Site Search

The presentation introduces a research-based guidance document and self-assessment rubric designed to help districts and schools identify the root causes of "success gaps" (for example, in test scores, suspension or graduation rates, or course credits) for some groups of students, thereby helping schools to improve and equalize results for all students.

Presenters introduced a research-based guidance document and self-assessment rubric designed by OSEP's Disproportionality Priority Team to help districts and schools identify the root causes of "success gaps" for some groups of students, thereby helping to improve and equalize results for all students. As an example, presenters used Georgia's SSIP process, focused on graduation for students with disabilities.

In this webinar, which IDC staff presented for the University of Tennessee’s Boling Center for Developmental Disabilities, we first discuss the requirements in the IDEA related to disproportionality, describe methods for calculating disproportionality, and present data, both at the national level and for the state of Tennessee. The second part of the webinar introduces a research-based guidance document and self-assessment rubric designed to help schools and districts identify the root causes of "success gaps."

After a State determines that a district has significant disproportionality, what are the next steps? Presenters and session participants discussed how states can identify technical assistance and available tools and resources to help LEAs identify root causes and implement action steps, including CEIS, to make substantive improvement.

This presentation introduced the audience of local education agency personnel to new tools, the Equity, Inclusion, and Opportunity: How to Address Success Gaps Rubric and the Equity, Inclusion and Opportunity: How to Address Success Gaps White Paper. The rubric and white paper were developed by a group of OSEP-funded technical assistance providers, with input from states and other experts. The Equity, Inclusion, and Opportunity: How to Address Success Gaps tools provide a process for reducing the differences in school success among subgroups of students by providing a structure for districts or schools to examine their current practices and identify areas for improvement.

The required measurements for APR Indicators B3, B4, B5, B6, B9, and B10 (the assessment, discipline, LRE, and disproportionality indicators) are based on Section 618 data. This session focused on selected section 618 data submissions and how the data can be explored to provide more in-depth information for use in discussion with state’s APR stakeholders. Presenters demonstrated some practical methods for taking a deeper look at data in the IDEA EDFacts file submissions using readily available data analysis tools (Microsoft Excel).

With the U.S. Department of Education’s recent publication of an NPRM on Significant Disproportionality, questions abounded regarding what such a rule would mean for states and districts. This session began with a brief history of the statutes and regulations related to significant disproportionality. The majority of the session focused on the similarities and differences between the current regulation and the proposed rule and what effects these may have on states.