. • It takes most of my day to give them extra instruction. • Consistency of district policy of discipline for SWD. • Who is making the modifications for these students? • I’m calling the state department. • General frustration about where the training will come from to help prepare the them for inclusion.

  23. Teacher Apprehensions Limitations Benefits • Distractions to the nondisabled students by having the extra person in the classroom talking at the same time. • Students on an IEP will not ask for help. • Grouping all students with an IEP together in the seating chart. • Access to curriculum • Inclusive learning with same age peers • Smaller teacher-student ratio (due to 2 teachers) therefore access to immediate clarification • Better opportunity to include students who are considered “at risk”

  24. 504 Plans vs. the IEP • Not all students who have disabilities require specialized instruction. • For students with disabilities who do require specialized instruction, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) controls the procedural requirements, and an IEP is developed. • The IDEA process is more involved than that of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and requires documentation of measurable growth on the IEP.

  25. Why a 504 Plan? • For students with disabilities who do not require specialized instruction but need the assurance that they will receive equal access to public education and services, a document is created to outline their specific accessibility requirements. • Students with 504 Plans do not require specialized instruction, but, like the IEP, a 504 Plan should be updated annually to ensure that the student is receiving the most effective accommodations for his/her specific circumstances • https://www.washington.edu/doit/Stem/articles?52

  26. Success What does successful Inclusion look like?

  27. Including Samuelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-Ex0vtklY0

  28. The Framework • For Inclusion and Co-Teaching to be successful, a framework needs to be in place. This includes a vision and mission statement as well as a step by step process, timeline and who is responsible for each specific area of the program.

  29. NWEA Test Scores ComparisonGains and Losses

  30. Mathematics: Comparisons of Winter 2011 to Winter 2012Gains and/or Losses * Denotes post inclusion results

  31. Math – Gains and/or Losses2011-2012 Note: Gains at all three sites in 4th grade level. Note: Gains at all grade levels at Jefferson.

  32. Math – Gains and/or Losses

  33. Reading: Comparison of Winter 2011 to Winter 2012Gains and/or Losses

  34. Reading – Gains and/or Losses2011-2012 Note: All grade levels from different sites showing a gain.

  35. Reading – Gains and/or Losses2011-2012

  36. Projections Mathematics 3-Year Projections based on the Jefferson Model Reading 3-Year Projections based on the Charles Evans Model

  37. Charles EvansMathematics 3-Year Projected Gains

  38. Charles Evans Mathematics 3-Year Projected Gains

  39. LincolnMathematics 3-Year Projected Gains

  40. Lincoln Mathematics 3-Year Projection

  41. JeffersonMathematics 3 Year Projected Gains

  42. JeffersonMathematics 3 Year Projected Gains

  43. Charles EvansReading 3-Year Projected Gains

  44. Charles EvansReading 3-Year Projected Gains

  45. LincolnReading 3-Year Projected Gains

  46. LincolnReading 3-Year Projected Gains

  47. JeffersonReading 3-Year Projected Gains

  48. JeffersonReading 3-Year Projected Gains

  49. 5th Grade Student Survey Results

  50. I believe having students who learn differently than me in the same classroom as me has been rewarding for me and for the students who learn differently. • Agree 48% • Indifferent 44% • Disagree 6%

More Related