Hello everyone! So sorry it's been so long since I posted. We have all been busy.
I wanted to take some time to talk with you abut FBAs and BIPs.
Behavior is something we deal with regularly. Sometimes it is more challenging than others, but we always keep our eyes on the prize. Appropriate behavior creates a positive learning environment in which each student can learn. Inappropriate behaviors create chaotic learning environments, suspensions and time away from teaching/learning.
Recently, a colleague and I sat with a team from another school and discussed behavior interventions. When she and I left the meeting, we agreed there are some quick interventions everyone should be aware of and try. Visuals, token systems, cool-down areas, and social stories are all easy interventions any teacher in any environment can try and they usually (after the initial investment of time and training) make everyone's life more pleasant.
So, I started looking! and thinking!
When there is behavioral trouble in the classroom, I believe teachers do the very best they can. Then they go to the principal or come to the special educator for help. We need to create a tool box so when we are needed, we have answers we can give.
Think of behavior in the same 3 tiered approach we view for RTi. The first Tier is Universal. All students receive these positive support systems and follow classroom rules that may be posted.
Tier 2 involves increased support, social skills training and parent/teacher collaboration. It can also include strategies such as check-in/check-out for some students.
Tier 3 is intensive behavioral support. These supports may include, intensive social skills training, individual behavior plans, multi-agency collaboration and any other alternatives to suspension and expulsion.
As students move into Tier 3 and we are preparing to write an Behavior Plan, please involve me. I would love to sit with you to do an FBA prior to creating the plan. Together we can judge what the function of the behavior may be and therefore pinpoint an appropriate replacement behavior.
I look so forward to working with you guys so that we can get ahead of these behavioral problems.
Remember: If a child has difficulty reading, we teach them. If a child has trouble with math, we teach them. If someone can't drive, we teach them! If someone doesn't know how to behave--we teach them!!! Punishment is not always the answer!
Information included from: RTI and Behavior: A Guide to Integrating Behavioral and Academic Supports, by Sprague, J., et al (2008).
Thursday, September 24, 2015
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
PARCC, NCSC etc...
PARCC and NCSC are just around the corner from us and it seems it will still be a while before we have the accommodations straightened out! This is stressing a lot of people and I thought I would address it with the most current information we have received from the state department.
The following is part of an email that was received from Robin Stripling attempting to provide insight into the ELA text to speech accommodation which seems to be at root of most of the confusion:
" Lisa Haley asked that I share my understanding of the text-to-speech accommodation on the PARCC assessment. Jennifer Gonzales and I do trainings at co-ops on this topic, so I try to stay as up-to-date with PARCC as possible. When I refer to text-to-speech, please know that the information also refers to screen reader, ASL video, or human reader/human signer.
Appendix D has been very helpful to me in understanding which students would qualify for this accommodation. I know that
* The student must have a disability that severely limits or prevents him or her from decoding text.
* The student uses the accommodation in routine instruction.
* The student’s inability to decode printed text is documented using locally-administered diagnostic assessments.
* The student receives ongoing, intensive instruction and/or interventions in the foundational reading skills.
My understanding is that this accommodation is for students with a specific deficit in reading; one that severely limits or prevents him or her from decoding text. This isn’t intended for students who can’t comprehend well; this is for students who can’t decode words. The majority of the students I taught in resource could decode fairly well; they struggled with comprehension. Those students would not qualify for this accommodation. I have worked with a few students who could not decode words but had high listening comprehension skills. Those students would benefit greatly from this accommodation.
IEP teams should, however, keep the other criteria in mind when considering this accommodation. Is the student using text-to-speech or human reader in everyday classroom settings? Is the child receiving intensive instruction in foundational reading skills? This is a hard one for middle school or high school students because our secondary schools rarely offer foundational reading (decoding and fluency) instruction in secondary settings. Few resource rooms that I have observed offer systematic decoding instruction. Also, are the secondary teachers using diagnostic assessments to measure students’ decoding abilities? Again, few secondary schools use the same literacy assessments that elementary schools use to measure decoding.
When taking Benchmark assessments, no students were allowed to have the reading portion of the test read to them. The math section could be read aloud as an accommodation so that only the student’s math skills were being assessed and not whether the student could read the math test. The writing section could be read aloud as an accommodation so that only the student’s writing skills were being assessed and not whether the student could read the writing test. The reading test could not be read aloud because the test measured how well the student could decode and comprehend. On the PARCC assessment, the literacy (reading and writing combined) may be read aloud, but a notation will be reported to the school and to the parents stating that “No claims should be inferred regarding the student’s ability to demonstrate foundational reading skills (i.e., decoding and fluency).” When the literacy portion is read aloud, the assessment then measures the student’s level of listening comprehension. Any student may have the text-to-speech accommodation on the math test so that only the student’s ability to complete math tasks will be assessed, not whether the student could read the math portion.
As for how many students could receive this accommodation, your IEP teams will need to make individual decisions based on student needs using Appendix D for guidance. The ADE Assessment Unit’s FAQ document states, “PARCC-state reading access specialists recommended limiting the accommodation to 1-1 1Ž2% of the student population being assessed in a given district. IEP teams and 504 coordinators determine who receives the accommodation based on students’ individual needs and documents it in the IEP/504.”
https://docs.google.com/
My advice to you is to review the current modifications section of your IEPs and make sure students who are receiving the text to speech modification qualify under Appendix D. As I stated in a previous email, I'd like to sit down with each of you to be sure you are comfortable with how your IEPs are worded, and I ask that you be sure that you can defend the use of each accommodation.
The above referenced document has a lot of really good information in the form of FAQs. Read over this and if we can't come to a conclusion we are comfortable with, we will call the state department and ask questions ourselves.
I know this new process is exhausting! Believe me I feel your pain.
Also, the NEA cooperative is having a PARCC and NCSC training on Feb. 17. The session id for this training is 240365. I have not seen a similar session offered at CRESC, but if you can't get in to the NEA session and are interested, you may want to call the teacher education department at CRESC and see if they will be offering something similar.
Have a great day! I can't believe it's almost February!!!
The following is part of an email that was received from Robin Stripling attempting to provide insight into the ELA text to speech accommodation which seems to be at root of most of the confusion:
" Lisa Haley asked that I share my understanding of the text-to-speech accommodation on the PARCC assessment. Jennifer Gonzales and I do trainings at co-ops on this topic, so I try to stay as up-to-date with PARCC as possible. When I refer to text-to-speech, please know that the information also refers to screen reader, ASL video, or human reader/human signer.
Appendix D has been very helpful to me in understanding which students would qualify for this accommodation. I know that
* The student must have a disability that severely limits or prevents him or her from decoding text.
* The student uses the accommodation in routine instruction.
* The student’s inability to decode printed text is documented using locally-administered diagnostic assessments.
* The student receives ongoing, intensive instruction and/or interventions in the foundational reading skills.
My understanding is that this accommodation is for students with a specific deficit in reading; one that severely limits or prevents him or her from decoding text. This isn’t intended for students who can’t comprehend well; this is for students who can’t decode words. The majority of the students I taught in resource could decode fairly well; they struggled with comprehension. Those students would not qualify for this accommodation. I have worked with a few students who could not decode words but had high listening comprehension skills. Those students would benefit greatly from this accommodation.
IEP teams should, however, keep the other criteria in mind when considering this accommodation. Is the student using text-to-speech or human reader in everyday classroom settings? Is the child receiving intensive instruction in foundational reading skills? This is a hard one for middle school or high school students because our secondary schools rarely offer foundational reading (decoding and fluency) instruction in secondary settings. Few resource rooms that I have observed offer systematic decoding instruction. Also, are the secondary teachers using diagnostic assessments to measure students’ decoding abilities? Again, few secondary schools use the same literacy assessments that elementary schools use to measure decoding.
When taking Benchmark assessments, no students were allowed to have the reading portion of the test read to them. The math section could be read aloud as an accommodation so that only the student’s math skills were being assessed and not whether the student could read the math test. The writing section could be read aloud as an accommodation so that only the student’s writing skills were being assessed and not whether the student could read the writing test. The reading test could not be read aloud because the test measured how well the student could decode and comprehend. On the PARCC assessment, the literacy (reading and writing combined) may be read aloud, but a notation will be reported to the school and to the parents stating that “No claims should be inferred regarding the student’s ability to demonstrate foundational reading skills (i.e., decoding and fluency).” When the literacy portion is read aloud, the assessment then measures the student’s level of listening comprehension. Any student may have the text-to-speech accommodation on the math test so that only the student’s ability to complete math tasks will be assessed, not whether the student could read the math portion.
As for how many students could receive this accommodation, your IEP teams will need to make individual decisions based on student needs using Appendix D for guidance. The ADE Assessment Unit’s FAQ document states, “PARCC-state reading access specialists recommended limiting the accommodation to 1-1 1Ž2% of the student population being assessed in a given district. IEP teams and 504 coordinators determine who receives the accommodation based on students’ individual needs and documents it in the IEP/504.”
https://docs.google.com/
My advice to you is to review the current modifications section of your IEPs and make sure students who are receiving the text to speech modification qualify under Appendix D. As I stated in a previous email, I'd like to sit down with each of you to be sure you are comfortable with how your IEPs are worded, and I ask that you be sure that you can defend the use of each accommodation.
The above referenced document has a lot of really good information in the form of FAQs. Read over this and if we can't come to a conclusion we are comfortable with, we will call the state department and ask questions ourselves.
I know this new process is exhausting! Believe me I feel your pain.
Also, the NEA cooperative is having a PARCC and NCSC training on Feb. 17. The session id for this training is 240365. I have not seen a similar session offered at CRESC, but if you can't get in to the NEA session and are interested, you may want to call the teacher education department at CRESC and see if they will be offering something similar.
Have a great day! I can't believe it's almost February!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)