Revised SLD Criteria and Implementation Overview

1. Revised SLD Criteria and Implementation Overview Scott Brown DPI Consultant Special Education Team

2. Agenda • SLD Rule Overview • Exclusionary Factors • Inadequate Classroom Achievement • Insufficient Progress • Training Plans and Resources • Implications for Practice

3. Overview of the SLD Rule

4. Revised WI SLD Rule • Three Criteria: • Inadequate classroom achievement (after intervention) • Insufficient progress • Consideration of exclusionary factors • Sources of Data • Observation • Formal and informal assessment data • Documentation requirements

5. How Did We Get Here?

6. Definition of SLD Specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in an imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell or perform mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia and developmental aphasia. The term does not include learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, motor disabilities, cognitive disabilities, emotional disturbance, cultural factors, environmental, or economic disadvantage. PI 11.36(6)(a)

7. Eight Areas • oral expression • listening comprehension • written expression • basic reading skill • reading fluency • reading comprehension • mathematics calculation • mathematics problem solving

8. Math Achievement Areas Defined Math Calculation: knowledge and retrieval of mathematical facts and the application of procedural knowledge in computation Math Problem Solving: the ability to use decision-making skills to apply mathematical concepts and understandings to real world situations. It is the functional combination of computation knowledge and application knowledge, and involves the use of mathematical computation skills and fluency, reasoning, reading, and visual-spatial skills in solving problems. Essentially, it is applying mathematical knowledge at the conceptual level.

9. Additional Team Members • Licensed person qualified to assess data on individual rate of progress • Licensed person who implemented scientific, research-based or evidence-based, intensive interventions • Licensed person qualified to conduct individual diagnostic evaluations • Student’s general education teacher; or individual licensed to teach a student of the same age (required of all IEP teams) • One team member can serve multiple roles PI 11.36(6)(d)3.

10. Insufficient Progress ExclusionaryFactors Inadequate Classroom Achievement

11. Exclusionary Factors

12. Insufficient Progress ExclusionaryFactors Inadequate Classroom Achievement

13. Exclusionary Factors • Environmental or economic disadvantage, or cultural factors. • Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, math or any of the other possible areas of SLD being considered. • Limited English proficiency. • Other impairments. PI11.36(6)(d)1.

14. The IEP team may not identify a student with SLD if inadequate classroom achievement or insufficient progress is primarily due to an exclusionary factor. Applying Exclusionary Factors Exclusionary Factors

15. Inadequate Classroom Achievement

16. Insufficient Progress Exclusionary Factors Inadequate Classroom Achievement

17. Individually Administered Achievement Test • 1.25 SD cut score on reliable/valid test. • Must be administered after intensive intervention. • Same cut score standard applies regardless of intellectual ability. • Applies to each area of potential concern. PI 11.36(6)(6)1.

18. Insufficient Progress

19. Insufficient Progress ExclusionaryFactors Inadequate Classroom Achievement

20. Insufficient Progress • Insufficient response to intensive, scientific research-based or evidence-based interventions. • Progress monitoring data from at least 2 intensive interventions in EACH area of concern is required. • Baseline data and at least weekly progress monitoring is required. • Rate of progress is compared to same-age peers.

21. Insufficient Progress

22. Standards for ALL Intensive Interventions • Used with individual or small groups. • Focused on single or small number of discrete skills. • Include substantial number of instructional minutes beyond what is provided to all students. • Applied in a manner highly consistent with its design, closely aligned to student need. • Culturally responsive. PI 11.02(6m) PI 11.36(6)(f)4 Insufficient Progress Inadequate Classroom Achievement

23. Additional Standards for Interventions with Progress Monitoring • Must meet standards for all intensive interventions • ADDITIONAL features: • Scientific research-based or evidence-based (SRBI or EBI) • Closely aligned to individual learning needs (area of concern) • Implemented with adequate fidelity • Consistent with design • At least 80% of the recommended number of weeks, sessions, minutes • At least TWO interventions required for EACH area of concern PI 11.02(1), PI 11.36(6)(c)2.a. Insufficient Progress Inadequate Classroom Achievement

24. Intervention Examples Example A EXAMPLE B Intervention #1 Not SRBI or EBI Parent Permission given for testing SRBI or EBI #1 Academic Achievement Testing SRBI or EBI #2 Parent Permission given for testing SRBI or EBI #1 • Academic Achievement Testing SRBI or EBI #2

25. Where do we find scientific research-based interventions for the WI SLD Rule? Wisconsin Intensive Intervention Guide IES Practice Guides Other professional sources

26. Go to the Wisconsin RtI Center webpage: http://www.wisconsinrticenter.org/

27. From the “Educators” area, select “RtI in Action”

28. Select “Interventions”

29. Select “Wisconsin Intensive Intervention Selection Tool”

30. Read this introduction, then scroll down the page.

31. Choose Filters: Such as Type & Grade Level

32. Select “Filter;” Results for your selections will display

33. IES Practice Guides:www.http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc

34. Progress Monitoring What is progress monitoring? • A scientifically based practice to assess student response to intervention • Uses valid and reliable tools (probes) • Brief, direct measures of specific academic skills • Multiple equal or nearly equal forms • Sensitive to small changes in student performance • Provides valid, reliable measures of performance during intervention. PI 11.02 (9)

35. When is progress insufficient? • Progress is the same or less than same-age peers OR • Progress is greater than same-age peers but will not result in reaching the average range of achievement in a reasonable period of time OR • Progress is greater than same-age peers but the intensity of resources necessary to obtain this rate of progress cannot be maintained in general education

36. New Resource: SLD Data Graphing Toolhttp://sped.dpi.wi.gov/sped_ld

38. Determining Insufficient Progress

39. Interaction of RTI & SLD • Implementation of RTI is helpful but not required for compliance with SLD rule • Goal of RTI system is not to identify students for special education; the goal is to improve outcomes for ALL students. • Most direct intersection is documenting “insufficient progress” – one of the two of the required types of achievement data is progress monitoring data from at least 2 scientific, research/evidence based intensive interventions • This directly links general education/instructional support with special education eligibility • Special education referrals cannot be delayed • Timeline may be extended based on mutual agreement between school and parents

40. Training Plans and Resources

41. SLD Rule for School Teams

42. Spring SLD Workshops • April 4: CESA 12 • April 9: CESA 5 • April 11: CESA 4 • April 17: CESA 7 • April 30: CESA 10 • May 10: CESA 1 • May 17: CESA 2

43. 2012/13 School Year

44. Online Resources • DPI SLD Page: http://sped.dpi.wi.gov/sped_ld • Wisconsin Framework for RtI: http://rti.dpi.wi.gov/ • Read Wisconsin: http://www.readwisconsin.net/ • Wisconsin RTI Center: http://www.wisconsinrticenter.org/ • What Works Clearinghouse: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ • Doing What Works: http://dww.ed.gov/ • National Center on Intensive Intervention: http://www.intensiveintervention.org/

45. Practical Implications

46. Fidelity-Monitoring Resources for Interventions Intervention Central -> RTI Help • Intervention Integrity Part 1: Building Integrity into the Academic Intervention in the Design Phase • Critical Components Checklist • Intervention Integrity Part 2: Using Multiple Measures to Track the Quality With Which Interventions Are Carried Out • Intervention Contact Log • Intervention Script Builder • Selecting Methods to Track Intervention Integrity

47. Fidelity-Monitoring Resources for Interventions • Intervention Integrity Checklists: • SCRED, Iowa Heartland AEA and Joe Kovaleski(Scroll down page to Integrity Checklists) • Indiana University of Pennsylvania Dept. of Educational and School Psychology • Roles and responsibilities for ensuring fidelity • Ntl. Research Center for Learning Disabilities RtI manual – Section 4 -> Table 4.1[p.4.7]

48. Fidelity-Monitoring Resources for RtI Systems • Wisconsin RtI Center • Schoolwide Implementation Review (SIR) • Systems Coaching • MIBLSI Building Leadership Team Practice Profiles • National Center on RtI • RTI Essential Components Integrity Rubric • District RTI Capacity & Implementation Rubric and Worksheet

49. Thank You

50. Questions?