ACSIP – Special Education
ACSIP – Special Education Trigger Rubric
2009-2010
District: Building:
Date Reviewed: Reviewed by:
Approved:
List District Special Education Triggers:
additional information needed (AIN)
| |Yes |No |AIN |
|1. The plan contains a special education priority | | | |
|Comments and Examples: |
| |
|List special education priority on district and building plans |
|Examples: |
|One: Special Education: Identification |
|Two or More: Special Education: Identification and Disability Category |
|2. The school collects & analyzes data related to the special education priority: | | | |
|sources of data (one must be Special Education Focused Monitoring Data [SEFMD]) | | | |
|Comments and Examples: |
| |
|1. The district plan must have three years of Special Education Focused Monitoring Data listed in the data section of the plan as well as other data|
|that relate to contributing factors associated with the trigger at district and school building levels. (See building level data analysis handout |
|for examples of additional data at the building level for the trigger on disproportionality.) |
| |
|2. Data must be analyzed with regard to contributing factors for each district trigger area. |
| b. data analysis identifies school/district weaknesses in triggered area(s): | |
|identification | | | |
|disability category | | | |
|least restrictive environment | | | |
|discipline | | | |
|Comments and Examples: |
| |
|Data need to be analyzed with regard to contributing factors (weaknesses) as to why the district may have triggered in a particular trigger area. |
|This is done for each trigger area. Data gathering and analysis should begin at the building level and be summarized in the district plan. |
| |
|It is important to gather and analyze building level data and analyze data as to possible contributing factors at that level before including data |
|in the supporting data section of the special education priority area in the district level plan. |
| |
|Following the analysis of building level data with regard to contributing factors analysis, a hypothesis (tentative cause or causes for why the |
|district triggered in a specific area) is agreed upon by the district level committee as to why the district triggered in a particular area. |
| |
|Example: Identification - Building Level Data Analysis: |
| |
|Does the data analysis indicate whether or not the building level population is characterized by a disproportionate ratio of white to African |
|American students receiving special education services? Have possible contributing factors such as student mobility, pre-referral and referral |
|policies and practices, and or general instructional environments responsive to students at risk for failure in those environments been identified? |
| |
|Based on this analysis, interventions are identified to reduce the disproportionate ratio of white to African American students receiving special |
|education services at the building level. |
| | | | |
|3. Goals have been determined for each trigger. | | | |
|Comments and Examples: |
| |
|A goal is stated for each special education trigger area separately. If the district is triggered in two areas such as, discipline and LRE, there |
|should be a separate goal for each area listed under the Goal section of the protocol. |
| |
|The goal for Identification should be stated in terms of the relative proportion of American students to white students, not in percentages or |
|numbers of African American students. (See following Comments and Examples) |
| |
| |
| |
|4. Benchmarks for each trigger have been determined & are linked to goals. | | | |
|Comments and Examples: |
| |
|A benchmark is stated for each special education trigger Goal. If the district is triggered in two areas such as, least restrictive environment and|
|discipline, there should be a separate benchmark for each area listed under the Benchmark section of the protocol. |
| |
|The benchmark should include achievement and time criteria. |
| |
|Examples: |
| |
|LRE: The school district will perform within one standard deviation of the state average in the percentage of its special education students |
|receiving 80% or more of their education in general education settings by the end of the 200X-200X school year. |
| |
|Discipline: The school district will perform within one standard deviation of the state average in the number of special education students it |
|suspends/expels compared to its general education students by the end of the 200X-200X school year. |
| |
|Identification: The school district will reduce the relative proportion of African-American students and white students receiving special |
|educations services to within one standard deviation of the state average by the end of the 200X-200X school year. |
|5. Scientifically based research intervention(s) have been determined for each trigger. | | | |
|Comments and Examples: |
| |
|An educational intervention is a description of a set of procedures/activities for positive change in academic, behavioral, and social learning |
|environments for all students that incorporates collaboration of: |
|School resources, which may include: principals, teachers, counselors, academic coaches, nurses, custodians, cafeteria workers, and bus drivers, |
|home and community resources. |
|Home resources which may include: parents, grandparents, siblings and other significant others. |
|Community resources, which may include: churches, parents groups, school board, PTA, libraries, local civic organizations, county health and mental|
|health organizations, and local government administration. |
| |
|Intervention(s) selected for inclusion into the school improvement plan to address the special education trigger should be based on the building |
|level school improvement committee’s data analysis re contributing factors to the identified trigger area (s). |
|Intervention(s) chosen to be implemented at the building level should be documented with research related to the effectiveness of the intervention |
|regarding the special education trigger with which the intervention is associated. |
| |
|Some example of interventions that might be used in addressing trigger areas of Identification, LRE, and Discipline are: |
|Co-teaching model |
|Differentiated instruction model |
|Cross-age tutoring |
|Positive behavioral supports model |
|Problem-solving teams (Examples) |
|Teacher Assistance Teams |
|School-Based Pre-referral Intervention Teams (SPRINT Team) |
|School and community mentoring program |
|School Based mental health program |
|In-school and after academic tutoring programs |
|Review of pre-referral, referral, evaluation, and placement procedures |
| |
|It is important to note that the above are only few examples of many different interventions that are appropriate in addressing special education |
|trigger areas. |
|6. For each intervention, actions are written in multiple, sequential steps of sufficient detail to describe the | | | |
|implementation & maintenance of the interventions. | | | |
|Comments and Examples: |
| |
|Actions are associated with each intervention. Action statements should be of sufficient detail to describe the implementation, maintenance, and |
|evaluation of the effectiveness of the intervention with regards to the trigger area with which they are associated. |
| |
|Example: Preferral Intervention |
| |
|All district administrators will attend an overview of School-Based Pre-referral Intervention Teams |
|Faculty who are members of building level and grade level teams will receive training in functional assessment data based problem solving using the |
|RQC problem-solving process. |
|Teams will be provided weekly meeting time, receive onsite TA, and be given the opportunity to demonstrate collaboration skills necessary for |
|implementing the problem –solving process model through case study practice and mentoring feedback. |
|Building level teams will meet weekly for 45 minutes. TA will be provided as requested. |
|Building level teams will prepare written reports (for each case referred) that include documentation of the problem-solving process, interventions,|
|and outcomes as they relate to the initial reason for referral to the team. From end of year audit of cases, staff will identify most common |
|referral problems and successful interventions. |
|Action Type: Collaboration |
|Action Type: Prof Development |
|Action Type: Evaluation |
|Action Type: Special Education |
| |
|7. Evaluation of intervention(s) | | | |
|a. Formative evaluation is a way of tracking progress toward outcomes and therefore should be done at specified | | | |
|intervals during the year rather than waiting until the end of the year. | | | |
| (1) actions specify formative evaluation procedures | | | |
| (2) actions specify what will be measured or evaluated (data sets) | | | |
| (3) actions specify when or how often progress will be evaluated | | | |
| (4) actions specify how evaluation results will be used (ex. Will they use results to make changes to the | | | |
|intervention?) | | | |
|b. Summative evaluation is a way of measuring whether projected outcomes for the intervention were achieved. | | | |
| (1) actions specify summative evaluation procedures | | | |
| (2) actions specify when summative evaluation will occur | | | |
| (3) actions specify how summative evaluation will be done | | | |
|Comments And Examples: |
| |
|The description of actions for each intervention should include information on formative and summative evaluation with regard to the effectiveness |
|of the intervention in the remediation of the trigger condition. Formative evaluation is important also in documenting that the intervention was |
|implemented with integrity. |
| |
|In the above example of the pre-referral intervention formative and summative evaluation is referenced in the following underlined statements: |
| |
|Formative: Teams will be provided weekly meeting time; receive onsite TA, and be given the opportunity to demonstrate collaboration skills |
|necessary for implementing the problem-solving model through case study practice and mentoring feedback. Building level teams will prepare written |
|reports (for each case referred) that include documentation of the problem-solving process, interventions, and outcomes as they relate to the |
|initial reason for referral to the team. |
| |
|Summative: Building level teams will prepare written reports (for each case referred) that include documentation of the problem-solving process, |
|interventions, and outcomes as they relate to the initial reason for referral to the team. From end of year audit of cases, staff will identify |
|most common referral problems and successful interventions. |
| |Yes |No |N/A |
|8. Allocation of resources | | | |
|Comments and Examples: |
| |
|Funds should be allocated at the district and building level in accordance with CEIS guidelines and with actions that are implemented to address the|
|trigger area. |
|Follow-Up Activities: |
| |
|These are a list of actions that the reviewer will do in providing feedback to the school district regarding the district and building level school |
|improvement plans. |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- acsip special education
- educational evaluation report
- treatment plan goals objectives
- evaluation summary report
- accommodations interventions modifications chart
- educational implications for students with disabilities
- pre referral intervention information form
- training and education implementation plan
- school psychology portfolio intervention case study form
Related searches
- special education questions and answers
- special education report card template
- louisiana ser special education system
- special education teacher loan forgiveness
- special education philosophy statement
- philosophy of special education articles
- philosophy of special education essay
- special education what is it
- what is special education definition
- what is special education pdf
- philosophy of special education paper
- special education in louisiana