Closing the Opportunity to Learn Gap for Students with Disabilities

Cross-State Research ResultsOpportunity To Learn– Instructional

Alignment

Least Restrictive Environment

Impacts on Student Achievement

Summary: What Was Learned?

A report of the KS State Consortium SEC Special Education Project

US ED Enhanced Assessment Grant

The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the U.S. Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the U.S.

Department of Education and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal government.

Opportunity to Learn (OTL) Analysis of Instruction

Question examined:

How well aligned is Instruction in Classrooms to Standards and

Assessments?

Opportunity to Learn

Language Arts & Reading

*

*

Alignment By Teacher Position

Notable distinctions between General Ed. and Special Ed. teachers across all alignment targets

Alignment By SWD Status

Only alignment to Common Core is notably different when grouped on SWD Status

CCSS CCSS

Mod. Test

State Test

Ext. Stnds.

State Stnds.

General Ed. Teacher

Special Ed. Teacher

Mathematics

Opportunity to Learn

Alignment By Position

Alignment By SWD StatusCCSS

Mod. Test

State Test

Ext. Stnds.

State Stnds.

NCTM Stnds.

Only alignment to Common Core is notably different when grouped on Position

Alignment to Common Core and NCTM Standards are notably different when grouped on SWD status

General Ed. Teacher

Special Ed. Teacher

Least Restrictive Environment

LRE >80% Test Z Score

OTL CCSS State Ext. Stnd.

OTLState Stnd

Low -0.07 0.48 0.32 0.44

Med -0.08 0.46 0.30 0.41

High 0.30 0.52 0.32 0.45

LRE >80% Test Z Score

OTL CCSS State Ext. Stnd.

OTLState Stnd

Low -1.27 0.45 0.33 0.42

Med -1.45 0.43 0.30 0.38

High -0.58 0.52 0.35 0.45

Language Arts and Reading – School LRE Category A (>80% time) by Performance & OTL

For All Students

For SWD Students

Performance | Opportunity To Learn |

Performance | Opportunity To Learn |

Least Restrictive Environment

LRE >80% Test Z Score

OTL CCSS OTLNCTM

OTLState Stnd

Low -0.26 0.44 0.50 0.43

Med 0.17 0.43 0.47 0.43

High 0.06 0.45 0.44 0.41

LRE >80% Test Z Score

OTL CCSS OTLNCTM

OTLState Stnd

Low -1.66 0.43 0.45 0.42

Med -0.53 0.46 0.46 0.44

High -0.93 0.47 0.47 0.40

Mathematics – School LRE Category A (>80% time) by Performance & OTL

For All Students

For SWD Students

Performance Opportunity To Learn |

Performance Opportunity To Learn |

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60

State Standards (cg)*

CCSS (cg)**

Extended Standards (cg)*

ModifiedAssessment (cg)**

StateAssesment (cg)

Special Population (201) General Population (1068)

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60

State Standards (cg)

CCSS (cg)

Extended Standards (cg)

ModifiedAssessment (cg)

StateAssesment (cg)*

Special Population (179) General Population (1290)

Chart 6: Opportunity To Learn by Level of InclusivenessMathematics

Low Levels of Inclusiveness (<62%) High Levels of Inclusiveness (>80%)

* Significant at p < 0.05 ** Significant at p < 0.01 Whisker = 1 Standard Deviation

Special Population (n=179) General Population (n=1290)Special Population (n=201) General Population (n=1068)

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60

StateStandards (cg)**

CCSS (cg)**

Extended Standards (cg)

Modified Assessment (cg)

State Assessment (cg)

Special Population (n=218) General Population (n=1709)

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60

StateStandards (cg)*

CCSS (cg)

ExtendedStandards (cg)**

Modified Assessment (cg)**

State Assessment (cg)

Special Population (n=188) General Population (n=1472)

Chart 7: Opportunity To Learn by Level of InclusivenessLanguage Arts & Reading

Low Levels of Inclusiveness (<62%) High Levels of Inclusiveness (>80%)

* Significant at p < 0.05 ** Significant at p < 0.01 Whisker = 1 Standard Deviation

Variable Standardized Beta Coefficient

Significance

Prior achievement 0.70 0.000

Disability status -0.096 0.000

Economic Disadvantage -0.069 0.000

Level of Inclusion (LRE Cat. A) 0.048 0.001

State Standard (pre-CCSSM) 0.065 0.000

CCSSM -0.073 0.000

NCTM 0.132 0.000

Analyzing Information 0.040 0.000

Mathematics Multivariate Regression Equation predicting mathematics achievement

Variable Standardized Beta Coefficient

Significance

Prior Achievement .777 .000

Disability Status -.076 .000

Economic Disadvantage -.065 .000

Level of inclusion (LRE Cat. A)

.045 .000

State Standard -.178 .000

CCSS .090 .000

State Mod. Test .062 .000

State Ext. Standard .030 .004

Generate Written Text .022 .037

Language Arts/Reading Multivariate Regression Equation predicting achievement

What have we learned? (so what?)SEC Special Education Consortium Project –Final (1)

• Instructional content data from classrooms in 3 states show general consistency in opportunity to learn between general ed. and special ed. but instruction differs at the fine grain (specific topic) level in many schools

• The SEC data reported by teachers reveal wide variation in instructional practices used in Math and ELA, and among classes taught by special education and general education teachers

• Demonstrated for schools, districts, & states a method of analyzing and using data on alignment of instruction to standards –two dimensions are important – Topics by Cognitive expectations

• Cognitive expectations for teaching and learning were found to be a major gap between current instruction and Common Core Standards— SEC charts proved useful to focus shifts needed for transition to CCSS

What have we learned? (so what)SEC Special Education Consortium Project –Final (2)

• Analyzed school LRE indicator and instruction– Schools with more inclusive classrooms (higher LRE scores) had greater alignment of instruction to Standards –both students with IEPs and Gen.Ed. students

• Tested a new method of reporting on instruction to students with significant cognitive disabilities (1% group), and reporting on relation of instruction to Extended Standards

• Analyzed effects of instructional alignment on gains in student achievement: a) Better alignment of ELA instruction to Common Core positively related to student achievement gains, b) Math instruction alignment to prior standards related to gains in achievement

• Model for professional development with use of data at school level, involving teacher teams by grade level (Online PD Modules)