This week we celebrate the important work of all of you do for our students. I encourage you to take a minute and stop to reflect with gratitude on the enormous privilege you have been given to be hired as an educational diagnostician. None of us got to where we are on our own. Maybe you were mentored by another diagnostician as a teacher or inspired by one who evaluated your own child. Consider taking time to send an email or pen a note to a fellow diagnostician you would like to give credit for helping you to become the diagnostician you are today. Celebrate each other and enjoy your week!
Resources for your Tool Box
National Center on Improving Literacy: State of Dyslexia - Have you received an FIE on a student transferring from out of state where you are puzzled with how they determined the condition of dyslexia and/or what or where services were provided? This website offers and interactive map of the US that reflects current information regarding state policy regarding required dyslexia screenings, evaluations and services. Knowing under what requirements the student was determined to have the condition of dyslexia and what services were required to be provided is critical when conducting a REED for a student transferring from out of state. You will find in reviewing the metrics on which states are rated, Texas has policy addressing all areas.
TEA updated FAQ on Dyslexia and Related Disorders (January 2021)- Take some time to review these updates from the March 2019 Dyslexia FAQ to stay informed as you make decisions for students you are evaluating who are suspected of having the condition of dyslexia and related disorders.
Diagnostician Roundtables
Prior to the session those registered will be sent a zoom link and form for submitting questions. Any information regarding a specific case shared must be presented without the sharing of any personally identifiable information about the student. These sessions will not be recorded and will end once all questions have been discussed.
Difference vs Disorder with Region 10 SLP Evaluation Consultants Dr. Jyutika Mehta and Pam Sepulvado
This 3 hour session will provide evaluation teams practical tips and tools for assessing language dominance and language proficiency when determining a difference versus as disorder in CLD students
Resources for your tool box
Currently there have been lots of questions regarding student participation options for STAAR and STAAR Alt this year for students who are participating remotely. TEA recently updated their FAQ addressing how to respond to parents who indicate they will not choose to bring their students to campus in order to take their state assessment.
Keep in mind you must still document the appropriate assessment option in the IEP even if parents will chose not to have their child take the assessment.
TEA Division of Assessment and Accountability has released a short on-line module which will walk you through the participation requirements and process you should follow when determining the need for a student to take the STAAR Alt 2 assessment.
Upcoming Sessions for ARD Facilitators
This is an excellent course for any ARD facilitator, counselor or diagnostician who work at the secondary level.
Earning a diploma signifies the completion of one’s education, but it is the Academic Achievement Record that tells the whole story. Participants will receive an overview of the relationship between state and district requirements for graduation, special education graduation options, rules for coding courses on the AAR, and documentation needed to accurately reflect a student’s high school education. Participants are encouraged to bring a copy of their districts course description guide.
OR
Legal Framework Application for Mac and Android Devices
Additionally, when you log into the Framework under your district number you can access your district's operating guidelines at the top of many of the frameworks selected within the menu. Review this click sheet for directions on what steps to follow to access these.
REPRINTED FROM JIM WALSH’S “DAILY DAWG” WITH PERMISSION FROM THE WALSH GALLEGOS LAW FIRM.
TOOLBOX TUESDAY!! HOW NOT TO DEVELOP A BIP….
We hear much emphasis these days on data-based decision making. Making decisions based on data makes sense, particularly under IDEA with its emphasis on individualization of a student’s education. But there are hazards. A recent court case illustrates how the failure to “follow the data” can be costly.
The student in this case had a BIP (Behavior Improvement Plan) that focused on behaviors that were 1) self-injurious; 2) aggressive; and 3) sexually self-stimulatory. The district monitored the situation and issued Progress Codes with regard to every objective in the BIP. The Progress Codes indicated the same thing with regard to every objective in the BIP: the student was “making sufficient progress to meet goal.”
Sounds good, right? Unfortunately for the school district, the parent retained one of those good lawyers who dig beneath the labels and look at the data. There, the lawyer found two problems. First, there was zero data about aggression or sexual self-stimulation. Obviously, that’s a problem for the school district. How can you say “making sufficient progress” without any data to support that conclusion?
Secondly, there was data about self-injurious behaviors, but it did not match the conclusion. In fact, the data was wildly off base with the conclusion. For example, the court noted that the data regarding self-injurious behaviors showed an increase from an average of 17 times per day to 108. The court summarized:
The Progress Code on every objective states “making sufficient progress to meet goal,” even when the accompanying data shows no progress, or, on some objectives, even regression.
This huge disconnect between data and conclusion led the court to speculate that perhaps the computer code for Progress Reports had a default setting of “making sufficient progress” regardless of what the data showed. Hmmmm….I wonder if the court is on to something?
This is a great case to review with direct service providers who fill out progress reports. The lesson is obvious: make sure that your conclusion can be supported by the data.
In our firm’s Toolbox Training we talk a lot about Tool #1, which we call the Most Important Tool—a BIP. This case is a great example of how not to create a BIP. The case is S.S. v. Board of Education of Harford County, decided by the federal district court in Maryland in 2020. We found it on Special Ed Connection at 77 IDELR 182.
DAWG BONE: DATA AND CONCLUSION OUGHT TO MATCH UP
Subscriptions to the Daily Dawg are available at www.edlawdawg.com
Child Find, Evaluation and ARD Supports Network is one of ten TEA funded, statewide networks charged with creating guidance documents, resources and trainings that provide technical support in critical areas. These networks are supported by representatives from each service center around the state in partnership with TEA.
Quarterly Chronicle is here! Check out their latest Newsletter
Region 10 Child Find Weblink
TEA Child Find, Evaluation and ARD Supports Network
Amy Smith, Evaluation Consultant
Email: amy.smith@region10.org
Website: https://www.region10.org/programs/evaluation-special-education/overview/
Location: Region 10 Education Service Center, East Spring Valley Road, Richardson, TX, USA
Phone: 972-348-1784