What’s New with Special Education Data?

(…and Reminders for what is not new!)

We still have…• The Office of Special Education (OSEP) Tables

– Table 1 – Child Count (last Fri. October)– Table 2 – Special Education Personnel (December)– Table 3 – Environments (last Friday in October)– Table 4 – Exits (Final pull – Oct 1 for 08/09)– Table 5 – Discipline (Final pull – Oct 1 for 08/09)– Table 6 – Academic achievement (Feb 1 – Annual Report)– Table 7 – Due Process (DPA completes – Nov. 1)And now we also have:

– Table 8 - Early Intervention (Coming Attraction)

We have a better way to report!!• NASIS!!• Steps:

– Find student (left panel)– Click on most recent enrollment– Find the BIE enrollment section– Enter special education status

• 1 if not now or ever special education• 2 if referred – must complete assessment within 60 days of permission• 3 receiving services• 4 exited from services – complete reason and date

– Enter primary disability– Enter special education setting

More NASIS

• Make sure all other information is correct– Discipline with incidences, resolutions and dates

as needed– Complete Exit data– Homeless checked if appropriate– Limited English Proficiency data– Graduation data if appropriate– All other basic data is correct– For Spring 2010 graduates data will be from NASIS

NEW - Early Intervention

• On the BIE enrollment tab– Put a check in the Intervening Services box if– You are using special education dollars to provide

services– Table 8 will require reporting this information

NEW – High Quality Teachers

• Enter High Quality Teacher (HQT) information into NASIS

• Will be found under census• School must keep paper record of

qualifications• Teacher must meet the HQT requirements for

teaching the class to which they are assigned

Forms in NASIS

• IEP forms now on NASIS – yea!!!• Please complete the forms as indicated• Forms are data entry points• Work with system administration to make sure

right people have right level of access• Remember confidentiality – few people will

need this access

Right Now…

Discipline• ‘618’ regulations• Remove to an

Interim Alternative Education Setting

• Suspensions / expulsions

• By gender and ethnicity

Exits• No longer receives services• Transferred – proof ( end grade a school)• Dropped out• Graduated• Certificate• Maximum age• Died

Why do we do all this?

Basic student rosterFederal Reporting requirements

Funds distributionISEP

TitlesPart B

Most Important:To give guidance for instructional planning

Trends over time…

School Year

• 2004-2005• 2005-2006• 2006-2007• 2007-2008• 2008-2009

Number of students with IEPs

• 7,998• 7,465• 6,918• 7,057• 6,724

Enrollment

7998 74656684 6732

6399

010002000300040005000600070008000

2004-2005

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

Number of SWD

Number of SWD

Where are these students served?

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

2004-2005

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

Year

Environments by Year

Separate (C)

>60

21-60

<21

Think About• Where are students served at your school• What impact would the total number have on

the year to year change in %• Things to consider when determining service

LRE– Individual needs– Limiting amount of time away from peers but also

meeting special education needs– How can time in regular classroom be increased

without denying services

Graph 1. Graduation Two Year Trend:

Graduation Rates

70.14

48.78

74.88

44.1

01020304050607080

2006-2007 2007-2008

Non Disabled

SWD

Graduation Rate..Why Different?

• BIE moved to the Cohort concept all states must use.• Last year - first attempt at verifying the data• Next data year data will be taken from NASIS

GOAL:• To reduce gap between the all students category and the

SWD category• Formula: _____#_graduates___________

9th grd (fall 4 yrs prev.) + (trans. in 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th) – (trans. out +decea.)

2007-2008 Reading Achievement  Number of

StudentsParticipatio

n Rate Basic % Proficient % Advanced %

Proficient + Advanced %

All Students 20954  96.57%  61.60%  35.60%  2.80%  38.40% 

Males 10476  96.40%  66.19%  31.19%  2.61%  33.81% 

Females 10478  96.74%  57.02%  40.00%  2.98%  42.98% 

Race and Ethnicity            

Native American 20954  96.57%  61.60%  35.60%  2.80%  38.40% 

Other Groups            

IEP 3700  98.30%  83.97%  14.57%  1.46%  16.03% 

Limited English Proficient

7625  90.19%  74.28%  24.97%  0.76%  25.72% 

96.57

61.6

35.6

2.8

38.4

96.383.97

14.571.46

16.03

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

All Students

IEP

2007-2008 Reading (%)

2007-2008 Mathematics Achievement

  Number of Students Participation Rate Basic % Proficient % Advanced %Proficient + Advanced %

All Students 14711  96.78%  64.98%  30.83%  4.19%  35.02% 

             

Males 7351  96.75%  65.78%  30.08%  4.15%  34.22% 

Females 7360  96.81%  64.18%  31.58%  4.24%  35.82% 

Race and Ethnicity            

Native American 14711  96.78%  64.98%  30.83%  4.19%  35.02% 

Other Groups            

IEP 2371  97.60%  84.70%  14.09%  1.21%  15.30% 

Limited English Proficient 7518  96.74%  73.15%  24.53%  2.32%  26.85% 

2007-2008 Mathematics96.78

64.96

30.83

4.19

35.02

0

97.684.7

14.090

15.30

0

20

40

60

80

100

120P

artic

ipat

ion

Rat

e

Bas

ic %

Pro

ficie

nt %

Adv

ance

d %

Pro

ficie

nt +

Adv

ance

d %

Num

ber o

fS

tude

nts

All Students

IEP

Parent SurveyFFY2006 FFY2007

Total number of Parent respondents

2,087 3, 143

Number who reported school facilitated their involvement

689 1,037

Percentage who reported school facilitated their involvement

33% 33%

# Surveys by Disability CategoryDisability Distribution

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%

40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52

Survey BIE

# Surveys by Disability

Survey BIE Survey BIE

MR 40 3% 5.50% D/B 48 <1% 0.01%

HI 41 1% 0.57% Mult. 49 2% 1.77%

Sp/Lg 42 17% 21.80% Autism 50 1% 0.79%

VI 43 1% 0.28% TBI 51 <1% 0.34%

ED 44 4% 5.80% DD 52 7% 5.34%

OI 45 <1% 0.18%Missing 13% 0.00%

OHI 46 6% 5.54% More Than One 9% 0.00%

SLD 47 37% 51.90% 

Surveys distributed

Sites Surveys returned

Sites

7, 591 175 2,087 108

Surveys distributed

Sites Surveys returned

Sites

6,566 172 3,143 152

2006-2007 - 27.49%

2007-2008 - 47.87%

We are getting better!!

Levels – Things to consider

• Indicator 11 – timely evaluations this is critical• Indicator 8 – parent surveys in so they are

counted• Indicator 20 – timely data examples

– Child Count rosters back on time– Personnel data returned in a timely manner– Discipline data correctly entered in NASIS– Exit data entered in NASIS

Final Word…

– Data collections are getting much better every year

– Make the task useful, look at your own data and use it

Thank You For All Your Hard Work in Improving the Data Collections!!