Special
Education Study
Work Team Minutes
March 01, 2005
Our
Goal:
A strategic approach to developing a Special Education Instructional Model
for resource and BI services
Enduring
Understandings:
A system approach helps to show
alignment of program curriculum, assessments, and effective instructional
practices
Quality instruction is essential
for the success of all students in the system
Essential
Questions:
How do Special Education services
specifically support Goal One of the Strategic Plan?
What can we learn by understanding
IDEA, exploring effective models, and examining our current research?
Outcomes:
- KNOWLEDGE BUILDING-debriefing
reading assignment
- Understanding our Work Team
TIMELINE
- Continuing our INVESTIGATIONS
- Planning for VISITATIONS
- Finalizing the first LOOPING
OUT process and TRACKING process.
- ASSIGNMENTS Reading
and Research
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
Agenda
Items:
1) Welcome: Review of
Outcomes for today’s meeting
2) Inclusion Activity:
Reflection: Why did you agree to be on this team? What will you
bring to our work?
3) TIMELINE: Timelines
for accomplishing our work were shared with the team.
- Mar. 1:
Completion of criteria for district visits and In-District visit protocol
developed and published
- March 2-14:
Committee decides where to visit. Teams formed and contacts made.
- Before WASL:
Visits occur. Findings written, but names deleted.
- April-May:
Development of Model based upon Team findings and research
- May 27:
Present Model to Directors
4) KNOWLEDGE BUILDING –
Debriefing readings and research:
- Team members used a 3 step
interview process to review the document “The new IDEA: Track the important
changes” which compares the 2004 legislation with the 1997 legislation.
5) INVESTIGATIONS
- The team reviewed
the questions in the five areas for research, Early prevention and identification,
Curriculum and Assessment, Instructional practices, Professional development
and Implementation.
- Individual
team members were asked to review their homework assignment to confirm
their choice of research topic and the rationale for their choice/s.
- Members signed
up for their research topics and met with these teams for a short time
to discuss how they would begin their research. As their “Visitation
Criteria” teams completed their work members shifted into their research.
6) VISITATIONS:
- A Charette process was used
to review and refine the work of the visitation criteria teams.
- Following the review of the
work from 4 criteria teams, it was decided to turn over the completion
of the visitation criteria to an ad hoc committee of representatives from
each criteria team. This team met on Mar. 7 to continue the process
of defining the criteria for the selection of schools to visit inside
and outside of Spokane, as well as the specific information we want to
gather from these schools.
7) LOOPING OUT and TRACKING process:
-
Team members were surveyed to see where and when they might be able to
conduct a loop out to their representative groups during the next 2 weeks.
They were given a presentation framework as a resource to follow when
delivering their loop out message.
- An
email from Chris Bailey will follow with a PowerPoint and handouts to
assist with this loop out as well.
8) ASSIGNMENT:
- Each team member was asked
to conduct a loop out to their representative group.
- Team members were asked to
research and read according to the agreements made within their research
teams.