special education assessment team - aesa · conduct all special education evaluations in the...
TRANSCRIPT
Special Education Assessment Team (SEAT): Experience From the Field
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Individual case managers conduct evaluations Case manager determines evaluation
timelines Evaluations completed according to caseload Referrals and evaluation information flows
through child study team
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
One team of specified staff Conduct all special education evaluations in
the district Coordinate all evaluations and timelines Referrals and evaluation information flows
through assessment team via the building level assistance teams
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
School Psychologist Special Education Teacher Speech-Language Pathologist Low Incidence/Related Services Providers Staffing needs may vary
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
School Psychologist Assessment/Testing Report Writing IEP meeting attendance Same duties as with traditional model
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Special Education Teacher – Reduced direct service/teaching time – Primary Responsibilities: testing, observations, report
writing – Licensure
• SLD/EBD/DCD • One person with all licensures or combination of staff with
appropriate licensure • SLD/EBD combination recommended • Birth to age 5 evaluations could be included by adding ECSE
licensed teacher
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Speech Language Pathologist Traditional model - SLP evaluates and provides
direct service to students on caseload Assessment Team model – SLP direct service
reduced or eliminated and evaluation is primary responsibility Direct services could be provided by another SLP SLP could also be on assessment team as needed
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Low Incidence/Related Service Providers Included in assessments as needed Similar to traditional model ▪ Occupational Therapist ▪ Physical Therapist ▪ Developmental Adaptive Physical Education ▪ Deaf Hard of Hearing ▪ Visually Impaired ▪ Physical Impairment
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Secretarial Support Call team members and schedule meetings Mail due process documents Distribute checklists and testing materials to
parents and teachers Follow-up to get checklists returned Update evaluation due dates on master list Utilize computer software to generate test score
reports
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Coordination of the Assessment Team Process Monitor and coordinate evaluation due dates Complete evaluation plans Schedule mailing of evaluation plans Schedule evaluation planning meetings Communicate with parents and teachers Monitor and coordinate completion of evaluations This role could be filled by any member of the
team SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Number of total evaluations per year - approximately 1/3 of child count number
1 FTE school psychologist and 1 FTE special education teacher per 85-100 evaluations
Other team members as needed or with additional SEAT duties
Impact of secretarial support on FTE’s needed
BENEFITS
Consistency: – Objective interpretation of
results – Qualifying/dismissal of
students – Due process requirements for
evaluations Evaluation timelines met Teachers are spending time
providing direct service Eliminates building level child
study meetings
CHALLENGES
Change is difficult Dissolving an assessment
team would require retraining of individual case managers
Appropriate licensure Communication between
the assessment team and the IEP team
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
SEAT takes the place of “child study teams” Still need pre-referral intervention teams Trade-off for not having to do evaluations is
an increased caseload Planning and implementation time needed SEAT staff needs good due process skills
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Administrative support Early conversations – create “buy in” with
staff Identify staff who will work on SEAT Training for SEAT – procedures, timing of
evaluations, roles Create forms that will streamline process Respond to parent and teacher questions
about the change
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Question Yes No Not Applicable
When SEAT was first discussed at our
school, I was in favor of it.
78.9 % 2.6% 18.4%
I am currently in favor of the SEAT concept
92.1 % 7.9%
2 districts surveyed in 2010
Question Yes No Not Applicable
When SEAT was first discussed at our
school, I was in favor of it.
60.4% 17.0% 22.6%
I am currently in favor of the SEAT concept
90.4% 9.6%
10 districts surveyed in 2012
10 districts surveyed in 2012 0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Improved compliance withdue process regulations
Reduction in paperwork forcase managers
Increased service time withstudents
More consistentidentification of students
with disabilities
More consistent process forexiting students from special
education
I feel the following areas are strengths of using a SEAT team model. Choose all that apply.
Provide time for facilitated networking with other SEAT teams in the region
Provide training on evaluation topics: * Specific Learning Disabilities * Transition * Autism
Support districts in planning and implementing new SEAT teams
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
SEAT Implementation Process Evaluation Planning Form Initial and Re-evaluation Process Maps SEAT Staffing Comparison
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)
Jackie Budden, Assistant Director of Special Education Email: [email protected] Office: 507-537-6924 ext. 5004 Cell: 507-530-5577 Mary Margaret Mathers, Coordinator of Special Education Email: [email protected] Office: 320-231-5184 ext. 2318 Cell: 507-829-4056 Tammy Stahl, Director of Special Education Email: [email protected] Office: 507-825-5858 Cell: 507-215-3172
SWWC Service Cooperative (2012)