Colorado Deaf Education Reform:
Where we have Been and the Challenges
we FaceCheryl DeConde Johnson
Colorado Department of EducationJanet DesGeorges
Hands & Voices-ColoradoCarol Hilty
Colorado School for the Deaf and the Blind
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Colorado Deaf Education Reform Timetable
Phase 1 – Data Collection & Development
of Plan Phase 2 – Develop
Implemen-tation Plan Phase 3 - Pilot
Implementation
Phase 4 – Implementa-tion
Colorado Deaf Ed Reform Activities – Phase 1
Deaf Ed Reform Task Force (2000-2002) All relevant stakeholders
Department of Ed, School for the Deaf, LEAs, DHH Parent/Professional organizations, community agencies, higher education
Review of existing reform efforts nationally and in other states
Statewide Student Assessment Colorado Individual Performance Profile (CIPP) Colorado Student Assessment Program (CSAP) Successful Attributes (Luckner & Muir, 2001)
Task Force Recommendations A Blueprint for Closing the Gap: Developing a Statewide
System of Service Improvements for Student whoi are Deaf and hard of Hearing (2002)
Statewide Assessment Summary (2000-01)
CIPP: Average performances indicated 2-3 year delay
CSAP: 70% of DHH students were performing in the unsatisfactory/partially proficient range
Functional Assessment: Rating of functional performance (cognitive/behavioral/social/life skills) indicated most students were functioning normally to near normally
Teacher Perception: 90% felt students were receiving adequate services
Inclusion: DHH students in CO who receive the majority of their education in the general ed classroom is 26% higher than national average
A Blueprint for Closing the Gap
Developing A Statewide System of
Service Improvements for Students who are Deaf and Hard of
Hearing
Communication- driven
High Standards
Critical MassFull
Access
Colorado Deaf Ed Reform Activities – Phase 2
Deaf Ed Reform Implementation Task Force (2002-04) All relevant stakeholders Plan for Implementation – 3 Work Groups
Develop program & service standards Develop accountability plan Develop funding plan and means for getting legislative
support Pilot data needed to support budget request
Key Question for Legislature: Will the implementation of the recommended program and service standards improve educational outcomes for DHH students?
Colorado Deaf Ed Reform Activities – Phase 2
Colorado Quality Standards: Programs and Services for Students who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing (August 2004) Educational Interpreter Handbook (2004) Audiology Standards of Practice (2004)
Accountability Plan Annual data collection/analysis - CIPP
Demographic Information Parent Input School-based Indicators Student-based Indicators
Colorado Deaf Ed Reform Activities – Phase 3
Deaf Ed Reform Implementation Advisory Council (2004-) All relevant stakeholders Implementation of pilots
RFPs (Spring 2004) 3 year pilots
planning year (2004-05) Implementation years (2005-06, 2006-07)
Funding provided by CDE-ESS Federal VIB Funded Pilots
Pikes Peak – Colorado Springs (4 LEAs and CSDB) Rocky Mtn – 3 LEAs (20 school districts) South Metro – 4 LEAs
Colorado Deaf Ed Reform – Phase 3 Pilots
Pikes Peak Pilot – Colorado Springs Goal – develop regional model of continuum
of services to implement Colorado Quality Standards
Funding - $70,000 – 1st year; TBD for years 2 & 3
Year 1 Priorities (2004-05) Hire administrator to oversee development and
implementation of model Create advisory council to guide activities
Years 2 & 3: Implementation
Colorado Deaf Ed Reform – Phase 3 Pilots
Rocky Mountain Pilot Goals
Develop regional model that brings staff under the umbrella of CSDB
Provide supervision by qualified administrator to implement elements of Colorado Quality Standards (11/36)
Implement a Technology Plan in collaboration with Join Together/Naster Teacher Project (H Johnson, Kent State)
Create distance learning opportunities for DHH students Increase contact between itinerant deaf ed teacher and local
classroom teacher Provide Web-based inservices
Funding: $20,000 – 1st year; TBD for years 2 & 3 $50,000 technology grant for year 1
Year 1 Priorities Hire administrator Develop plan to move teachers, interpreters, audiologists to
CSDB staff Develop technology plan, train master teachers, pilot use of
webcams and video systems
Colorado Deaf Ed Reform – Phase 3 Pilots
South Metro - Denver Goal
Development regional teacher inservice model Funding:
$10,000 – 1st year; TBD for years 2 & 3 supplemental funding from LEAs
Year 1 Priorities Hire teacher trainer Develop training plan – content and delivery
Challenges Finding qualified administrators Staff
Buy-in Fear of change
LEA barriers Funding
Justification to the legislature Insurance benefits
Data collection and analysis How do we measure benefit?
Standards/services 1:1 Expectation
Assessment Model
Assessment
SocialAcademic
Communication
Standardized and Functional Assessments
STUDENT PORTFOLIO
CIPP
Colorado Individual
Performance Profile
SocialAcademic
Communication
Extra-curricular activities
Role models
Access
Peer
OpportunitiesSocial skills
Self-
concept
Accommodations
TechnologyClassroom Participation
Questionnaire; Functional Assessment
Social Skills Rating System; Meadow-Kendall
CSAP; Standardized and Functional Assessments
The Colorado Model
…Through the eyes of Families
What’s Different about Now?(What makes us think we’ll succeed this time?)
In Colorado: A new emerging generation of students
and parents Precedent of advocacy set by Deaf/Hard of
Hearing adult consumers and advocates Getting beyond the method debate to the
great ‘education debate’ The ‘Fruitcake’ Theory If not now, when?
Foundations leading us towards success in Colorado
VISION Deaf Child Bill of Rights
The Communication Plan Collaboration between systems and people
(state and nation wide) Leadership of individuals resulting in
systemization of reform Strong Parent Involvement
Setting a Standard of Parent Involvement
Creating a SYSTEM of formalized Parent Involvement Utilizing organizations Paid parent positions provide meaningful contribution The healthy tension between collaboration and
‘watchdogging’ Parents who train other Parents Creates ownership of reform The real issues emerge
Providing Structure to ProgramsStandard 35 “The Program actively promotes parents as equal
partners, encouraging strong collaboration between program/school staff and the development of parent leadership. This is reflected in every aspect of the program and includes a plan for involving parents in program development”
Colorado Quality Standards, CDE
In Colorado: Active parent org.s; regional parent reps; training by parents to professionals. Long-term commitment and involvement; pro-active vs. re-active Next step: Formalizing ‘regional’ participation
Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing Adults & Community Involvement
Standard 36 The program involves the deaf and hard-of-
hearing communities in program development and encourages strong collaboration between school staff, parents, and deaf and hard-of-hearing community members.
In Colorado: Deaf/HH Connections; consumer advisors on boards; collaboration between parent org.s and deaf/hh consumer org.s
www.handsandvoices.org
Disturb the Peace
Sustain Tension
Contain Anxiety
Provide Leadership
Colorado Website
www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/sd-hearing.asp