http://www.spectrumk12.com/ en bethdubose@spectrumk12.com Copyright 2008 2008-04-25T15:18:01-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/how_to_prepare_our_children_and_stay_involved_in_their_education_during_dep/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/how_to_prepare_our_children_and_stay_involved_in_their_education_during_dep/#When:14:18:01Z By Earle Dean Christian, who has devoted 21 years of her life to furthering education This article was published by the Military Child Education Coalition (MCEC). The article identifies three phases in the deployment cycle: 1) pre-deployment, 2) deployment, and 3) reunion. Suggestions are provided for the caregiver and the educator on how to work with the children in each of these phases. The article includes artwork and poetry by military children.  The article can be read in its entity at http://www.militarychild.org/pdfs/DeploymentBooklet.pdf .  The Military Child Education Coalition (MCEC) website has other great tips regarding the various aspects of the military child’s life. The website has a Moving link, which provides important information such as a Checklist for Transferring Students, K and Grade 1 Requirements, Graduation Exit Matrix (for each state requiring and exit exam) etc.  There is also information about the Special Education Leaders Institute (SELI), which is sponsored by the MECE. The purpose of the SELI is “to promote awareness and increase the availability of professional educators who understand the challenges associated with transitioning mobile military-connected students with special needs.” Approximately 13% of military students are special needs students.  More details on these topics can be viewed at: http://www.militarychild.org/ About the Author Earle Dean Christian has devoted 21 years of her life to furthering education. She spent nine years as a middle school classroom teacher, six years as an Elementary School Media Specialist and three years as Lead Teacher/ Grant Writer in high school. 2008-04-25T14:18:01-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/disproportionality_in_special_education/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/disproportionality_in_special_education/#When:16:44:01Z by Wanda Duff, former Special Education teacher of 25 years A recent publication by the National Education Association in collaboration with the National Association of School Psychologists entitled “Truth in Labeling: Disproportionality in Special Education” provides an enlightening overview of issues related to “over- and under-representation” by specific populations in special education and gifted and talented programs. Across the nation, increasing numbers of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students are populating America’s public schools making this issue more relevant than ever before. Substantiated by numerous statistical references the subject of disproportionality has been thoroughly investigated by the authors, and they present a wealth of valuable information for school districts as well as individual practitioners. Focusing on factors that have historically contributed to the problem of disproportionality, the authors cite local policies that may contribute to the problem. Budgetary and resource constraints are usually at the root of these limitations that include  Class sizes too large for teachers to provide attention to individual student needs  A dearth of early childhood programs for low-income families  Limited implementation of early intervention programs  Zero tolerance discipline policies that move students out of the educational environment  The expansion of a rigorous academic curriculum in order to increase performance on district and state-wide testing to the detriment of slower learners Spotlighting case studies from around the country, a number of proposals for positive change are presented including those with emphasis on English language proficiency for content comprehension in a rigorous academic environment  Increased emphasis on early childhood programs  Early intervention services, tracking, and documentation through the implementation of a formalized Response to Intervention (RtI) program  Positive behavioral supports as the norm rather than zero tolerance policies which often result in escalating negative behaviors  Professional development in the areas of classroom management and culturally responsible teaching  Development and use of culturally responsible assessment practices and tools  Family and community partnerships related to education and academic growth  Gathering and reporting accurate and relevant statistical data related to diverse populations The article concludes with a wealth of valuable print and online resources that will be of special interest to those involved in positive change and educational reform. Read more at the NEA website where you can download a copy of the 57-page document for free. http://www.nea.org/specialed/disproportionality.html About the author Wanda Duff retired from Omaha Public Schools after 25 years of teaching Special Ed students. She has a B.S. in Education from the University of Nebraska, Omaha and a MLS from Emporia State University. 2008-04-21T16:44:01-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/software_implementation_checklist/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/software_implementation_checklist/#When:16:54:00Z By Beth DuBose, former Special Education teacher SIIA Software Implementation Guideline for Educators SIIA has released a checklist for schools and districts to help in the implementation of both instructional and administrative software. I thought this would be important for anyone researching and implementing IEP software systems. Most school districts have not carried out large-scale IEP software implementations before, and the document that SIIA created is a guideline for educational institutions to be successful in enterprise-level software implementations. The document provides “The Ten Essentials” to having an effective software implementation, and can be used for an IEP software implementation as well. These factors are crucial to both the IEP software vendor and the school district as they work together to provide an effective implementation. SIIA also provide a table indicating a software implementation cycle for both instructional and administrative software, so schools and districts can have a realistic view of the timeline in implementing such a system. Hopefully this will provide districts with an effective tool as they venture into their IEP software implementation. The SIIA Software Implementation for Educators can be downloaded at http://www.siia.net/education/pubs/pp_Checklist.pdf About the author Beth DuBose has a B.A. in Early Childhood Education and was a K-5 Reading Intervention Specialist for three years. Upon completing her Masters in Special Education, she taught 1st though 5th grade Self-Contained Emotional Behavioral Disorders for a year, where her classroom became the model classroom for integrating America’s Choice Curriculum and Special Education. 2008-04-15T16:54:00-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/effective_teams_in_education/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/effective_teams_in_education/#When:15:23:00Z By Maggie Massimore, retired Director of Special Education, Metro Nashville Public Schools As NCLB and IDEA evolve and bring general education and special education closer to a unified educational system for all, educators and administrators across the nation are struggling to help all students achieve at higher and higher levels. As NCLB and IDEA evolve and bring general education and special education closer to a unified educational system for all, educators and administrators across the nation are struggling to help all students achieve at higher and higher levels. As I read the literature, note the news articles, and spend time in different states and districts, I see several common themes evident in schools where all students are progressing. In these, schools, there is strong administrative support and an environment of collaboration and cooperation, of community and of ownership and responsibility for all students. There is no atmosphere “your students” or “my students,” but a theme of “our students.” Co- teaching and team teaching is practiced, with special and general educators working together in a variety of ways to support the students assigned to them. The benefits for all parties are great. General education teachers gain in their understanding of disabilities and the impact on the students’ instructional and behavioral needs. They become more comfortable with their own skills working with students with disabilities. Special Education teachers gain a deeper understanding of general education curriculum, state standards and the requirements at each grade level. Each member of the team begins to understand more deeply his or her role on the IEP team, and participation on the team becomes more meaningful. The IEP process becomes more collaborative, with each contributing from his or her area of strength and skill. General Education teachers bring to the table their knowledge of the curriculum and the state standards, and Special Education teachers contribute through their understanding and knowledge of disabilities and specialized instruction. Both develop a stronger understanding of how general education students are performing, and how the individual child with disabilities is doing within that picture. A better IEP is developed with more individualized goals and objectives that are aligned with the state and district standards. The student with disabilities becomes more involved in the general curriculum and in school life in general. Students who are not in Special Education are able to receive more focused, intensive instruction from a teacher who is able to utilize a variety of instructional strategies, and these students often make progress far beyond what they would have with a single teacher working alone. All students benefit from the additional support, and are able to learn from the positive models provided by teachers and a school community that work collaboratively. Learn more about Facilitated IEP training and Standards Based Goals and Objectives training About the author Mrs. Masimore has over 30 years’ experience in the field of Special Education, including serving as Director of Special Education for Metro Nashville Public Schools from 1992 – 2002. Since her retirement she has worked as an Education Consultant and trainer with Spectrum K12 School Solutions. 2008-04-15T15:23:00-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/graduation_dilemma/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/graduation_dilemma/#When:14:18:00Z All states are facing the same challenges when it comes to graduation of students with disabilities.  Challenges include drop outs, state testing participation rate, state testing passing rates, success of exiting seniors and the list goes on. With good intentions, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 2004, has not solved the graduation dilemma and in some opinions, may have worsened the problem. Let me explain my view point.  BELIEF: Studies show that when teachers raise their standards and expectations - clearly raising the bar for students, the student achievement will also substantially increase.  While recognizing that some students with disabilities must overcome significant barriers, in high achieving schools, these obstacles are not seen as insurmountable.  Students are offered ambitious and rigorous courses of study. 1 I believe this is the noble intent of NCLB and I, along with most educators, have always believed this to be true.  We are beginning to chip away at the tip of the iceberg.  Now, what about those students with disabilities who have struggled with academics daily and upon reaching the secondary level, have almost given up? What about students who get physically ill worrying about passing the state exit or competency test prior to graduation? Those secondary students who are taking the exit test for the 4th and final chance and wish desperately to pass. We also know that some students drop out of school when they cannot meet this high standard. Below are the “reporting requirements” all states must use to show progress in this critical area of graduation. Accountability: The Office of Special Education Programs, (OSEP), has provided direction to the states by determining 20 Indicators in which all states will set criteria and report progress annually to OSEP in the State Performance Plan (SPP). All 20 indicators are interrelated. In addition, in summer of 2007, OSEP gave the states a Determination Ranking on a scale of 1 through 4 in which to measure progress on these 20 Indicators. The states’ Determination Ranking, of course, is based on the sum / data of all the local schools in each state. If the local schools rank #1 then they are in good shape. If they rank #3 or #4, at worse, they need intervention. If there are numerous schools in the state that rank low on each indicator, the state’s overall ranking on the Indicators in the SPP will be lower.  The specific Indicators referencing Graduation or impacting Graduation are: Indicator 1. Improving graduation rates for students with disabilities. Indicator 2. Decreasing dropout rates for students with disabilities. Indicator 3. Ensuring participation in statewide assessments for students with disabilities. Indicator number 3 is directly related to the graduation rate. Each state can set the criteria in the SPP for annual progress on the Indicators. In my state, there are choices of which state assessment the student will take and the IEP Committee will determine the appropriate assessment and accommodations necessary. Sound good so far?  1. Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency. See Part III, The Core Disciplines: Building the Learning Organization. Below reflects the scenario (simplified) in my state: OSEP Indicator Number   State Target Criteria (can change when the SPP is updated for OSEP) Statewide Assessments Available Correlation 1.  Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high school with a regular diploma compared to percent of all youth in the State graduating with a regular diploma The graduation rate for students with disabilities will increase 0.2% from the previous year’s rate.   All students get a diploma that looks the same.  The transcript reflects accurate information. 2.  Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school compared to the percent of all youth in the State dropping out of high school The dropout rate for all students shall not exceed 2.9%   Drop out due to lack of curriculum options, state testing challenges, etc.? 3.  Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): Participation and performance of children with disabilities on statewide assessments. AYP Target Criteria in NCLB   Participation rate in both Math and Reading: 100%   Passing Performance on Math for 2007-08:   50%   Passing Performance on Reading for 2007-08: 60%   Passing Performance criteria increases annually. Three choices are available:     State Test –  with or without accommodations    (97% of the sp.ed. population must take the same test that students in general education take)   State Test - Modified         (only 2% of sp.ed. population can take this or counts against AYP)   State Test - Alternate       (only 1% of sp.ed. population can take this or counts against AYP)   IEP Committee can choose a graduation option without passing state test.   The student’s transcript will denote if they have passed the state test or not. Catch 22 The target is students with disabilities must pass the same rigorous state test that all students take in order to graduate. Students with disabilities must pass the state test in order for schools to meet NCLB-AYP criteria. Students with disabilities may drop out because they cannot pass the state test. Never fear, some states have come up with a “work around” to help students graduate without passing the state test, however, this “work around” does not help the district Determination Ranking for Indicator #3. If anything it only perpetuates the problem.  * If the student cannot PASS the State Test, but stays in school through 12th grade, completes all required state/local credits = our state rule (and others as well) allows the student to graduate without passing the state test.    Incentive???  Students may graduate and receive a regular diploma - “all diplomas look the same”. The transcript will specify if the student passed the state test or not and which test taken. The 97% of students with disabilities expected to take the “real” state test includes a percentage of students who are functioning at a very low level of mastery. Meeting AYP Indicator 3 will become increasingly more difficult each year. Special educators and general educators alike will continue to work diligently with students using creative, peer reviewed research based instructional strategies with the genuine intent of improving outcomes for students.  Our challenge is to create a learning environment whereby   special education students see their goal to stay in school and work toward passing the academically demanding state test for graduation. 2008-03-11T14:18:00-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/the_age_of_information/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/the_age_of_information/#When:14:43:00Z How well are we preparing our children for a future beyond our ability to even envision? "Upon graduation from high school our current first graders will have access to a computer that exceeds the capacity of the human brain.” How can we even comprehend a piece of technology that exceeds the capacity of the human brain? Are we, as educators, creating a daily environment in which students learn to work together collaboratively to solve problems, communicate effectively, and creatively resolve conflict? Take a moment to watch what I think is an outstanding video. Reflect upon what you are personally doing to become a more effective educator in this Age of Information. YouTube - Did You Know; Shift Happens - Globalization; Information Age 2008-03-03T14:43:00-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/wanna_rap/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/wanna_rap/#When:14:14:00Z Ok…so on the heels of http://www.youtube.com (of which I’m secretly a fan…) I’ve been introduced to youtube’s smarter sister http://www.teachertube.com! Recently, at ERDI, we were finishing a very invigorating panel discussion when one of the participants, Mark Edwards, Superintendent in Mooresville, NC, commented on a funny video on teachertube.com.  Being an internet junkie and spending way too much time in airports, I thought I’d take a look.  What did I find – whoa! the mother lode! For fun, I did a search on “Response to Intervention” and the first thing I see is a discussion about RtI with Alexa Posny, the Kansas Education Commissioner.  I was fortunate to hear Dr. Posny give one of the key note addresses at CASE this winter in Long Beach.  It was nice to see teachertube had this caliber of materials posted.  So, as I continued my journey….I searched the website using the tabs at top.  It’s pretty easy to navigate and pretty typical, i.e. ‘Home, New Videos, Channels, Groups, Blogs….” and of course you can expect the familiar favorites of “Most viewed and Most Recent.” Hey – it’s not just anywhere that you can see Ms. Burk do the “Perimeter Rap.” I’m inspired! In all seriousness, what a great medium to reach educators.  I would encourage anyone reading this blog to visit this site.  I’m going to make a personal commitment to contribute to this site at some point!  When I do – you can rest assured that it will be on this blog. So I leave you with this…in a time where we have to “think before we post” see the video… http://www.teachertube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=97eeae6788aa3348e553&page=2&viewtype=&category= It is refreshing to find a site focused on education and learning.  Bravo! 2008-02-25T14:14:00-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/preparing_of_education_leaders/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/preparing_of_education_leaders/#When:14:11:00Z As an educator who got into campus administration by the “back door” and then began working toward an administrator’s certificate, it is extremely refreshing to see the emphasis now being placed on leadership training for principals. Many assistant principals and principals are teachers one day and administrators the next day without the benefit of training other than watching how other principals led and managed our campuses. For some, the modeling was top-notch. For others, it wasn’t.  Preparation programs include courses in various areas of campus management and educational issues, but many have been using the same curricula for years. As research in both education and business focus on the importance of leadership and as accountability is driving our educational area, it is timely that leadership programs & academies for principals raise their standards so that the principals are taught skills utilizing current research and trends in school leadership, organizational management, instructional focus, data analysis, strategic planning, effective communication, best practices, and building collaborative processes. With more districts removing or changing principals when schools don’t meet state standards, why not first ensure that principals have been given strong preparation before giving them positions. Georgia is one state that is taking action in requiring higher standards for principal ship training (EdWeek,December 19, 2007) Additionally, Arkansas has a long-standing Principals’ Academy. At the recent National Council of State Legislators, a roundtable was devoted to principal preparation and leadership. The Wallace Foundation as an executive summary, “How leadership influences student learning.” The authors (Leithwood, Louis, Anderson & Wahlstrom) report that “leadership not only maters: it is second only to teaching among school related factors in its impact on student learning.” Congratulations to states and organizations that are moving from just talking about “instructional leadership” to taking action on providing our current and future educational leaders with the tools they need. 2008-02-25T14:11:00-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/great_special_education_resource/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/great_special_education_resource/#When:17:48:00Z Are you searching for information on Learning Disabilities? If so, you will likely find the National Center for Learning Disabilities website a valuable resource that offers a wealth of information for parents, educators, and individuals diagnosed as LD.  Well organized and easy to navigate, this site offers timely, pertinent articles on a wide-range of topics related to Learning Disabilities. Of particular interest to those involved in today’s special education community is RTI or the Response to Intervention initiative that is a focus for many school districts today. By following the “LD InfoZone” link on the home page, the user can select RTI as one of the current Hot Topics and choose from a variety of links on the subject including research, parent guide, and the opportunity to subscribe to the RTI e-newsletter. Details of the spring launch of their RTI website will be forthcoming, so check it out. http://www.ncld.org 2008-02-21T17:48:00-05:00 http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/nclb_on_the_campaign_trail/ http://www.spectrumk12.com/blog/nclb_on_the_campaign_trail/#When:13:52:00Z So much of our focus in education over the better half of the last decade has come from the No Child Left Behind act adopted under George W. Bush’s administration. 2008 stands to be a decisive year for education changes not only because this controversial federal mandate is now up for re-authorization but because it is a year that will mark the election of a brand new presidential administration.  More than just adding AYP and API to our already overflowing alphabet soup of IEPs, BIPs, RTIs and SSTs, NCLB has sparked passionate debate among politicians, parents, and educators. Some have praised it for raising accountability and setting high standards. Some scorn it for being a federal intrusion in state authority, blaming it for unfairly mandating results without providing adequate funding and resources to meet its goals. Some believe that it has further stunted often marginalized populations such as students from lower socio-economic backgrounds, English language learners, and students in special education. Thankfully, this growing public concern has provided a forum for candidates to address the educational needs of the country. But just where do the candidates vying for their party’s presidential nominations stand on the controversial plan? Most have taken some stand but few have taken a concrete one. On the Democratic side, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama agree (what a surprise) that in order for NCLB to work, changes must be made to recognize progress school districts make rather than punishing them for not reaching one-size-fits-all standards. They also agree that the federal government should be doing more to provide resources to assist states in reaching the mandate. On the Republican side, John McCain (whose wife is a former special education teacher) acknowledges that NCLB has not reaped intended results but believes it has been a positive step toward raising accountability in school systems. Mike Huckabee has focused some attention on NCLB making the point that overemphasizing math and reading proficiency has perhaps derailed other important areas of education including the arts. As educators, I think we can all agree that while it is positive that candidates include education somewhere on their priority list, it is time to step up the conversation. When talk of hopeful futures and better tomorrows dribble from their lips, they must make sure to keep in mind who will be making those better tomorrows: the students in today’s classrooms. If they believe that NCLB can work with some changes, exactly what are those changes and how will they be implemented? If they believe that NCLB was a half-baked solution to a complex problem then I hope they plan to spend some time in the kitchen to…well, bake. Districts deserve this. Parents deserve this. Educators deserve this. Most importantly, our students deserve this. For more information about where candidates stand on NCLB see their individual websites. Also see The National Center for Fair & Open Testing | FairTest. 2008-02-19T13:52:00-05:00