Plenary Speakers: Federal Panel Amanda BryansOffice of Head Start, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services Libby Doggett Early Learning Deputy Assistant Secretary at the US Department of Education Ruth Ryder Deputy Director of the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), US Department of Education Panel Moderator Rob Corso Research Assistant Professor at Vanderbilt University 1
21
Embed
Plenary Speakers: Federal Panel Amanda Bryans Office of Head Start, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Plenary Speakers: Federal Panel
Amanda BryansOffice of Head Start, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services
Libby Doggett Early Learning Deputy Assistant Secretary at the US Department of Education
Ruth Ryder Deputy Director of the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), US Department of Education
Panel Moderator
Rob Corso Research Assistant Professor at Vanderbilt University
1
PRESIDENT OBAMA’S VISION
2
FOCUS ON EARLY LEARNING
BUILDING TOWARD A $2 BILLION INVESTMENTRACE TO THE TOP-EARLY LEARNING CHALLENGE – 20 STATESPRESCHOOL DEVELOPMENT GRANTS– 18 STATES
• RTT-ELC, RTT and RTT-D - the latter 2 have projects in P-3
• IDEA (Part C and Section 619) is birth through age 21
• ESEA (Title 1, Title II, Title III)• School Turnaround• Promise Neighborhoods• Investing in Innovation (I3)• Comprehensive Centers (CEELO)
which coordinates with nat’l & reg’l comp centers
• Enhanced Assessment Grants• Full Service Community Schools• Ready to Learn (ages 2-9)• Institute for Education Sciences• Research: Case Studies on P-3,
KEAs, QRIS, Preschool Development Grants (research network), NAS Studies on workforce, family engagement, English Learners
7
12 QUALITY STANDARDS
1. High staff qualifications 2. High-quality professional
development for all staff3. RATIO OF NO MORE THAN 10
TO 14. CLASS SIZE OF NO MORE THAN
20 5. FULL-DAY PROGRAM6. INCLUSION OF CHILDREN
WITH DISABILITIES 7. DEVELOPMENTALLY
APPROPRIATE, CULTURALLY AND LINGUISTICALLY RESPONSIVE INSTRUCTION
Policy Statement on Inclusion of Children with Disabilities in Early
Childhood Programs
• It is the Departments’ position that all young children with disabilities should have access to inclusive high-quality early childhood programs where they are provided with appropriate support in meeting high expectations
Policy Statement on Inclusion of Children with Disabilities in Early
Childhood ProgramsInclusion in early childhood programs: •including children with disabilities in general early childhood programs together with their peers without disabilities;
•holding high expectations and intentionally promoting participation in all learning and social activities, facilitated by individualized accommodations; and
•using evidence-based services and supports to foster their cognitive, language, physical, behavioral, and social-emotional development and friendships with peers and sense of belonging.
This applies to all young children with disabilities, from those with the mildest disabilities, to those with the most significant disabilities.
Policy Statement on Inclusion of Children with Disabilities in Early
Childhood Programs
• A “high-quality” early childhood program is one that is inclusive of children with disabilities and their families and ensures that policies, funding, and practices enable their full participation and success
Components of RDA•State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR) measures results and compliance and includes a State Systemic Improvement Plan
•Determinations reflect State performance on results, as well as compliance
•Differentiated monitoring and support focuses on improvement in all States, but especially low performing States
18
19
Year 1—FFY 2013Delivered by Apr 2015
Year 2—FFY 2014Delivered by Feb 2016
Years 3-6—FFY 2015-18Feb 2017- Feb 2020
Phase IAnalysis
Phase IIPlan
Phase IIIEvaluation
• Data Analysis;• Infrastructure Analysis;• State-identified
measureable result;• Coherent Improvement
Strategies;• Theory of Action.
• Multi-year plan addressing:• Infrastructure
Development; • Support EIS
Program/LEA in Implementing Evidence-Based Practices;
• Evaluation Plan.
• Reporting on Progress including:• Results of Ongoing
Evaluation;• Extent of Progress.
• Revisions to the SPP .
SSIP Activities by Phase
State-Identified Measureable Result –Part B
What are States working on?•Graduation: AK, DC, FL, GA, MN, MT, NC, ND, NJ, PA, RMI, VA, WV
•Reading/ELA: AR, AS, AZ, CNMI, CO, CT, DE, FSM, GU, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, LA, MI, MS, NE, NV, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, Palau, SC, SD, TN, TX, VI, WA, WI, WY
•Math: KY, MD, ME, PR, RI, UT, VT•Reading and Math: CA, MO•Early Childhood Outcomes: MA, NH•Post-school Outcomes: AL, BIE
Variations: Disability category; race/ethnicity; gender; grades; English learner; poverty status; subset of districts
20
State-Identified Measureable Result – Part C
What are States working on?•ECO-Social Emotional: AK, AL, AZ, CA, DE, FL, GA, HI. ID, IN, KS, MA, MD, MI, MO, MT, NJ, NC, ND, NV, OH, RI, SC, TX, UT, VT(also C4C ), WA, WI, WV, WY
•ECO-Knowledge and Skills: AS, DC, GU, IL, ME, MN, MS, NE, NH, OK, PR, SD, TN, VI
•ECO-Behavior to Meet Needs: CO, CNMI, SC, VA•ECO-All: LA, NM•Family Outcomes-Develop and Learn: AR, IA, KY •Other: C3 A&B–OR, PA; C4B-CT; C4 All-NY
Variations: ECO Summary Statement 1 or 2 or 1 and 2