SLD Eligibility Review Teresa Fritsch, Psy.S., NCSP School Psychologist @meridianschool.org

download SLD Eligibility Review Teresa Fritsch, Psy.S., NCSP School Psychologist  @meridianschool.org

of 30

  • date post

    18-Dec-2015
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    214
  • download

    1

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of SLD Eligibility Review Teresa Fritsch, Psy.S., NCSP School Psychologist @meridianschool.org

  • Slide 1
  • SLD Eligibility Review Teresa Fritsch, Psy.S., NCSP School Psychologist fritsch.teresa@meridianschool.org
  • Slide 2
  • Purpose and Objectives Review SLD Evaluation Procedures Psychological Processing Models
  • Slide 3
  • Review from Psychological Processing: Part 1 Webinar Universal screening and data collection Interventions provided to those students struggling and below grade level Progress monitoring and data collection Referral to consider special education evaluation
  • Slide 4
  • * Evidence of low achievement * Performance significantly below the mean on a cluster, composite, or 2 or more subtests in the same academic area (i.e. Word Attack and Letter-Word Identification=Basic Reading Skills) * Specific Learning Disability not using Broad scores * Norm-referenced, standardized, achievement assessment Academic Achievement Assessment
  • Slide 5
  • Psychological Processing Review Cont Psychological Processing evaluation Review and analyze all data already obtained (Teacher and Parent input from referral meeting) Develop a theory and hypothesis Assess/Collect data and interpret results Determine if there is a link between psychological processing area(s) and academic deficits Pattern of strengths and weaknesses Do the dots connect? Sample SLD Eligibility Report
  • Slide 6
  • Slide 7
  • Slide 8
  • Slide 9
  • Slide 10
  • Slide 11
  • Slide 12
  • Slide 13
  • Slide 14
  • Slide 15
  • Various Models/Approaches to SLD Identification: - Discrepancy-Consistency Approach Using PASS Theory (Naglieri, Das, & Kirby)* - RTI & Cognitive Hypothesis Testing (Concordance- Discordance Model) (Hale, Wycoff, & Fiorello)* - Ability-Achievement Consistency Model (CHC Theory) (Flanagan, Alfonso, & Mascolo)* - Milton Dehn Model (Dehn) * Essentials of Specific Learning Disability Identification, 2011
  • Slide 16
  • Discrepancy-Consistency Approach Significant Difference(s) Significant Difference(s) Achievement Weakness(es) Processing Weakness(es) Processing & Achievement Strengths Similar Scores Copyright Jack A. Naglieri, 2010
  • Slide 17
  • RTI and Cognitive Hypothesis Testing Theory Hypothesis Data Collection Interpretation 1. Problem 5. Cognitive Strengths/Weaknesses 9. Intervention Consultation 13. Continue/Terminate/Modify 2. Intellectual/Cognitive Problem 6. Choose Related Construct Test 10. Choose Plausible Intervention 3. Administer/Score Intelligence Test 7. Administer/Score Related Construct Test 11. Collect Objective Intervention Data 4. Interpret Psych. Processing 8. Interpret Constructs/Compare 12. Determine Intervention Efficacy Hale, J.B., & Fiorello, CA (2004)
  • Slide 18
  • Flanagan et al (2002, 2006, 2007) Ability Achievement Consistency Model (Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory) Level I-A: Measurement of Specific Academic Skills & Acquired Knowledge Inter-Academic Ability Analysis (Stores of Acquired Knowledge) Math Calculation- Basic Reading Skills- Reading Fluency Math Reasoning- Reading Comprehension- Written Expression General information*- Oral Expression* Lexical Knowledge*- Listening Comprehension* Level I-B: Evaluation of Exclusionary Factors NOT Sensory Impairment; NOT Mental Retardation; NOT Cultural Differences; NOT Language Differences; etc
  • Slide 19
  • Ability Achievement Consistency Model (Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory) Level II-A: Measurement of Broad Abilities/Processes and Aptitudes for Learning-Inter-Cognitive Ability Analysis (Learning Efficiency) Gt, Gs, Gsm, Glr, Ga, Gv, Gf, and Gc* Level II-B: Re-evaluation of Exclusionary Factors Level III: Evaluation of Underachievement Integrated Ability Analysis Below Average Aptitude-Achievement Consistency within an otherwise normal ability profile Level IV: Evaluation of Interference with Functioning (deficits are normative) The identified deficits significantly interfere with academic achievement or other daily activities requiring these skills (e.g., reading, writing, math)
  • Slide 20
  • Evidence of a Processing Strength or Weakness Milton J. Dehn, Ed.D. Spring 2010 Both intra-individual and normative scores to be considered a strength or weakness A low score in a process is not necessarily a deficit indicative of LD, unless its also an intra-individual weakness Example: very low IQ have inherent processing problems Although Dehn defines intra-individual and normative scores by certain values, the Idaho SLD policy looks for the preponderance of evidence to support the eligibility decision.
  • Slide 21
  • ProcessTest/Battery Name Subtest/Factor Name Subtest Scores Factor Score IQ/MeanDifference From Mean Normative S or W Ipsative S or W Deficit or Asset **Information regarding the directions for the Processing Analysis Worksheet can be found in Dr. Dehns book.
  • Slide 22
  • Basic Reading Skills Reading Comprehension Reading Fluency Math Calculation Math Problem Solving Written Expression Crystallized Intelligence Perceptual Speed Fluid Reasoning Crystallized Intelligence Auditory Processing Short Term/Working Memory Long-Term Storage Crystallized Intelligence Short Term/Working Memory Long-Term Storage & Retrieval Phonologi- cal Processing Short-Term/ Working Memory Short Term/Working Memory Processing Speed Fluid ReasoningCrystallized Intelligence Processing Speed Fluid Reasoning Short-Term/ Working Memory Auditory Processing Visual Processing Auditory Processing Attention Executive Function Flanagan, Ortiz, & Alfonso, 2007, Dehn, M., 2009, and McGrew 2009
  • Slide 23
  • Slide 24
  • Slide 25
  • Slide 26
  • Key Elements of Psychological Processing: * Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses * Normative Weaknesses must link to academic deficits * Summarize information in Section G; bring the story together; connect the dots
  • Slide 27
  • www.idahotc.com www.idahotc.com Training and Technology for Todays Tomorrow Website to link school professionals and parents with special education training opportunities and resources across the state Supported By: Idaho State Department of Education (ISDE), Special Education Project Team: Cari Murphy Shawn Wright
  • Slide 28
  • Statewide Special Education Technical Assistance (SESTA ) Center for School Improvement & Policy Studies, BSU Gina Hopper, Carol Carnahan, Associate Director Statewide Consultant ginahopper@boisestate.edu ginahopper@boisestate.edu carolcarnahan@boisestate.edu carolcarnahan@boisestate.edu 208.426.4363 208.426.3257
  • Slide 29
  • www.sde.idaho.gov/site/isee
  • Slide 30
  • Contact Us Teresa Fritsch, School Psychologist, Meridian School District, fritsch.teresa@meridianschools.orgfritsch.teresa@meridianschools.org Carol Treat, School Psychologist, Post Falls School District, ctreat@sd273.com ctreat@sd273.com Richard Henderson, Director of Special Education, SDE, rhenderson@sde.idaho.gov rhenderson@sde.idaho.gov