Toad-ally Exceptional Learners

The Ongoing Journey: Problem Solving in Special Education with iReady Insights

July 01, 2024

The need for continuous improvement is not just something providers need to pay attention to. It also applies to our students as well. It doesn't matter if they are just starting their journey in RTI/MTSS or have been receiving special education services for some time.

The point of Response to Intervention is to prevent students from becoming special education students. And if they are on an IEP, the point is to get them off it. It was never meant to be a life sentence.

But what do you do once you have them. How do you know what you have created is working? How do you prove it to parents or administrators or yourself?

This goes beyond progress monitoring. What if the student is just spinning? Or you're tapped out and need help?? What if you don't know what questions to ask because it's not your job or your thing or just don't know where to start????

Let me walk you through a problem-solving method that puts (in many different ways) problem-solving on its head.

But first some background--

In my building, iReady is a pretty good predictor of how our 3-6 students will do on the state assessment. (And if you want all my objections and the things I like, you can read them here.)

I'm fortunate enough to have most of my students for more than a year, so I can use iReady as my big assessment to see if what has been taught is rolling over on a larger scale.

The data above is the averages for my group as 2nd graders and 3rd graders and school-wide for the just concluded school year. And the last 4 slides that about how my student did over the two years.

Data | Vocabulary Project Blogpost by Alison Whiteley

My state and building use iReady diagnostics three times a year for READ Plans and intervention data. (more on come on iReady-both loves and dislikes)

As a special education teacher, I only use this data to compare students to their peer group and see their gains over the year.

I look at the overall gains my students make on the five categories assessed each time. This year, I made a huge shift to building and creating a solid foundation in phonemic awareness and phonics.

How am I going to track these changes to know the outcome to make meaningful changes in my instruction?

Out of all the ways I could track this decision, I went with a RIOT/ICEL.

What is RIOT/ICEL and what does it have to do with my vocabulary project??

It is a problem-solving matrix. It's a different way to look at students. It can be used for RTI/MTSS. My state suggests this method of problem-solving for SLD.

When I get stuck working out why students' down move, I turn the equation on its head to look at the problem differently. RIOT/ICEL does that in a framework that doesn't let me stray from the heart of the matter. Need a copy grab it here.

How it all works?

It is one tool that can help school teams sample information from abroad range of sources and investigate all likely explanations for academic or behavioral problems. This matrix helps schools to work efficiently and quickly to decide what relevant information to collect on academic performance and behavior—and also how to organize that information to identify probable reasons why the student groups are not experiencing academic or behavioral success.

The ICEL/RIOT matrix is not itself a data collection instrument. Instead, it is an organizing framework that increases schools’ confidence both in the quality of the data that they collect and the findings that emerge from the data. The leftmost vertical column of the ICEL/RIOT table includes four key domains of learning to be assessed: Instruction, Curriculum, Environment, and Learner (ICEL).

A common mistake that schools often make is to assume that student learning problems exist primarily in the learner and to underestimate the degree to which teacher instructional strategies, curriculum demands, and environmental influences impact the learner’s academic performance. The ICEL helps ensure the whole child is looked at holistically.

The top horizontal row of the ICEL/RIOT table includes four potential sources of student information: Review, Interview, Observation, and Test (RIOT). Teams should attempt to collect information from a range of sources to control for potential bias from any one source.

The power of the ICEL/RIOT matrix lies in its use as a cognitive strategy, one that helps educators to verify that they have asked the right questions and sampled from a sufficiently broad range of data sources to increase the probability that they will correctly understand the student’s presenting concern(s). Viewed in this way, the matrix is not a rigid approach but rather serves as a flexible framework for exploratory problem-solving.

RIOT: (Review, Interview, Observation, Test)

Review--This category consists of past or present records collected on the student. Obvious examples include report cards, office disciplinary referral data, state test results, and attendance records. Less obvious examples include student work samples, physical products of teacher interventions (e.g., a sticker chart used to reward positive student behaviors), and emails sent by a teacher to a parent detailing concerns about a student’s study and organizational skills.

Interview--Interviews can be conducted face-to-face, via telephone, or even through email correspondence. Interviews can also be structured (that is, using a pre-determined series of questions) or follow an open-ended format, with questions guided by information supplied by the respondent. Interview targets can include teachers, paraprofessionals, administrators, and support staff in the school setting who have worked with or had interactions with the student in the present or past. Prospective interview candidates can also consist of parents and other relatives of the student as well as the student himself or herself.

Observation--Direct observation of the student’s academic skills, study and organizational strategies, degree of attentional focus, and general conduct can be a useful channel of information. Observations can be more structured (e.g., tallying the frequency of call-outs or calculating the percentage of on-task intervals during a class period) or less structured (e.g., observing a student and writing a running narrative of the observed events). Obvious examples of observation include a teacher keeping a frequency count of the times that she redirects an inattentive student to task during a class period and a school psychologist observing the number of intervals that a student talks with peers during independent seatwork Less obvious examples of observation include having a student periodically rate her own academic engagement on a 3-point scale (self-evaluation) and encouraging a parent to send to school narrative observations of her son’s typical routine for completing homework.

Test--Testing can be thought of as a structured and standardized observation of the student that is intended to test certain hypotheses about why the student might be struggling and what school supports would logically benefit the student (Christ, 2008). Obvious examples of testing include a curriculum-based measurement Oral Reading Fluency probe administered to determine a student’s accuracy and fluency when reading grade-level texts and a state English Language Arts test that evaluates students’ mastery of state literacy standards. A less obvious example of testing might be a teacher who teases out information about the student’s skills and motivation on an academic task by having that student complete two equivalent timed worksheets under identical conditions—except that the student is offered an incentive for improved performance on the second worksheet but not on the first (‘Can’t Do/Won’t Do Assessment’). Another less obvious example of testing might be a student who has developed the capacity to take chapter pre-tests in her math book, to self-grade the test, and to write down questions and areas of confusion revealed by that test for later review with the math Instructor.

ICEL–Instruction, Curriculum, Environment, and Learner

Instruction--The purpose of investigating the ‘instruction’ domain is to uncover any instructional practices that either help the student to learn more effectively or interfere with that student’s learning. More obvious instructional questions to investigate would be whether specific teaching strategies for activating prior knowledge better prepare the student to master new information or whether a student benefits optimally from the large-group lecture format that is often used in a classroom. A less obvious example of an instructional question would be whether a particular student learns better through teacher-delivered or self-directed, computer-administered instruction.

Curriculum--‘Curriculum’ represents the full set of academic skills that a student is expected to have mastered in a specific academic area at a given point in time. To adequately evaluate a student’s acquisition of academic skills, of course, the educator must (1) know the school’s curriculum (and related state academic performance standards), (2) be able to inventory the specific academic skills that the student currently possesses, and then (3) identify gaps between curriculum expectations and actual student skills. (This process of uncovering student academic skill gaps is sometimes referred to as an ‘instructional’ or ‘analytic’ assessment.) More obvious examples of curriculum questions include checking whether a student knows how to computer a multiplication problem with double-digit terms and regrouping or whether that student knows key facts about the Civil War. A less obvious curriculum-related question might be whether a student possesses the full range of essential academic vocabulary (e.g., terms such as ‘hypothesis’) required for success in the grade 10 curriculum.

Environment--The ‘environment’ includes any factors in students’ school, community, or home surroundings that can directly enable their academic success or hinder that success. Obvious questions about environmental factors that impact learning include whether a student’s educational performance is better or worse in the presence of certain peers and whether having additional adult supervision during a study hall results in higher student work productivity. Less obvious questions about the learning environment include whether a student has a setting at home that is conducive to completing homework or whether chaotic hallway conditions are delaying that student’s transitioning between classes and therefore reducing available learning time.

Learner--While the student is at the center of any questions of instruction, curriculum, and [learning] environment, the ‘learner’ domain includes those qualities of the student that represent their unique capacities and traits. More obvious examples of questions that relate to the learner include investigating whether a student has stable and high rates of inattention across different classrooms or evaluating the efficiency of a student’s study habits and test-taking skills. A less obvious example of a question that relates to the learner is whether a student harbors a low sense of self-efficacy in mathematics that is interfering with that learner’s willingness to put appropriate effort into math courses.

Integrating the RIOT/ICEL Matrix into a Building’s Problem-Solving. The power of the RIOT/ICEL matrix lies in its use as a cognitive strategy, one that helps educators verify that they have asked the right questions and sampled from a sufficiently broad range of data sources to increase the probability that they will correctly understand the student’s presenting concern(s). Viewed in this way, the matrix is not a rigid approach but rather serves as a flexible heuristic for exploratory problem-solving.

Yes, it is time-consuming but asking all the right questions is what needs to happen to plan the right interventions for students and to make sure IEP teams know what assessments need to be given if the student has been referred for formal testing.

I like this method when I'm stuck and feel a student's IEP team is missing something to move the needle for a student. It's great for collaboration and looking at the whole student. And with students whose primary language is not English, you are not always seeing everything because of the language barrier.

Stay tuned to learn how my team comes together to support ESL students using this method. Make sure to grab your freebie to help support your learners.

Chat Soon-

PS: Here's a handout to help you complete a RIOT/ICEL.

Labels:data,freebie,law,RTI | 0 comments

Part 3: Planning a Comprehensive Evaluation - Parent Input

June 17, 2024

Welcome back to learning about what is needed to complete a Comprehensive Special Education evaluation. In part 2, I talked about the importance of planning comprehensive special education evaluations is emphasized. The process involves a collaborative approach among educators, specialists, and parents to ensure each child’s unique needs are accurately identified and met. It covers the key steps and considerations, including reviewing existing data, conducting new assessments, and integrating parental input. The post also highlights the necessity of adhering to legal requirements and timelines, particularly those specified by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Effective planning and execution of these evaluations are crucial for developing appropriate Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) that support student success. Read it here.

Not going to lie here-getting parent input is hard. And sometimes really hard. But you need it. Like legally need it. You must have the parent's voice throughout the whole process not just the IEP but also the evaluation. Colorado's Dispute and Complaint Office has shared that if that it's the first thing they look for when looking at an IEP or evaluation.

Notice of start of evaluation or reevaluation and appointment of IEP team

Determine who the IEP team participants are with collective expertise about areas of student strength and need, age and grade level standards and expectations, disability category criteria, and state and federal evaluation process requirements. In an Initial IEP use the RTI/MTSS data. If a three-year reevaluation, use the current IEP to drive what needs to be done.

Remember, parents are part of the team. Ask them!

Make sure if additional specialists are needed on the team to provide expertise about concerns representing particular areas of need such as specific medical, health concerns, or behavior.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) emphasizes the importance of parental input in the special education process. Several sections of the law highlight the critical role that parents play in developing and implementing their child's Individualized Education Program (IEP).

Parental Input in the IEP Process

IDEA say --

34 CFR § 300.322 Parent participation:

(a) Public agency responsibility—general. Each public agency must take steps to ensure that one or both of the parents of a child with a disability are present at each IEP Team meeting or are afforded the opportunity to participate, including—

(1) Notifying parents of the meeting early enough to ensure that they will have an opportunity to attend; and
(2) Scheduling the meeting at a mutually agreed on time and place.

(b) Information provided to parents.

(1) The notice required under paragraph (a)(1) of this section must—

(i) Indicate the purpose, time, and location of the meeting and who will be in attendance; and
(ii) Inform the parents of the provisions in § 300.321(a)(6) and (c) (relating to the participation of other individuals on the IEP Team who have knowledge or special expertise about the child), and § 300.321(f) (relating to the participation of the Part C service coordinator or other representatives of the Part C system at the initial IEP Team meeting for a child previously served under Part C of the Act).

(2) For a child with a disability beginning not later than the first IEP to be in effect when the child turns 16, or younger if determined appropriate by the IEP Team, the notice also must—

(i) Indicate—

(A) That a purpose of the meeting will be the consideration of the postsecondary goals and transition services for the child, in accordance with § 300.320(b); and
(B) That the agency will invite the student; and

(ii) Identify any other agency that will be invited to send a representative.

34 CFR § 300.324 Development, review, and revision of IEP:

(a) Development of IEP—

(1) General. In developing each child’s IEP, the IEP Team must consider—

(i)The strengths of the child;
(ii) The concerns of the parents for enhancing the education of their child;
(iii) The results of the initial or most recent evaluation of the child; and
(iv) The academic, developmental, and functional needs of the child.

(b) Review and revision of IEPs—

(1) General. Each public agency must ensure that, subject to paragraphs (b)(2) and

(b)(3) of this section, the IEP Team—
(i) Reviews the child’s IEP periodically, but not less than annually, to determine whether the annual goals for the child are being achieved; and
(ii) Revises the IEP, as appropriate, to address—

(A) Any lack of expected progress toward the annual goals described in § 300.320(a)(2), and in the general education curriculum, if appropriate;
(B) The results of any reevaluation conducted under § 300.303;
(C) Information about the child provided to, or by, the parents, as described in § 300.305(a)(2);
(D) The child’s anticipated needs; or
(E) Other matters.

But Amanda J. v. Clark County School District 267 F.3rd 877 also states “Parents not only represent the best interests of their child in the IEP development process, they also provide information about the child critical to developing a comprehensive IEP and which only they are in a position to know.”

These sections of IDEA emphasize that parents must be included in the IEP team meetings, their input must be considered in the development of the IEP, and they have the right to be informed and participate actively in the decision-making process regarding their child's education. If a complaint is filed this will be the first thing the state will look for.

Plan the Evaluation - Review of Existing Data and determine if additional assessment is needed

Create student-specific developmentally and educationally relevant questions using either the student’s RTI/MTSS data or the current IEP and its data. Make sure you are looking across all domains to assess the whole child: academic, cognitive learning, communication, independence and self-determination, social and emotional, physical, and health.

Ask any needed clarifying questions around suspected areas of need as well as related concerns of those who interact with the student in and out of school by asking developmentally and educationally relevant questions.

Identify existing functional, developmental, and academic information about student access, engagement, and progress in general education curriculum, instruction, and other school activities, and environments. Review and refine educationally relevant questions as needed to ensure nothing will be missed. Within the RTI/MTSS system these questions, concerns, and data should be already documented.

Consider potential disability categories that should be considered so sufficient information will be available to apply initial or reevaluation disability category criteria. Make sure the IEP team includes individuals with expertise in the category(ies) of disability that may be considered. Ask hard questions like, “Do we have cognitive concerns?, Do we suspect Autism?, Do we suspect Dyslexia?”

Decide what, if any, additional data or other assessment information is needed to explore all areas of suspected academic and functional skill concern, areas of student strengths and assets, and to apply anticipated disability category criteria. A comprehensive evaluation includes a mix of formal and informal testing to answer the team's questions.

Use a problem-solving framework (e.g., RIOT/ICEL) to guide the review of existing data and maintain focus on the whole student. Consider information about instruction, curriculum, learning environments, and the student. I have shared this before, this is the form my building uses for all RTI/MTSS student concerns.

Notice and Consent - Need to Conduct Additional Assessment

Before moving forward, ensure data and information that will be used to make evaluation decisions comes from multiple sources and is collected using a variety of assessment tools and methods such as record reviews, observations, interviews, curriculum-based evaluation, and norm-referenced standardized tests; and includes information gathered in the student’s natural learning environments. (formal and informal assessment data points)

Document review of existing data and decision about additional assessment or other information needed.

Communicate with the family and others to clearly explain who will administer assessments and collect other information, the types of assessments that will be implemented, and the tools used to collect other information, and clarify any questions that family members or others may have.

Chat Soon-

References:

About idea. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2024, March 27). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/about-idea/

Statute and regulations. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2024b, January 26). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statuteregulations/ https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statuteregulations/

PS: Introducing "A Guide to Special Education for Parents and Teachers," a comprehensive resource available in my Teachers Pay Teachers store. This guide provides valuable insights and practical strategies for navigating the special education process. Designed for both parents and educators, it covers essential topics such as the Individualized Education Program (IEP), legal rights, assessment procedures, and effective communication techniques. With clear explanations and actionable advice, this guide empowers stakeholders to collaborate effectively, ensuring that students with special needs receive the support and services they deserve. Ideal for those seeking to enhance their understanding and advocacy in the realm of special education.

PSS: Parent Input Freebie

Labels:law,special education | 0 comments

Part 2: Planning a Comprehensive Special Education Evaluation

June 03, 2024

I work on a HUGE special education team. This year it is 15 members. Getting everyone on the same page for a student evaluation is hard. It's hard on a good day but out of everything, I deal with as a special education teacher, case manager, and one who completes 98% of all academic testing for students starting their special education journey. This post will walk you through what IDEA tells us what we have to do.

In case you missed the first post in this series here's a quick snippet. Comprehensive special education evaluations are crucial for accurately identifying a child’s unique needs and ensuring they receive the appropriate support. These evaluations go beyond academics to assess cognitive, emotional, social, and physical development. They involve multiple methods and sources, such as observations, standardized tests, and input from parents and teachers. A thorough evaluation provides a detailed understanding of a child's strengths and weaknesses, which is essential for creating an effective Individualized Education Program (IEP). Read it here.

What does IDEA say?

IEP teams follow these steps when conducting comprehensive special education evaluations. The Evaluation Process Chart outlines required IDEA timeline procedures and describes recommended actions for each step. These procedures fall within the needed timeline for evaluation.

According to IDEA, evaluations must be conducted within 60 calendar days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation. This timeline can vary if the state has established its own timeframe, but the federal requirement is 60 days.
The relevant section of IDEA is found in 34 CFR § 300.301(c), which states:

(a) General. A public agency must ensure that a reevaluation of each child with a disability is conducted

(1) If the public agency determines that the educational or related services needs, including improved academic achievement and functional performance, of the child warrant a reevaluation; or
(2) If the child’s parent or teacher requests a reevaluation.

(b) Limitation. A reevaluation conducted under paragraph (a) of this section—

(1) May occur not more than once a year, unless the parent and the public agency agree otherwise; and
(2) Must occur at least once every 3 years, unless the parent and the public agency agree that a reevaluation is unnecessary.

Start the Evaluation: Initial or Reevaluation

Initial Evaluation: A special education referral starts the initial special education evaluation process. The referral describes why the person making the referral believes the student is a “child with a disability” who needs special education.

Reevaluation: A reevaluation is started when the LEA (Local Educational Agency–most of the time will be the school your child attends) decides a student’s disability-related needs, including improved academic achievement and functional performance, warrant a reevaluation; or if the student’s parent or teacher requests a reevaluation.

The relevant sections from IDEA are 34 CFR § 300.303 and 34 CFR § 300.305.

Definition and Timing of Reevaluations from 34 CFR § 300.303 Reevaluations:

(a) General. A public agency must ensure that a reevaluation of each child with a disability is conducted—

(1) If the public agency determines that the educational or related services needs, including improved academic achievement and functional performance, of the child warrant a reevaluation; or
(2) If the child’s parent or teacher requests a reevaluation.

(b) Limitation. A reevaluation conducted under paragraph (a) of this section—

(1) May occur not more than once a year, unless the parent and the public agency agree otherwise; and
(2) Must occur at least once every 3 years, unless the parent and the public agency agree that a reevaluation is unnecessary.

Evaluation Procedures

34 CFR § 300.305 Additional requirements for evaluations and reevaluations:

(a) Review of existing evaluation data. As part of an initial evaluation (if appropriate) and as part of any reevaluation under this part, the IEP Team and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, must—

(1) Review existing evaluation data on the child, including—

(i) Evaluations and information provided by the parents of the child;
(ii) Current classroom-based, local, or State assessments, and classroom-based observations; and
(iii) Observations by teachers and related service providers; and

(2) On the basis of that review, and input from the child’s parents, identify what additional data, if any, are needed to determine—

(i) Whether the child is a child with a disability, as defined in §300.8, and the educational needs of the child; or, in case of a reevaluation of a child, whether the child continues to have such a disability, and the educational needs of the child;
(ii) The present levels of academic achievement and related developmental needs of the child;
(iii) Whether the child needs special education and related services; or, in the case of a reevaluation of a child, whether the child continues to need special education and related services; and
(iv) Whether any additions or modifications to the special education and related services are needed to enable the child to meet the measurable annual goals set out in the IEP of the child and to participate, as appropriate, in the general education curriculum.

Coming soon more on parent input and implementing the IEP. This process is hard. It takes time and team communication with each other. The Law is here to help us with what we need to so we do our jobs right and not miss students who need the support but also make sure that those who don't need us get the correct support.

Chat Soon-

References:

About idea. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2024, March 27). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/about-idea/

Statute and regulations. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2024b, January 26). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statuteregulations/ https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statuteregulations/

PS: Introducing "A Guide to Special Education for Parents and Teachers," a comprehensive resource
available in my Teachers Pay Teachers store. This guide provides valuable insights and practical strategies for navigating the special education process. Designed for both parents and educators, it covers essential topics such as the Individualized Education Program (IEP), legal rights, assessment procedures, and effective communication techniques. With clear explanations and actionable advice, this guide empowers stakeholders to collaborate effectively, ensuring that students with special needs receive the support and services they deserve. Ideal for those seeking to enhance their understanding and advocacy in the realm of special education.

Labels:law,special education | 0 comments

The Importance of Oral Language for ELL Students in Reading and Writing

May 21, 2024

As a special education teacher, I often see firsthand the critical role that oral language plays in the development of reading and writing skills, particularly for English Language Learner (ELL) students. Oral language, which encompasses listening and speaking skills, is foundational for literacy development. For ELL students, who are navigating the challenges of acquiring a new language, a strong base in oral language is essential for their success in reading and writing.

Understanding Oral Language

Oral language involves the ability to comprehend and produce spoken language. It includes phonology (the sounds of language), vocabulary (words and their meanings), syntax (sentence structure), semantics (meaning), and pragmatics (social language use). In essence, oral language is the bedrock upon which literacy is built. Without a firm grasp of oral language, students can struggle with decoding words, understanding texts, and expressing themselves in writing.

Scarborough's Rope

Oral Language and Scarborough’s Rope

Oral language is integral to Scarborough's Reading Rope, which intertwines language comprehension and word recognition strands for skilled reading. For non-English speakers, strong oral language skills support vocabulary development, syntax understanding, and listening comprehension, all critical for language comprehension. These skills enable ELL students to decode and make sense of written text in English. By enhancing phonological awareness and verbal interaction, educators can strengthen the oral language strand, thereby supporting ELL students in weaving together the elements necessary for proficient reading in English. This holistic approach is essential for their reading success.

The Link Between Oral Language and Literacy

Research consistently shows that oral language proficiency is a strong predictor of later reading comprehension and writing ability. For ELL students, developing oral language skills in English is particularly important. Here's why:

Phonological Awareness: ELL students need to become familiar with the sounds of English. Phonological awareness, which includes recognizing and manipulating sounds, is crucial for decoding words during reading. If a student cannot hear and produce the sounds in a word, reading that word becomes significantly more challenging.

Vocabulary Development: A robust vocabulary is essential for understanding and producing both spoken and written language. Oral language activities, such as storytelling and discussions, expose ELL students to new words and phrases in context, helping them to build their vocabulary. This, in turn, aids in reading comprehension and the ability to express ideas in writing.

Syntax and Grammar: Understanding the structure of English sentences is crucial for both reading and writing. Through oral language practice, ELL students learn how words and phrases are organized in English. This knowledge helps them decode complex sentences while reading and construct grammatically correct sentences when writing.

Listening Comprehension: Listening to spoken English helps ELL students develop an ear for the language, including intonation, rhythm, and stress patterns. Listening comprehension is directly related to reading comprehension; students who can understand spoken language are better equipped to understand written texts.

Cultural and Pragmatic Understanding: Oral language also involves understanding the social use of language, which includes cultural nuances and pragmatic rules. This understanding helps ELL students navigate different contexts, which is important for both reading (e.g., understanding characters’ intentions in a story) and writing (e.g., knowing how to address different audiences)

Strategies to Support Oral Language Development

Given its importance, it’s essential to incorporate strategies that promote oral language development in ELL students. Here are some effective approaches:

Interactive Read-Alouds: Reading books aloud to students and engaging them in discussions about the story helps build vocabulary and comprehension skills. Ask open-ended questions that encourage students to think and talk about the text.

Language-Rich Environments: Create a classroom environment that is rich in oral language opportunities. Label objects in the classroom, use word walls, and provide ample opportunities for students to engage in conversations, both with peers and adults.

Explicit Vocabulary Instruction: Teach new words explicitly, using visuals, gestures, and examples to reinforce understanding. Encourage students to use new vocabulary in their speech and writing.

Oral Language Activities: Incorporate activities such as storytelling, role-playing, and group discussions. These activities not only make learning fun but also provide meaningful contexts for using language.

Peer Interactions: Pair ELL students with peers who are proficient in English. Peer interactions can provide models of fluent speech and offer opportunities for ELL students to practice speaking in a less formal, more supportive environment.

Scaffolded Support: Provide scaffolded support by modeling correct language use, offering sentence starters, and gradually increasing the complexity of language tasks as students become more proficient.

Current Research

Current research underscores the importance of oral language and vocabulary development in second language learners, aligning closely with the principles outlined in Scarborough's Reading Rope. This framework, introduced by Hollis Scarborough, integrates multiple strands of literacy skills essential for proficient reading, categorized into two main areas: word recognition and language comprehension (Really Great Reading) (Landmark Outreach).

For second language learners, the upper strands of the Reading Rope, which include background knowledge, vocabulary, language structures, verbal reasoning, and literacy knowledge, are particularly crucial. These elements contribute significantly to language comprehension, one of the two main components necessary for skilled reading (Prentice Blog) (Amplify).

Research emphasizes that robust vocabulary and oral language skills enable learners to decode and understand new words more effectively, which is particularly beneficial for second language learners. As these learners often need to build both their vocabulary and understanding of language structures, a focus on these areas helps improve overall reading comprehension and fluency (Landmark Outreach) (Amplify).

Moreover, evidence from the field of the Science of Reading supports the integration of vocabulary and oral language instruction into literacy education. This approach helps second language learners develop the necessary skills to decode text and comprehend its meaning simultaneously, which is essential for reading proficiency (Amplify).

The current research aligns with Scarborough's Reading Rope in highlighting the integral role of oral language and vocabulary development in the reading proficiency of second language learners. Educators are encouraged to incorporate these components into their teaching strategies to support the holistic development of reading skills in these students.

Oral language is a critical component of literacy development, especially for ELL students. It serves as the foundation upon which reading and writing skills are built. By focusing on oral language development, educators can help ELL students achieve greater success in their literacy journey. As a special education teacher, I am committed to implementing strategies that support the oral language needs of ELL students, recognizing that these skills are key to unlocking their full academic potential. Through intentional and thoughtful instruction, we can empower our ELL students to become confident, competent readers and writers.

References

Jooda, B. (2023, June 29). The Reading Rope: Breaking it all down . Amplify. https://amplify.com/blog/science-of-reading/the-reading-rope-breaking-it-all-down/

Navigating Literacy Excellence: Unveiling the Significance of Scarborough’s Reading Rope. (n.d.). Blog.prentice.org. Retrieved May 21, 2024, from https://blog.prentice.org/blog/navigating-literacy-excellence-unveiling-the-significance-of-scarboroughs-reading-rope

Really Great Reading. (2015). Scarborough’s Reading Rope | Really Great Reading. www.reallygreatreading.com. https://www.reallygreatreading.com/scarboroughs-reading-rope

Scarborough’s Reading Rope. (2022, October 14). Landmark Outreach. https://www.landmarkoutreach.org/strategies/scarboroughs-reading-rope/

Chat Soon-

Labels:ELL strategies,research,science of reading | 0 comments

Why a Comprehensive Special Education Evaluation?

August 07, 2023

The Framework

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that special education evaluations be sufficiently comprehensive to make eligibility decisions and identify the student’s educational needs, whether or not commonly linked to the disability category in which the student has been classified (34 CFR 300.304). Comprehensive evaluations are conducted in a culturally and linguistically responsive manner; non-discriminatory for students of all cultural, racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and other backgrounds. When conducting special education evaluations, IEP teams must follow all procedural and substantive evaluation requirements specified in IDEA.

The BIG Ideas

Special education evaluations must be sufficiently comprehensive for IEP teams to determine special education eligibility or continuing eligibility and to identify the educational needs of the student, whether or not commonly linked to the student’s identified disability category(ies).
A comprehensive evaluation is a process, not an event. IEP team participants work together to explore, problem-solve, and make decisions about eligibility for special education services. If found eligible, the IEP team uses information gathered during the evaluation to collectively develop the content of the student’s IEP.
A comprehensive special education evaluation actively engages the family throughout the evaluation process.
Comprehensive evaluations are first and foremost “needs focused” on identifying academic and functional skill areas affected by the student’s disability, rather than “label focused” on identifying a disability category label which may or may not, accurately infer student need.
Developmentally and educationally relevant questions about instruction, curriculum, environment, as well as the student, guide the evaluation. Such questions are especially helpful during the review of existing data to determine what if any, additional information is needed.
Asking clarifying questions throughout the evaluation helps the team explore educational concerns as well as student strengths and needs such as barriers to and conditions that support student learning, and important skills the student needs to develop or improve.
Culturally responsive problem-solving and data-based decision-making using current, valid, and reliable (i.e. accurate) assessment data and information is critical to conducting a comprehensive evaluation.
Assessment tools and strategies used to collect additional information must be linguistically and culturally sensitive and must provide accurate and useful data about the student’s academic, developmental, and functional skills.
Data and other information used during the evaluation process is collected through multiple means including review, interview, observation, and testing; as well as across domains of learning including instruction, curriculum, environment, and learner.
Individuals who collect and interpret assessment data and other information during an evaluation must be appropriately skilled in test administration and other data collection methods. This includes understanding how systemic, racial, and other types of bias may influence data collection and interpretation, and how individual student characteristics may influence results.
Assessment data and other information gathered over time and across environments help the team understand and make evaluation decisions about the nature and effects of a student’s disability on their education.
Comprehensive evaluations must provide information relevant to making decisions about how to educate the student. A comprehensive evaluation provides the foundation for developing an IEP that promotes student access, engagement, and progress in age or grade-level general education curriculum, instruction, and other activities, and environments.

The Balcony View

Comprehensive evaluations must provide information relevant to making decisions about how to educate the student so they can access, engage, and make meaningful progress toward meeting age and grade level standards. Assessment and collection of additional information play a central role during the evaluation and subsequently in IEP development and reviewing student progress.

A comprehensive evaluation takes into account Career Readiness, a growing awareness of the relationship between evaluation and IEP development, and the need for information about how special education evaluations and reevaluations can be made more useful for IEP development.

The 2017 US Supreme Court Endrew F. case also brought renewed attention to the importance of knowing whether a student's IEP is sufficient to enable a student with a disability to make progress “appropriate in light of their circumstances.” Finally, updated guidance, including results of statewide procedural compliance self-assessment, IDEA complaints addressing whether evaluations are sufficiently comprehensive, and continuing disproportionate disability identification, placement, and discipline in student groups who traditionally are not equitably served.

A comprehensive evaluation responds to stakeholders’ requests for more information and reinforces that every public school student graduates ready for further education, the workplace, and the community.

It seeks to ensure a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) for every student protected under IDEA. It guides IEP teams in planning and conducting special education evaluations that explicitly address state and federal requirements to conduct comprehensive evaluations that help IEP teams to determine eligibility, and thoroughly and clearly identify student needs.

Planning and Conducting a Comprehensive Special Education Evaluation

An Individualized Education Program (IEP) is the key to addressing a student’s disability-related needs.
It describes annual goals and the supports and services a student must receive so they can access, engage, and make progress in general education.

A well-developed IEP is a vehicle to ensure that a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) is provided to students protected under IDEA. A comprehensive special education evaluation provides the foundation for effective IEP development.

A comprehensive special education evaluation is conducted by a student’s IEP team appointed by the district. The IEP team must include the parent as a required participant and essential partner in decision-making. Special Education evaluation is a collaborative IEP team responsibility. During the evaluation process, the team collectively gathers relevant information and uses it to make accurate and individualized decisions about a student’s eligibility or continuing eligibility, effects of disability, areas of strength, and academic and functional needs.

Data and other information used to make evaluation decisions come from a variety of sources and environments, often extending beyond the IEP team. Guided by educationally relevant questions, both existing and new information is compiled or collected, analyzed, integrated, and summarized by the IEP team to provide a comprehensive picture of the student’s educational strengths and needs.

A comprehensive special education evaluation is grounded in a culturally responsive problem-solving model in which potential systemic, racial, and other bias is addressed, and hypotheses about the nature and extent of the student’s disability are generated and explored.

Conducting a comprehensive special education evaluation requires planning. Each team has its own methods for planning and conducting comprehensive special education evaluations with guidance from the state and district.

Why RIOT/ICEL Matrix?

The RIOT/ICEL model comes from Jim Wright and is one way to look at RTI/MTSS. RIOT is the top horizontal row of the table and includes four potential sources of student information: Review, Interview, Observation, and Test. Teams should attempt to collect information from a range of sources.

ICEL is the left column of the table that includes key areas of learning to be assessed: Instruction, Curriuclum, Environment, and Learner. A common mistake that teams often make is to assume that student learning problems exist in the learner and underestimate the degree to which what the classroom teacher is providing in class ie., accommodations, curriculum, and environmental influences that impact the student's academic performance. The model ensures no rock is left unturned.

The matrix is an assessment guide to help teams efficiently to decide what relevant information to collect on student academic performance and behavior and also how to organize that information to identify probable reasons why the student is not experiencing academic or behavioral success.

The matrix is not itself a data collection instrument. Instead, it is an organizing framework that increases teams' confidence both in the quality of the data that they collect and the findings that emerge from the data.

An editable RIOT/ICEL form is below for you--just click the picture. Be on the lookout for a blog post sharing how I use this model with grade-level teams. The object of this model is to remove bias, it is a good way to look at multi-lingual students (ELL or ESL). It can be a great way to have collegial conversations about students.

Chat Soon-