April 5, 2012

Follow us on

Remote Sites Joining Us Today

Welcome to:

BURNET CISDCHANNELVIEW ISDCOMFORT ISDCUERO ISDFORT DAVIS ISDGONZALES ISDHARPER ISD

HUTTO ISDLEANDER ISDNIXON-SMILEY CISDROCKWALL ISDSOUTHWEST ISDTEMPLE ISD

Agenda• Welcome• Legal Update• Curriculum Update• Accountability Update• General Updates:

– Project Share– Graduation Plans– STAAR Standard Setting– Proclamations– EMAT– TEKS PD Sessions– Commitment Forms

• To Do List & To the Administrator Addressed

JIM WALSH

AIDE V. TEACHER

We don’t know what happened in the case that follows.

We only know what the plaintiff alleges.So don’t make any judgments about the

school or its personnel.But the case has some important

lessons for us, even at this early stage.

WHAT HAPPENED

The student was a kindergartener with seizure disorder and developmental delays.

School served her in Life Skills, a program for medically fragile students and those with severe and profound needs.

Ms. Michaels was the teacher. She had three aides.

WHAT ALLEGEDLY HAPPENED

A consultant/supervisor spent two days in the classroom working one-on-one with student.

She determined that the student’s acting out behaviors were designed to attract adult attention.

She came up with a three-step plan.Court did not use the term “FBA” to

describe this process.

FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT

First, send student to a regular chair for time out.

If that did not work, use a modified basket hold, sitting behind student and loosely holding her.

If this does not work within five minutes, go to the “Restraint Chair.”

THE BEHAVIOR PLAN

• Wooden, high-backed chair similar to a high chair.

• Student to be strapped in.• Timer set: NO MORE THAN FIVE

MINUTES.• Chair not to be used punitively—only

for re-direction.

THE RESTRAINT CHAIR

The Plan, and its use of “Restraint Chair” was not incorporated into IEP.

Consultant explained use of chair to mother.

Mother wrote: “I give promission for teacher to use hight with strap.”

Mother originally from Laos. English is a second language. No translator at meeting.

THE PLAN AND THE IEP

From early September until October 10, the chair was used daily.

Student was allowed to go to art and P.E., but otherwise “was strapped into the Restraint Chair from shortly after she arrived until about five minutes before her mother returned to pick her up.”

Court notes: these allegations hotly contested.

USE OF THE CHAIR

From early October to mid-December, the child was put in the Chair four or five times, from five minutes to 40.

Arms were strapped to her side. Chair put in the corner, with high

barriers.Child not allowed to use restroom. Child

yelled and cried.

LATER USE OF THE CHAIR

There was rarely any reason to use the chair.

Teacher “just didn’t like the child.”The straps sometimes restrained child’s

arms.Child frequently cried. Teacher told her

to “shut up.”Two to three times a week teacher

turned chair around and erected barriers to isolate child.

ACCORDING TO THE AIDES….

All three aides were “troubled” by the use of the Chair.

On the second day the Chair was used, an aide told the principal.

Same aide said she had over a dozen conversations with principal about this.

All three aides spoke to the principal about this.

THE AIDES SPEAK UP

Principal Burke told all three aides she would investigate.

“Burke did not investigate the complaints in any manner. Burke did not personally confront Michaels about the use of the restraint chair or ask her to stop using it.”

Court cites Ms. Burke’s own deposition testimony for this.

THE PRINCIPAL: MS. BURKE

All three aides expressed concerns to Ms. Rice, one of them six or seven times. Another one put it in writing.

Rice said she would meet with the teacher.

But she didn’t. She assumed the Chair was being used as per the Plan. Did “nothing to confirm that this assumption was true.” Court cites Rice’s deposition testimony.

CONSULTANT/SUPERVISOR MS. RICE

In December, one of the aides contacted the Legal Center for People with Disabilities and Older People.

The Center launched an investigation.This is the first that the superintendent

knew anything about this.

THE LEGAL CENTER

When the principal learned of the investigation she ordered the staff not to use any kind of time-out chair that had a strap on it.

When she later learned that the staff was still using the Chair, principal personally removed the straps from the Chair.

IMMEDIATE FOLLOW UP

1. The district.2. The superintendent.3. The director of special services.4. The consultant/supervisor: Ms. Rice.5. The principal: Ms. Burke.6. The teacher: Ms. Michaels.7. Two of the three teacher aides.

THE SUIT: EIGHT DEFENDANTS

• 4th Amendment.• 14th Amendment: substantive due

process.• 14th Amendment: procedural due process.• 14th Amendment: Equal Protection.• 504/ADA: Disability discrimination.• Federal Bill of Rights for the

Developmentally Disabled.• State Law claims (Colorado).

THE SUIT: LEGAL THEORIES

No liability for the superintendent or special education director: no knowledge.

No liability for district: no policy that authorized unconstitutional conduct.

No liability for aides: they didn’t do it.Possible liability for teacher, principal,

consultant/supervisor.

4TH AMENDMENT: UNLAWFUL SEIZURE

The potential liability of the principal and the consultant/supervisor was based on a failure to train and/or supervise. Neither of them actually restrained the child.

There was some evidence of deliberate indifference. The law is clearly established and the employees are not entitled to immunity.

FAILURE TO TRAIN/SUPERVISE

No liability for any defendant under this theory.

None of the defendants, other than perhaps the teacher, deprived the student of substantive due process.

As to the teacher, the law on this was not “clearly established.” She gets immunity.

14TH AMENDMENT: SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS

Use of restraint as alleged in this case requires notice and hearing, similar to with a short term suspension.

Teacher is potentially liable for this, but none of the other defendants.

14TH AMENDMENT: PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS

No one liable under this theory. Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that she was treated differently from those “similarly situated.”

There is no one “similarly situated.” No evidence that other children had similar behaviors, or a Plan like this student’s. Each student had his/her own IEP.

14TH AMENDMENT: EQUAL PROTECTION

There is no basis for liability under these laws for any individual—so all claims dismissed as to the individuals.

But the district is potentially liable for intentional discrimination, based on the allegations that two supervisory persons were informed and did not respond.

504/ADA

This law does not authorize a private cause of action—all claims dismissed.

FEDERAL BILL OF RIGHTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

• If the Plan had been followed as it was written, there would be no liability, and probably no lawsuit.

• When aides speak up, LISTEN.• Restraint is controversial and getting

much attention from advocate groups and media.

• SUPERVISE and DOCUMENT.

LESSONS

A.B. v. Adams-Arapahoe 28J School District

U.S. District Court, Colorado, November 28, 2011.

58 IDELR 14.

THE CASE

Jim WalshWalsh, Anderson, Gallegos, Green and

Treviño, P.C.P.O. Box 2156Austin, Texas 78768Phone: (512) 454-6864Fax: (512) 467-9318Email: jwalsh@wabsa.com Web: www.WalshAnderson.comTwitter: http://twitter.com/JWalshtxlawdawg

CONTACT INFORMATION

The information in this handout was created by Walsh, Anderson, Gallegos, Green and Treviño, P.C. It is intended to be used for general information only and is not to be considered specific legal advice. If specific legal advice is sought, consult an attorney.

Curriculum Update

• Teachable Moments in Social Media• Living Science Materials

Teachable Moments in Social Media

Social Media: forms of electronic communication (as Web sites for social networking

and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas,

personal messages, and other content (as videos)

Source: Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2012)

Do you recognize this man?

This is not a political campaign.

Value and Place for Media in the Classroom

Where Value DiminishesIf presented to students

-- at a inappropriate age. -- with no context. -- purely for entertainment value. -- with no real connection to the standards or curriculum.

Need for Objective Evaluation

Sampling of Related Standards

LIVING SCIENCE MATERIALS

Networking Break

10 Minutes

2013 State Accountability Update

Reference Materials

• http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/index.html

Approach

• Academic Achievement Distinction Designation Committee (AADDC)

• Accountability Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC)

• Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (APAC)

Comparison of Performance Index Systems

North Carolina Florida

• One Index; campus level growth looks at lowest performing 25% of students

• Index included campus-level progress measures

California

• 12 Indices (All students and 11 student groups

• Individual student progress is not used

• One Index; student groups not part of system

• Separate Growth index includes student progress on each test (reading and mathematics)

General Updates

• Project Share• Graduation Plans• STAAR Standard Setting• Proclamations• EMAT• TEKS PD Sessions• Commitment Forms

Project Share

Operation Graduation

Sandra Dorn, College and Career Guidance

Specialist

Graduation 2013

The good news is….

There are no significant changesAt the moment

THE GRADUATION PLANTaking a closer look

English

Requirements for School Districts:English I, II, III, and IV

No Change

Math

Math

Distinguished Achievement ProgramThe fourth mathematics credit must be taken after successful completion of Algebra I, algebra II, and Geometry.

CTE courses that may satisfy the fourth mathematics requirement may be taken after the successful completion of Algebra I and Geometry and either after the successful completion of or concurrently with Algebra II.

Recommended High School ProgramThe only mathematics course sequence requirements will be:

• Mathematical Models will applications must be successfully completed prior to Algebra II

• CTE courses that satisfy the fourth mathematics requirement may be taken after successful completion of Algebra I and Geometry and either after the successful completion of or concurrently with algebra II

Required Offerings• Algebra I• Algebra II• Geometry• Precalculus• Mathematical Models with

Applications

ScienceMinimum High School ProgramA student on the MHSP will be permitted to take Principles of Technology to satisfy the physics requirement if he or she takes chemistry and physics instead of IPC.

Recommended High school ProgramThe only science course requirements will be:Integrated Physics and Chemistry (IPC) must be successfully completed prior to chemistry and physics.CTE courses that may satisfy the fourth science requirement may be taken after the successful completion of biology and chemistry and either after the successful completion of or concurrently with physics.

Distinguished Achievement ProgramThere will be no course sequence requirements except:CTE courses that may satisfy the fourth science requirement may be taken after the successful completion of biology and chemistry and either after the successful completion of or concurrently with physics.

Science

Requirements for School Districts• IPC• Biology• Chemistry• Physics• at least two additional science courses

Social Studies/LOTE/PE/Electives

No Change

Social Studies

Requirements for School Districts• U.S. History Studies Since 1877• World History Studies• US Government• World Geography Studies• Economics

Languages Other Than English

Requirements for School Districts Levels I, II, and III or higher of the same language

Physical Education

Requirements for School Districtsat least two courses selected from:• Foundations of Personal Fitness• Adventure/outdoor Education• Aerobic activities• Individual Sports

Electives

Requirements for School Districtscoherent sequences of courses selected from at least three of the sixteen career clusters

Requirements for School Districts

Then• The school district must teach a course in which

ten or more students indicate they will participate or that is required for a student to graduate. For a course in which fewer than ten students indicate they will participate, the district must either teach the course every year or employ options described in Subchapter C of this chapter to provide the course and must maintain evidence that it is employing those options.

Now• A school district must teach a course that is specifically

required for high school graduation at least once in any two consecutive school years. For a subject that has an end-of-course assessment, the district must either teach the course every year or employ options described in Subchapter C of this chapter (relating to Other Provisions) to enable students to earn credit for the course and must maintain evidence that it is employing those options.

SUBSTITUTIONSAll Three Graduation Programs

• A student who is unable to participate in physical activity due to disability or illness may substitute an academic elective credit (English language arts, mathematics, science, or social studies) for the physical education credit requirement.

• The determination regarding a student's ability to participate in physical activity will be made by:

• The student‘s ARD committee if the student receives special education services • The Section 504 committee, if the student does not receive special education

services, but is covered by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 • A committee established by the school district of persons with appropriate

knowledge regarding the student if neither of the first two committees is applicable. This committee shall follow the same procedures required of an ARD or a Section 504 committee.

• On January 21, 2011 the State Board of Education adopted Proposed New 19 TAC Chapter 111, Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Mathematics, Subchapter C, High School, §111.37, Advanced Quantitative Reasoning (One Credit)

• This course is an additional option for students to satisfy the third mathematics credit requirement on the MHSP or the fourth mathematics credit requirement on the RHSP or DAP beginning with the 2011-2012 school year.

COMBINING CREDITSAll Three Graduation Programs

Half-

cred

its

Half-

cred

its

• The TAC allows a local school district to award credit proportionately to students to who are able to successfully complete only one semester of a two-semester course. Unless the TAC specifically prohibits combining two half credits to satisfy a graduation requirement, in accordance with local district policy, a student may satisfy a graduation requirement for which there are multiple options with one-half credit of one allowable option and one-half credit of a second allowable option.

• Citation: §74.26. Award of Credit • (d) In accordance with local district policy, students who are

able to successfully complete only one semester of a two-semester course can be awarded credit proportionately.

• MHSP - A student may not combine a half credit of Algebra II with a half credit from another mathematics course to satisfy the final mathematics credit requirement.

• MHSP - A student may not combine a half credit of either World History Studies or World Geography Studies with a half credit from another academic elective course to satisfy the academic elective credit requirement.

• All Programs - A student may not combine a half credit of a course for which there is an end-of-course assessment with another elective to satisfy an elective credit requirement

• Thanks for listening and have an incredible day!!!!

Timeline for STAAR EOC Standard Setting Process

Performance Categories

Level III: Advanced Academic Performance

Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance

Level I: Unsatisfactory Academic Performance

Timeline

STAAR EOC: late March 2012 (AKA as Aprilish)

STAAR 3-8: by Dec 2012

Timeline

Passing Standards

• Reviewed every 3 years

• Possible phase in of the Level II standards

• Students must achieve a cumulative score in order to meet graduation requirements

Validity Studies

Linking Studies

Where are we now?

Standard Setting Process Description Timeline

Validity and linking studies conducted*

External validity evidence will be collected to inform standard setting and support interpretations of the standards. Scores on each assessment will be linked to performance on other assessments in the same content area.

Studies started in spring 2009 and will continue throughout the program.

Development of performance labels and policy definitions*

Committee convened jointly by TEA and THECB to recommend number of performance categories, performance category labels and general policy definitions for each performance category.

September 2010

Development of specific performance-level descriptors for each course*

Committees consisting primarily of educators will develop performance-level descriptors as an aligned system, describing a reasonable progression of skills within each content area (English, mathematics, science, and social studies).

November 2011

∞

Standard Setting Process Description Timeline

Policy Committee* Committee will consider policy implications of performance standards and empirical study results and make recommendations to inform reasonable ranges (“neighborhoods”) for the cut scores.

February 1-2, 2012

Standard Setting Committee Committees will consist of members with higher education and policy background in addition to K–12 educators. They will use the performance labels, policy definitions, specific PLDs, and “neighborhoods” set by the policy committee to recommend cut scores for each STAAR EOC assessment. The specific PLDs will also be finalized.

Week of February 20 and 27, 2012

Internal Review of Performance Standards

TEA and THECB will review the cut-score recommendations across content areas and present final recommendations to commissioners for approval.

Early March 2012

Coming SOON

Coming SOON

Standard Setting Process Description Timeline

Approval of Performance Standards

Approved by Commissioner of Education (and Commissioner of Higher Education for postsecondary readiness standards).

Mid-March 2012

Implementation of Performance Standards

Performance standards will be reported to students after the spring 2012 administration. Phase-in process TBD.

May 2012

Review of Performance Standards

Done on a pre-determined schedule at least every three years.

Fall 2014

Coming SOON

Coming SOON

Every 3 yrs

Instructional Materials Adoption

2012

2019

Information current as of spring 2012. Source: Texas Education Today; Jan/Feb 2012 Edition (http://www.tea.state.tx.us/TET/)

Instructional Materials Adoption

2011-2012

Instructional Materials Adoption

Spring 2012

Instructional Materials Adoption

Instructional Materials AdoptionState Board to Adopt in 2013

SCIENCEMATH

TECH APPS

Instructional Materials Adoption

School year 2014-2015 (Proclamation 2014):

Science K-12, Mathematics K-8,

Technology Applications

School year 2015-2016 (Proclamation 2015):

Social studies, K-12 Math, 9-12

Fine arts

School year 2016-2017 (Proclamation 2016): Languages other than

English

School year 2017-2018 (Proclamation 2017): Career and technical

education

Instructional Materials Adoption

School year 2018-2019 (Proclamation 2018): English language arts

and reading, K-5 Prekindergarten

systems

School year 2019-2020 (Proclamation 2019): English language arts

and reading, 6-12 Health education

Physical education

Instructional Materials Adoption

Proclamation 2014

Proclamation 2015

Proclamation 2016

Proclamation 2017

Proclamation 2018

Proclamation 2019

Science K-12Math K-8Tech Apps

Social studies, K-12 Math, 9-12 Fine arts

Languages other than English

Career and technical education

English language arts and reading, K-5 Prekindergarten systems

English language arts and reading, 6-12 Health education Physical education

EMAT

April 2012

TEKS Professional Development (TEKS PD)

Region XIII ESC Commitment Forms

To Do List & To the Administrator Addressed

Contact Us

Ed VaraDeputy Executive Director512.919.5306ed.vara@esc13.txed.net

Jennifer DrummSenior Coordinator, Curriculum & Instruction512.919.5459jennifer.drumm@esc13.txed.net

Updates and Information:http://www5.esc13.net/thescoop/cc/