### TASP Presentation Fall 2013 - Tennessee State Personnel

```Determining Eligibility Within Tennessee’s RTI²
Framework
TASP 2013 Fall Conference
Theresa Nicholls, Ed.S., NCSP
Evaluation Services Coordinator
Nathan Travis, Ed.S., NCSP
Director of Data Services
2
July 1, 2014: SLD Definition
3
“Dual Discrepancy”
 Performance Discrepancy (Underachievement) = Condition 1
• Level of performance
• Student’s performance is significantly discrepant from norm group
 Progress Discrepancy (Response to Intervention) = Condition 2
• Rate of progress
• Student’s progress is significantly discrepant from expected progress
4
Condition 1:
Underachievement
5
Condition 1: Underachievement
Sources of Data to Document Underachievement
Source
Criteria to Consider*
Performance on Universal Screening
(i.e. Benchmark assessment)
Median score ≤ 10th national percentile
Or
Median score which is 2.0 x deficient
compared to norm group
Terminal performance on progress
monitoring measures
Last three data points ≤ 10th national
percentile
Performance on State or district wide
assessments
Basic or Below Basic performance on state
mandated test in area of concern
achievement
Composite scores ≥ 1.25 standard
deviations below the mean in area of
suspected disability
*This information does not represent fixed rules to be used in determining eligibility;
rather it provides guidance to assist teams in drawing conclusions regarding a student’s
level of learning.
6
Ratio of Deficiency: Level
(i.e. The Gap)
How discrepant is the student’s performance?
Is Gap Significant?
_____________ /
_____________ =
_____________
Current benchmark
Expectation
Current performance
Current Gap
□ Yes □ No
7
Let’s Practice
Step One: Gap Analysis Worksheet
Student Score
Current Benchmark Expectation
2nd Grade Math Computation = 4 CD
2nd Grade Math Computation = 15 CD
8
Is Gap Significant?
____15_______ /
_____4________ =
____3.75______
Current benchmark
Expectation
Current performance
Current Gap
√Yes □ No
Conclusion: The student is 3.75 times deficient compared to other
students in a normative sample.
9
Normative Assessment
 In order to substantiate inadequate achievement, an individual,
standardized, and norm-referenced measure of academic achievement
must be administered after initial consent is obtained in the area of
Comprehension, Written Expression, Mathematics Calculation, and
Mathematics Problem Solving).
• Must correspond to the deficit area identified through tiered interventions
 Intensive intervention must occur within the tiers before inadequate
classroom achievement can be assessed.
 Research suggests that scores below the 10th national percentile (or
standard scores ≥ 1.25 standard deviations below the mean) are
considered significant.
10
Systematic Observations
 A pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance shall be
documented by two systematic observations in the area of suspected
disability.
 One may be conducted by a special education teacher and one must be
conducted by the School Psychologist or certifying specialist:
a. Systematic observation of routine classroom instruction, and
b. Systematic observation during intensive, scientific research-based or
evidence-based intervention.
11
Condition 2:
Response to Intervention
12
Decision Rules
 The Tennessee SLD criteria identifies two decision rules to inform
the IEP team analysis of progress monitoring data from
intensive, scientific research-based or evidence-based
intervention. A student’s rate of progress during intensive
intervention is insufficient if either of the following apply:
 The rate of progress is less than that of his/her same-age peers,
or
 The rate of progress is greater than his/her same-age peers but will
not result in reaching the average range of achievement in a
reasonable period of time.
13
Gap Analysis
 Analyze the “Dual Discrepancy”
• Step One: How far discrepant is the student’s performance? (Condition One)
• Step Two: How does the student’s progress compare to the progress needed to
“close the gap”? (Condition Two)
____________
End of year
benchmark
_________
/
Difference
-
_____________
Current performance
____________
=
Weeks left in the year
=
____________
Difference
_____________
Is this
reasonable*?
Rate of Improvement Needed
OR
□ Yes □ No
___________
Difference
/
_____________
Student’s Current ROI
=
_____________
Number of weeks to meet goal
14
Let’s Practice
Step Two: Gap Analysis
Student’s current performance:
4 Correct Digits
Student’s current rate of improvement
(ROI):
End of year benchmark expectation:
.18
Number of weeks left in the school year:
25 Weeks
20 Correct Digits
15
Gap Analysis
____20______
End of year
benchmark
___16____
/
Difference
-
_____4_______
Current performance
_____25_____
=
Weeks left in the year
=
_____16_____
Difference
_____.64______
Is this
reasonable*?
Rate of Improvement Needed
OR
□ Yes □ No
___16______
Difference
/
_____.18______
Student’s Current ROI
=
____89_______
Number of weeks to meet goal
16
Ratio of Deficiency: Rate
 Norm group ROI/ Student ROI = ratio of deficiency
• Step One: Determine Typical Rate of Improvement
(_____________
-
_____________)
Spring benchmark
expectation
/
______36______
_
Number of weeks
Fall benchmark
expectation
=
___________
Typical ROI (slope)
• Step Two: Determine Student’s Rate of Improvement
(_____________
Score on last probe
-
_____________)
Score on first probe
/
_____________
Number of
weeks
=
___________
Student ROI
(slope)
17
Let’s Practice
Student’s score on first probe administered:
2 CD
Student’s score on last probe administered:
4 CD
Fall benchmark expectation:
7 CD
Spring benchmark expectation:
20 CD
Number of weeks
11 Weeks
18
Ratio of Deficiency: Rate
• Step One: Determine Typical Rate of Improvement
(_____20______
-
Spring benchmark
expectation
_____7_______)
/
Fall benchmark
expectation
______36_____
=
Number of weeks
____.36_____
Typical ROI (slope)
• Step Two: Determine Student’s Rate of Improvement
(_____4_______
Score on last probe
-
_____2_______)
Score on first probe
/
____11_______
Number of
weeks
=
____.18_____
Student ROI
(slope)
 Ratio of Deficiency: .36/.18 = 2
• Conclusion: The student’s progress is 2 times deficient compared to the typical
rate of improvement
19
Statistical Methods for Calculating Rate of
Improvement
 Last Minus First
• Slope Formula
• ROI Worksheet
• Does not consider outliers
 Tukey Method
• Considers outliers but does not take into account all data in a series
• Calculate by hand
 Linear Regression
• Considered the most precise way to calculate Rate of Improvement.
• Software programs
• RTI data graphing tool
• TNSPDG.com or TnCore.org
20
 Variability in student’s scores: Most variability should be
explained by the trend line. In particular, approximately 80% of the
plotted data points should fall within 15% of the trend line. If this
is not the case, the team may need to consider other environmental
and/or motivational factors.
 Standard Error of Measurement: School teams should consider
confidence intervals and standard error or measurement when
making high stakes decisions, including eligibility determinations.
• This is a developing area of research
21
Condition 3:
Exclusionary Factors
22
Condition Three: Exclusionary Factors
Exclusionary Factor:
Visual, Motor, or Hearing Disability
Intellectual Disability
Emotional Disturbance
Cultural Factors
Environmental or Economic Factors
Limited English Proficiency
Excessive Absenteeism
Source of Evidence:
Sensory screenings, medical records, observation
development, adaptive functioning (if necessary), IQ
(if necessary)
Classroom observation, student records, family
history, medical information, emotional/behavioral
screenings (if necessary)
Level of performance and rate of progress compared
to students from same ethnicity with similar
backgrounds
Level of performance and rate of progress compared
to students from similar economic backgrounds,
situational factors that are student specific
Measures of language acquisition and proficiency
(i.e., BICs and CALPs), level of performance and rate
of progress compared to other ELL students with
similar exposure to language and instruction
Attendance records, number of schools attended
within a 3 year period, tardies, absent for 23% of
instruction and/or intervention
23
Resources
www.TNcore.org
[email protected]/* <![CDATA[ */!function(t,e,r,n,c,a,p){try{t=document.currentScript||function(){for(t=document.getElementsByTagName('script'),e=t.length;e--;)if(t[e].getAttribute('data-cfhash'))return t[e]}();if(t&&(c=t.previousSibling)){p=t.parentNode;if(a=c.getAttribute('data-cfemail')){for(e='',r='0x'+a.substr(0,2)|0,n=2;a.length-n;n+=2)e+='%'+('0'+('0x'+a.substr(n,2)^r).toString(16)).slice(-2);p.replaceChild(document.createTextNode(decodeURIComponent(e)),c)}p.removeChild(t)}}catch(u){}}()/* ]]> */
www.TNSPDG.com