ERIC ED461619: School Reform through Instructional Support: The Pennsylvania Initiative. Part I: The Instructional Support Team (IST) [and] Part II: Instructional Evaluation.

28 Pages·1995·0.47 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
SP 037 541
ED 461 619
Kovaleski, Joseph F.; Tucker, James A.; Duffy, Daniel J.,
AUTHOR
Jr.; Lowery, Paul E.; Gickling, Edward E.
School Reform through Instructional Support: The
TITLE
Pennsylvania Initiative. Part I: The Instructional Support
[and] Part II: Instructional Evaluation.
Team (IST)
Pennsylvania State Dept. of Education, Harrisburg.
SPONS AGENCY
REPORT NO IST-400; IST-4-1
PUB DATE 1995-00-00
24p.; For related IST documents, see SP 037 535-545.
NOTE
Descriptive (141)
PUB TYPE Journal Articles (080) Reports
Communique; v23 n8 Jun 1995 v24 n2 Oct 1995
JOURNAL CIT
EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.
Educational Change; Elementary Education; Elementary School
DESCRIPTORS
Teachers; Inclusive Schools; *Instructional Improvement;
Models; *Partnerships in Education; Special Education;
*Special Needs Students; State Programs; Team Training;
*Teamwork
*Instructional Support; Pennsylvania
IDENTIFIERS
ABSTRACT
The document features two articles on school reform in
Pennsylvania. Part one discusses the Instruction Support Team (IST)
The IST process is an intensive
(Kovaleski, Tucker, and Duffy) .
building-based pre-referral intervention program to assist elementary
students experiencing difficulty in the classroom. The IST is a working group
of teachers and other school professionals that helps teachers find solutions
to instructional challenges through classroom-based assessment and
collaborative problem-solving. Over a 5-year phase-in period, all 501
Pennsylvania school districts have initiated the IST program. Training is
provided at the school level by IST Project consultants who assist team
members in the design, planning, and implementation of the program. The
components of the training are: collaboration and team building,
instructional assessment, instructional adaptation, student discipline, and
student assistance for at-risk issues. Each school's implementation of the
IST process is evaluated by validation teams. In the initial phases of the
project, an average of 50,000 elementary school students have been assisted
by the IST process annually. Referrals for multidisciplinary evaluation and
placements in special education have been reduced substantially in schools
enrolled in the IST process. Part two discusses instructional evaluation
Instructional evaluation is a procedure in
(Kovaleski, Lowery, and Gickling) .
which a student's need for special education is systematically examined
through an analysis of the student's responses to classroom-based
interventions. The multidisciplinary team (MDT) uses the instructional
evaluation process to analyze the level and intensity of the intervention(s)
needed in order for the student to succeed in the regular education setting,
or whether special education may be required. The MDT gathers the data
necessary for making eligibility decisions and for design of an IEP for
eligible students'. A re-evaluation process reviews the student's IEP,
determines which instructional approaches and techniques have been
successful, and recommends changes to the IEP.
(Contains 22 references.)
(ND)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
School Reform through Instructional Support:
The Pennsylvania Initiative.
Part I: The Instructional Support Team (I ST)
[and]
Part II: Instructional Evaluation
Joseph F. Kovaleski, James A. Tucker, Daniel J. Duffy, Jr.,
Paul E. Lowery, and Edward E. Giclding
Communiqué
Volume 23, Number 8 June 1995
and
Volume 24, Number 2 October 1995
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
Office of Educational Research and Improvement
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
BEEN GRANTED BY
CENTER (ERIC)
0 This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
J. Kovaleski
originating it.
U Minor changes have been made to improve
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
reproduction quality
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
Points of view or opinions stated in this
document do not necessarily represent official
OERI position or policy.
2
STCOPY AVAILABLE
The
Instructional
Support
Team
THROUGH
SCHOOL REFORM
SUPPORT:
INSTRUCTIONAL
Initiative
The Pennsylvania
The Instructional
Part I:
(IST)
Support Team
Reprinted from:
Communiqué
Instructional Support Team
Vol Z3. No.8
Jove 1995
Project of Pennsylvania
National Anziaticn cachool Psychologi
1110 Enterprise Road
East Petersburg PA 17520
giii(7-598-67.70
Search
A Systematic
for What Works!
#400
6/95
3
School Reform Through
NATIONAL
Instructional Support:
ASSOCIATION OF
The Pennsylvania Initiative
SCHOOL
PSNCHOLOGISTS
Part I: The Instructional
Support Team (IST)
Duffy, Jr.
by Joseph F. Kovaleskl, James A. Tucker, and Daniel J.
Overview Of Instructional Support
education and school psy-
Since the mld-1980s, there have been wide-ranging calls for reform In special
Will, 1988). In response to
chology (Kovaleski, 1988, Reach ly, 1988; Reynolds, Wang, and Waiberg, 1987,
system-wide effort to restructure its
these challenges, in 1990 the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania began a
this reform effort will be described.
special education program. In this and a future issue of the Communiqué,
Support Team (1ST) process,
Part I in the series (this.Issue) will feature the implementation of the Instructional
Intervention program. Part II of the series will review the changes made
an Intensive building-based pre-referral
instructional evaluation of all referred students.
to the multidisciplinary evaluation procedures that include an
element a longitudinal analysis of the
Both the 1ST process and the instructional evaluation have as a central
student's need for further services.
student's response to Intervention as the primary Indicator of the
emerging national conscious-
Critical to the implementation of the 1ST process in Pennsylvania was an
fundamental issue in the provision of special education. Traditionally
ness that the quality of instruction is a
in special education were shown to be related
potent issues, such as over-representation of minority students
regular and special education (Hargis,
directly to the nature and quality of instruction being provided in both
1989; Heller, Holtzman, & Messick, 1982; Messick, 1984).
adopted by the Pennsylvania State
Thus, it was by design that the revised Special Education Regulations,
structured around the Idea of instruc-
Board of Education and ratified by the Pennsylvania legislature, were
delivered to the American Education Finance As-
tion rather than categories of service-delivery. In an address
State Board of Education said, "The most sig-
sociation, Robert Feir, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania
needs of students, rather than on perceived
nificant change In the regulations was to focus on Instructional
Internal deficiencies of students." (Feir, 1992).
in Pennsylvania, similar pilots had
Also, for five years prior to the implementation of the pilotIST programs
The data on what works and what doesn't
been operating in Connecticut (results to be reported elsewhere).
setting up a viable model to fit the unique quali-
work that came from the Connecticut pilots were invaluable in
not necessary to rediscover certain funda-
ties of Pennsylvania's new special education regulations. It was
mental elements that were critical to initial success.
Pre-referral Intervention through 1ST
Standards stipulated that each elementary
The 1990 Pennsylvania Special Education Regulations and
five year phase-in period, all 501 Pennsyl-
(K-6) school develop an Instructional Support Team (1ST). Over a
K
to assist any elementary student (grades
vania school districts have initiated the 1ST program in order
consistent academic, social-emotional, or
through 6) who is experiencing difficulty in the classroom due to
schools create a seamless system of support
behavioral problems. The instructional support process helps
the student who is at risk for school failure
within the school for students and teachers where assistance for
is provided in the regular classroom.
differ from school to school, the team always
Although members of the Instructional Support Team may
'and a support teacher. Parents are encour-
includes the building principal, the student's classroom teacher,
remedial math and reading specialists,
aged to participate as members of the team. School psychologists,
teachers may also serve on the
guidance counselors,-speech therapists, school nurses, or other classroom
selected by the school district to assist regular
1ST, depending on the needs of the child. The support teacher is
specially trained and work under
education teachers In meeting goals set by the team. Support teachers are
their duties are related to the tasks,
the direction of the school principal. They have no assigned caseload;
directly with students to assess their
procedures, and timelines of the 1ST process. The support teacher works
and others who may provide direct
needs in the classroom and to model strategies for teachers, parents,
support teacher to "phase out" direct In-
services and support to the child. In all cases, the 1ST plans for the
4
ania Initiative
I
ort: The Penns
chool Reform Throu h Instructional Su
other regular education personnel. The support
volvement with a student in favor of the classroom teacher or
that the services provided by the support teacher
teacher is an essential part of the 1ST training process in
the phasing out
and serve as modeling for the classroom teacher. As part of
are in the regular classroom
with the support
is encouraged to engage in guided practice in collaboration
process, the classroom teacher
teacher.
the
the concept that teachers need assistance in meeting
;The instructional support process is based on
working
social, and emotional needs of their students. The IST is a
Increasingly coinplex academic, behavioral,
their instructional chat-
that helps teachers find solutions to
grOup of teachers and other school professionals
collaborative problem-solving. Teachers and par-
...lenges through precise, classroorh-based assessment and
which can be loosely defined as an instructionally sup-
:ents are encouraged to request instructional support,
course work as assigned In school or to
portive activity which is designed to enable the student to master
assigned course requirements. One 1ST tralner
accomplish Individual learning goals over and above those of
personal
"systematic search for what works" (E. Moe,
aptly described the purpose of instructional support as a
Instructional support, team members
communlcation, 1991). When a classroom teacher or parent requests
for what will work for the student by systematically ma-
work elde by side with the classroom teacher to search
reactions to these changes. As effective inter-
nipulating instructional variables and appraising the student's
Into
classroom teacher to incorporate the strategies
ventions are Identified and selected, the team assists the
collaborative
gulded practice. Thls classroom-based,
the daily Instructional routine through modeling and
strategies to other students or to the whole class.
aspect of the process promotes a generalization of the new
the instructional support process simultaneously serves
.While providing support for teachers and students,
determination of special
further referral for multidisciplinary evaluation for
as the required screening process for
(see below), the 1ST establishes whether
education eligibility. Through a process of instructional assessment
whether they require services and programs that
students can profit from interventions in regular education, or
plan,
By assessing the effectiveness of the intervention
extend beyond regular education to be successful.
through the regular education program or whether
the team decides whether the student can be supported
for special education programming.
the student's "degree of need" indicates an evaluation
in
of regular education services are coordinated
The 1ST also works to assure that the entire continuum
be-
in spite of a wide range of available programs
meeting the needs of all students. Too often a student falls
school-based
the student's needs. This concern applies both to
cause services are not coordinated to meet
education, etc.) as well as to external services
services (e.g., Title I, guidance, school psychology, bilingual
directly addresses service coordination
provided by community agencies. The instructional support process
(Reynolds, Wang, & Waiberg, 1987).
so that students do not "fall through the cracks"
Including Students with Disabilities through 1ST
be effectively educated in a regular class envi-
it is increasingly clear that students with disabilities can
when schools aspire to practices that support
ronment. Staff resources are used in new and creative ways
first and preferred option. In Pennsylvania schools,
students with disabilities in the regular class setting as the
education. When a student with a disability is involved
the 1ST serves as a bridge between special and regular
school day, the 1ST can help the regular class
in regular environments for participation over all or part of the
The team also can facilitate the best use
teacher develop accommodations to promote the student's success.
specially designed instructional needs as stated
of support services to help the teacher meet the student's
when a special educator or related service provider
on the Individual Education Program (IEP). In this way,
the regular education class.
delivers the specialized instruction, it can be given within the context of
Instructional Support Training
Team Project, an initiative spon-
Training in instructional support is provided by the Instructional Support
Commonwealth's training design for elementary in-
sored by the Pennsylvania Department of Education. The
consultants to schools that initiate 1ST training.
structional support includes the assignment of a team of training
in the design, planning, and implemen-
These consultants assist the school principal andother team members
professional staff as well as parents and
tation of a multi-year training effort that involves all members of the
established practices and procedures, especially
community members. This effort requires changes in many
the needs of students with learning, behav-
those involving the role of the classroom teacher in addressing
ior, and emotional needs.
provided In five content areas: 1) collaboration
The training, which is highly specific and skIll-oriented, Is
adaptation; 4) student discipline, and 5) stu-
and team building; 2) Instructional assessment; 3) Instructional
5
page 3
Pennsylvania Initiative
School Reform Through Instructional Support: The
of prin-
training is differentiated accordinglo the specific roles
dent assistance for at-risk issues. The method of
classrooms
large. Training is primarily hands-on, in
cipals, support teachers, specialists, and teachers at
in the
training is also involved). Trainers must be experienced
not in didactic workshops (though some such
skills involved.
On-Site Training
level.
and support services are provided at the school
Because 1ST is a state-mandated program, training
of Instructional
provide intensive guidance in the development
During the first year of training, 1ST consultants
by offer-
in the critical components of instructional support,
Support Teams by organizing in-district training
net-
teachers.and team members, and by coordinating local
ing guided practice in the components for support
and
first year, school districts continue to receive training
works of support teachers and teams. After the
have the
By providing training at the school sites, consultants
support through their local intermediate unit.
facilitate guided
demonstrate effective instructional strategies, and
opportunity to model instructional support,
of its
training. The district has the opportunity to have many
practice on the part of the support teacher in
general
effort of sending personnel out of the district. The
personnel participate without the added cost and
regular edu-
development of effective techniques that will give the
aim of instructional support training is the
that knowl-
learning problems of one child, but also to generalize
cation teacher the ability not only to solve the
class.
edge to serve the needs of each child in the
Principals' Training
work-
Pennsylvania's Principal Training Model, a multi-day
Elementary school principals participate in the
Support Team
Department of Education and the Instructional
shop and seminar offered by the Pennsylvania
with intensive
the school's participation, provides principals
Project. This training, offered the summer prior to
experience
work with other building principals who have
training in each of the components of 1ST. Principals
for follow-up and
networks of building principals are organized
with the program. During this training, regional
participated in this training.
on-going support. Over 1,000 principals have
the most
the instructional leader of a school is one of
The critical importance of the building principal as
both in the Con-
schools (Steller, 1988). For the past 10 years,
consistently reported characteristics of effective
consistently
Pennsylvania's 1ST implementation sites, it has
necticut pre-referral intervention pilot sites and in
of success in
the building principal is an effective predictor
been shown that the professional commitment of
be more than
intervention in a school. This involvement has to
the implementation of effective instructional
training.
always involves a serious commitment to
verbal assent; it has to be skill-based, and that almost
Components of Training
classroom, train-
to a wide range of students in the regular
In order to provide effective instructional support
have been iden-
is essential. The training components that
ing in critical educational practices and processes
effectiveness
based on educational research in school
tified for inclusion in the 1ST training initiative are
undertaken
1989), as well as on the results of pilot programs
(Steller, 1988; U.S. General Accounting Office,
of the
school districts of Connecticut, for example, the precursor
in Connecticut and Pennsylvania. In the pilot
not included,
more of the specified elements are
instructional support team model had shown that when one or
the results are significantly reduced.
is
element of an effective instructional support process
Collaboration and Team Building. The central
development of
collaboration have been incorporated into the
staff collaboration. Three particular aspects of
building and
problem-solving, and team maintenance. Team
the instructional support process: team building,
allow
working team, and on those procedures that
maintenance focus on the establishment of an effectively
gives the
efficient manner. The problem-solving approach
the team to continue to function in a thorough and
purposes' of using a collabo-
difficulties are addressed. The
team a structure through which individual student
learning and
learning and behavioral problems, to remediate
rative problem-solving approach are to prevent
(Rosenfield, 1987; West and Idol, 1990).
behavioral problems, and to coordinate instructional programs
identify the
the team helps the classroom teacher to
Through the collaborative problem-solving process,
The
goals, and identify effective instructional strategies.
student's specific school difficulty, set measurable
classroom through the
strategy is established and supported in the
process also assures that the identified
school psychologist). Finally, the success of the interven:
assistance of team members (e.g., support teacher,
continuation of successful strategies.
tion is evaluated and plans are made for the
page 4
Pennsylvania Initiative
School Reform Through Instructional Support: The
is a process that systematically analyzes a student's
Instructional Assessment. Instructional assessment
that directly assess, per-
strategies in a sequence of study. It includes procedures
response to instrbctional
determining instructional needs (Gickling and Thompson,
formance within course content for the purpose of
Critical
that test the student on unfamiliar material, a
1985). Unlike traditional norm-referenced assessment
performance.
actual classroom materials to gauge classroom
feature of instructional assessment is its use of
evaluating.a student's
educators with an unprecedented leVel of precision in
It provides teachers and other
academic needs.
assessment (Coulter, 1985; Gickling and Thompson,
Initially based on the concept of curriculum-based
mismatches between
instructional assessment allows educators to analyze
1985; Hargis, 1987; Tucker, 1985),
basis. This approach is tied to
and the demands of the tasks faced on a daily
the student's instructional level
by the school to as-
failure and confusion is often a direct result of failure
the principle that prolonged student
Instructional assessment is a
match between the student and the curriculum.
sure a consistent instructional
probability of success,
refine instructional strategies that have a high
dynamic process used tO identify and
in a class-
learns. Instructional assessment is naturalistic and occurs
and to guide instruction as the student
conditions.
room under everyday
assessment also al-
guiding instruction, the process of instructional
In addition to its use in designing and
evaluation to de-
students for consideration for multidisciplinary
lows the instructional support team to screen
student's reaction to
the instructional assessment process, the
termine special education eligibility. Through
student's rate of
classroom is measured according to the
specifically developed interventions in the regular
observation
concept of rate of learning is based on the common
learning of the curriculum-based tasks. The
for the acquisition and
speeds and with different levels of support needed
that students learn skills at different
retention of new material.
of retention.
analyzed according to the rate of acquisition and rate
The student's rate of learning may be
acquires
with which a student learns new information or
The rate of acquisition is defined as the relative ease
information
the ability of the student to retain and use
appropriate skills. The rate of retention is defined as
of an intervention period (e.g.,
Each of these concepts presumes the provision
or skills in meaningful ways.
in curriculum
student's academic functioning is assessed directly
through the 1ST process) during which the
assessed in the regular school environment. Following
materials, or during which behavior and social skills are
the
implemented, technical assistance is provided to support
these assessments, specific interventions are
learned
according to his/her ability to acquire and retain the
instruction, and the student's progress is analyzed
material.
regular classroom display learning difficulties, although
Instructional Adaptation. Many students in the
have
such as Title I or special education. These students may
they may or may not receive supportive services
independently,
discussions, organizing information, working
problems in reading text, participating in class
sequencing information, writing legibly, listening to class pre-
completing in-class assignments, locating and
these
expression, and completing homework assignments. As
sentations, communicating through written
also have trouble taking notes, studying for tests, us-
students approach the middle school years, they may
these students
general study skills. In spite of these difficulties,
ing complicated study guides, and applying
in instruction and assessment.
education environments through adaptations
can make progress in regular
teachers with
component of initructional support is to provide
The purpose of the instructional adaptation
adaptation requires
student performance. Instructional materials
models for adapting materials and evaluating
adaptations require
without changing the content. Performance
changing the format of instructional materials
to provide
alternative formats. The goal of both approaches is
the same performance from students, but in
and demonstrate mastery.
students with different ways to learn the same content
al., 1989)
is based on the work of Project ADAPT (Huck, et.
The instructional adaptation component of 1ST
and field-
materials included in the manual were developed
which was also developed in Pennsylvania. The
study
materials, eight activities are highlighted: structured
tested in actual classrooms. In adapting instructional
what-you-need-to-know charts, concept activities, applica-
guides, information organizers, skeletal outlines,
tion activities, games, and manipulatives.
class-
with learning needs also require adapted approaches to
In addition to adapting instruction, students
allow students to display
traditional classroom tests are adapted in order to
room assessment. In this area,
skills. Techniques used to adapt tests include al-
their knowledge without being penalized for poor test-taking
modifica-
questions, simplification of response levels, and
ternatives to written tests, modifications of written
mul-
adapt grading procedures are presented, including
tion of testing materials. In addition, techniques to
accommodation checklists, and incentive grading.
tiple gradin% coded 9radin313rade contracts,
*7
Pennsylvania Initiative
School Reform Through Instructional Support: The
that has been incorporated in the 1ST process
Student Discipline. The approach to classroom discipline
interaction patterns between adults and students. The notion that
is based on the establishment of effective
critical in the resolution of classroom discipline prob-
interactions between parents, teachers, and students are
translated this approach
Recently, Valentine (1987, 1988) has
lems is based in the family systems approach.
relevance to the resolution of difficult discipline problems in the
into a series of procedures that have direct
patterns between adults (teachers and parents) and
classroom. Valentine's model focuses on communication
do, and compares and contrasts effective and ineffec-
students. It examines what teachers actually say and
tive patterns of communication and interaction.
interaction patterns are first formed by underly-
Valentine (1987) has theorized that communication and
the effect of channeling or limiting one's expectations for a stu-
ing belief systems. These belief systems have
the student as unclear or mixed messages. For example,
dent. These expectations are then communicated to
able to stop fighting because of the family he comes
if it is believed that for some reason the student is not
about the student by giving vague, unclear directions to
from, the adult holding that belief will express doubt
just this once."). Belief systems may be examined and
the student, (e.g., "See, if you can control yourself
behave and do as expected, thus removing excuses
challenged by looking for evidence that the student can
misbehave. Once the adult believes that the student is capable
that might be used for allowing the student to
communications to the student can then be analyzed for their effective-
of appropriate behavior, the adult's
the student.
ness in conveying a clear message to
face of clearly worded directions, supportive and
When student behavior does not conform, even in the
techniques, summarized in an individual discipline plan,
non-punitive back-up techniques are designed. These
the required task/behavior rather than punishing him
emphasize supervising the student in the performance of
is to succeed. The
parents from the beginning is critical if the program
or her for failing to comply. Including
that the student knows that the parents and the
parents' support is solicited from the initiation of the plan so
behavior. The student is clearly prevented from "play-
school agree on their expectations for appropriate school
ing one side against the other."
the involvement of school psychologists, guid-
The effective interaction patterns approach also facilitates
behavior prob-
specialists from community agencies in cases of severe
ance counselors, and mental health
mental health practitioners assist the team in address-
lems. Working with the school, family, and student, the
ing the student's difficulties.
children are forced to deal with a range
Student Assistance for At-Risk Issues. In today's world, many
ksuse,
by others and the impact of other stressors
of stressful events and trauma, including exploitation
etc.) that place them at nil( for
-neglect, loss, chemical dependency, mental health problems, unemployment,
prob-
Life crises are often manifested in behavior
current school failure and eventual long-term impairment.
classroom. The link between an environmental stressor
lems and/or deficits in academic performance in the
skills.
traced to the affected students' absence of coping
"and resultant performance problem in school can be
personal
support training addresses the need to build
The student assistance component of instructional
developing. The training focuses on life skills and strat-
coping skills which prevent discipline pnoblems from
and
and communication of feelings, decision-making,
egies to improve students' self-concept, identification
1985). This component provides a context for inter-
social interaction skills (Clabby & Elias, 1986; Gresham,
Ventions that address the whole child.
Special Trainings
1ST Project provides specialized training to better
In addition to the five basic training components, the
Department of
the Commonwealth. In conjunction with the Pennsylvania
serve the needs of all students in
the 1ST Project provides training to Instructional
Education's GATEWAYS Project for inclusive practices,
with severe disabilities in regular environments.
Support Teams in best practices for working with students
who
in assessment and interventions for students
The 1ST Projectalso has developed specialized training
appropriate
diverse backgrounds, and for students where developmentally
are from culturally and linguistically
practices are relevant.
Process
Evaluating the Effectiveness of the First
the
concept through the state of Pennsylvania,
To facilitate an orderly and effective implementation of the
The first and succeedin9 years have been re-
state's r.90ations llowed for a five-year phase-In of the 1ST.
s:5;?
page 6
School Reform Through Instructional Support The Pennsylvania Initiative
The districts that implemented 1ST in
ferred to as succeeding "phases" in the implementation of the model.
districts. Districts that began implementation of 1ST
the first year (1990-1991 school year) were called Phase I
II districts,*and so on. The data presented in this
the following year (1991-92 school year) were called Phase
report are from the first three years (phases) of the program.
Validation
also specify the means by which a local
The State's regulations that establish Instructional Support Teams
used in the state regulations to
district demonstrates accountability in operating a functioning 1ST. The term
forth by which state moni-
verify a high-quality 1ST process is "validation," and specific requirements are set
implemented effectively.
tors are able to determine whether or not the 1ST process has been
In its second year
Validation determines the effectiveness of a school's implementation of the 1ST process.
teams. This three person team might in-
of implementation, a school's 1ST program is evaluated by validation
psychologist, special or regular education
clude a principal, support teacher, guidance counselor, school
task is to determine whether a school has
teacher, intermediate unit consultant, or 1ST consultant. The team's
the level of implementation
all required 1ST elements in place. Specifically, the validation process assesses
and exemplary implementation
of the required elements, the need for improvement in one or more elements,
of one or more elements.
teachers and students, obser-
The validation process consists of interviews with team members, parents,
The features which are evaluated
vation of classrooms and team meetings, and a review of student records.
are:
such as team membership, adherence to
1. Organization and management of the 1ST: Includes elements
timelines, and required documentation;
assessment in the instructional curricu-
2. Student assessment: Includes problem-identification based on
with the student;
lum, life stressors and coping skills, and/or discipline techniques used
the establishment of the intervention in
3. Design and implementation of classroom interventions: Includes
the teacher's incorporation of
the regular classroom by the support teacher or other team member and
the intervention into the regular classroom routine;
problem-solving process;
4. Team work: Includes the IST's engagement in a collaborative
procedures for identifying stu-
5. Screening by 1ST and referral to multidisciplinary evaluation: Includes
students for further MDE;
dents for instructional support and the use of the 1ST process to screen
activities leading to the validation
6. Training: Includes the school's participation in all required training
review;
of Education of number of
7. Outcomes: Includes required documentation (e.g., reports to Department
students served by 1ST) as well as data on 1ST effectiveness for individual students.
and sup-
Based on the results of the validation process, a district or school will receive additional training
allocation for 1ST costs
port as needed. Schools achieving validation are eligible to use their special education
in ensuing years.
have met all
To date, approximately ninety-eight percent (98%) of the schools that have been reviewed
reviewed
of the basic validation requirements. In addition, based on independent ratings, over 90% of schools
initiation of the
have in place the elements deemed to be indicative of effective practice within two years of
program.
Numbers of Students Served by IST
frequently teach-
Results indicate that the longer a school has been involved in the 1ST program, the more
Phase III (first year of training) identified 7.4 %
ers use the process. In the 1992-93 school year, schools in
identified 9.6%
of their student population for instructional support. Phase II (in their second year of operation)
school year (third
of the student population. Phase I schools that have been involved in 1ST since the 1990-91
10.7°/0: The average 1ST in Pennsylvaniaserves a total student population of ap-
year of operation) identified
of 50 students
proximately 500 students. If each team serves 10% of the students, that means that an average
by the number of schools that have
are being served by each 1ST in a given school year. When multiplied
implemented 1ST throughout the Commonwealth, is can be estimated that a average of 50,000 elementary
students have been assisted by the 1ST process annually.
9
page 7
Pennsylvania Initiative
School Reform Through Instructional Support: The
Placements in Special Education
of the 1ST program that referrals for multidisciplinary
Since the initiation of the project, it has been a goal
ultimately placements in special education would be decreased
evaluation (MDE) for special education and
the
provide effective instructional programs for students in
because teachers would become better able to
1992-
rates for MDE in schools that were using 1ST during the
regular classroom. Figure 1 compares referral
indicate that
had not yet implemented the 1ST process. These data
93 school year with those schools that
3% of the student population for MDE, while teachers in
teachers in non-IST schools refer approximately
This represents a decrease in MDE requests of between 33%
1ST schools refer 2% or less of the population.
and 46%.
students who are placed in special education as a result
A substantial difference in the actual number of
(non-
between schools that had not yet enrolled in the process
of instructional support can also be observed
involved in the 1ST
These data indicate that students
1ST) and schools in various phases of theIST program.
school of 500 students,
of 1% or less of the school population. In an average
process are placed at the rate
education as a result of 1ST. Compared to schools that
five or fewer students are being identified for special
data represent differences of between 38% and 48%.
are not using the process, these
Retention in Grade
retentions in grade would be used less frequently in schools
Another goal of theIST Project has been that
decreases in the use of
I, Phase II, and Phase III schools, substantial
that utilize the 1ST process. For Phase
displays
of implementation of instructional support. Figure 2
retention in grade have be seen during the years
seeing as
Compared to data from years prior to 1ST, schools are
representative data from Phase I schools.
be seen
in grade. It should be noted that these trends can
much as a 67% decrease in the use of retention
enter high school.
subsequent decreases in drop-outs as these students
as a possible predictor of
References
decision-making. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Clabby, J. & Elias, M. (1986). Teach your child
assessment: Considerations or pupil appraisal professionals.
Coulter, W. (1985). Implementing curriculum-based
Exceptional Children, 52, 277-281.
Figure 1
Refining
March).
(1992,
Feir,
R.
Pennsylvania's funding mechanism and
program rules for special education.
Students referred to MDE during
Paper presented at the annual meeting
1992-93 school year in 1ST
of the American Education Finance As- .
sociation, New Orleans, LA,
(phase 1-3)
Gickling E. & Thompson, V. (1985). A
and non-IST schools
personal view of curriculum-based
3.5
assessment. Exceptional Children,
3.11
52, 205-218.
3
Gresham, F.M. (1985). Strategies for en-
2.5
hancing the social outcomes of main-
2.07
streaming: A necessary ingredient for.
Percentage
success. In J. Meisel (Ed.), The conse-
of School
2
1.75
handi-
quences of mainstreiming
Population
1.5
capped children (pp.193-218). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
-
1
Hargis, C. (1987). Curriculum-based as-
sessment: A primer. Springfield, IL:
0.5
Charles C. Thomas.
Hargis, C. (1989). Teaching low achieving
Phase 2
Phase 3
and disadvantaged students. Spring-
-4.'1dt lUthalleS C 'Thomas