Report

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 Norm-referenced test of academic 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 suspected disability (i.e., Basic Reading Skills, Reading Fluency, Reading 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 administered - _____________) Score on first probe administered / _____________ 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 administered - _____2_______) Score on first probe administered / ____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 • Excel Spreadsheet • RTI data graphing tool • TNSPDG.com or TnCore.org 20 Additional Considerations 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 Classroom performance, academic skills, language 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] www.TNSPDG.com Follow RTI² on Twitter @TnRti2 Contact Information Theresa Nicholls, Evaluation Services Coordinator [email protected] @NichollsTheresa Nathan Travis, Director of Data Services [email protected] @dnathantravis 25