Working%20with%20State%20Pre-K%20Programs%20to%20Develop%20More%20Community-based%20Opportunities%20in%20New%20Jersey

1
Working with State Pre-K Programs to Develop More
Community-basedOpportunities in New Jersey

• Pamela Brillante
• New Jersey Department of Education
• Office of Special Education Programs

2
Introduction to Abbott in New Jersey

• Abbott is the short-hand description of a
  series of New Jersey Supreme Court decisions
  growing out of litigation filed in 1981 on behalf
  of children residing in New Jerseys most
  economically disadvantaged municipalities. 
• Abbott is the first-named plaintiff, but the
  name is now used to distinguish the 31 school
  districts selected by the Court and the
  Legislature to benefit from state financial
  assistance and to implement specific remedies
  mandated by the Court.

3
Objectives of the Abbott System

• The New Jersey Supreme Court in 1998 established
  a single criterion for determining whether a
  constitutionally guaranteed education is being
  provided to students in the poorest schools in
  the state.  Do they master the New Jersey Core
  Curriculum Content Standards with the same
  proficiency as students in more affluent
  districts? 
• Prior to 2002, most attention was given to
  specific remedies and services that were mandated
  or authorized by the New Jersey Supreme Court in
  1998. Subsequently, priority attention has been
  given to academic achievement with particular
  focus on early literacy and numeracy.

4
Resources of Abbott

• Under the Abbott decisions, Abbott districts
  receive state aid that is calculated to provide
  them with the same per-pupil operating budget as
  would be found in New Jerseys wealthiest school
  districts. 
• Called Abbott parity aid, this funding is
  adjusted annually to reflect spending and
  enrollment in wealthy districts.  In FY2006, it
  equals about 1 billion. 

5
Abbott Pre-K Requirement

• The state is financially responsible for the
  creation of high-quality preschool programs for
  all three and four year-old children residing in
  Abbott districts. 
• Currently, 70 percent of approximately 55,000
  eligible children are enrolled in Abbott
  preschools, supported by 500 million in state
  funds. 

6
Abbott Pre-K Requirement

• The Abbott preschool program has evolved since
  its inception in the 1999-2000 school year. In
  the landmark Abbott v. Burke school funding case,
  the New Jersey Supreme Court required that three-
  and four-year-old children in the highest poverty
  districts in the state receive a high-quality
  preschool education.
• Through a Department of Education (DOE) and
  Department of Human Services (DHS) partnership,
  these classrooms combine a DOE-funded six-hour,
  180-day component with a DHS-funded wrap-around
  program that provides daily before- and
  after-care and summer programs. In total, the
  full-day, full-year program is available ten
  hours per day, 245 days a year.

7
Abbott Pre-K Requirement

• Expansion of the program continues to occur. In
  the first school year of the program, only 19,000
  children were enrolled. Six years later in
  2005-06, more than 40,000 of the 54,000 three and
  four year-olds were in preschool.
• Projected enrollment for the 2006-07 school year
  is over 43,000-over 80 percent of the total
  population of three-and four-year-olds in these
  districts.

8
The Self-Assessment Validation System

• High-quality educational programs must undergo a
  continuous cycle of program evaluation and
  improvement.
• Recognizing this, the department launched the
  Self-Assessment Validation System for Abbott
  Preschool Programs (SAVS). The multi-phase SAVS
  process focuses on program improvement augmented
  by fiscal accountability.

9
The Self-Assessment Validation System
10
The Self-Assessment Validation System

• The Self Assessment Validation System (SAVS), was
  launched in the 2003-2004 school year as an
  annual evaluation that districts must undergo in
  the Abbott Preschool Program.
• The SAVS is designed to guide the district
  through a systematic self-appraisal of its
  preschool program.
• The SAVS criteria are derived from the NJ Abbott
  Preschool Program Implementation Guidelines and
  Guidelines for Appropriate Curriculum Content and
  Assessment in Programs Serving Children Ages 3
  through 8 (National Association for the
  Education of Young Children and the National
  Association of Early Childhood Specialists in
  State Departments of Education).
• Findings of the SAVS inform revisions to the
  districts Two Year Report on Instructional
  Priorities.

11
The Self-Assessment Validation System

• The following graph shows progress districts have
  made statewide from the 03-04 school year to the
  04-05 school year.
• Each of the 17 items on the SAVS is rated on a
  three point scale where 1 not met, 2 in
  progress and 3 fully met.
• Each district then receives an overall SAVS score
  derived by averaging the 17 component scores. As
  can be seen, districts have made dramatic
  improvements toward implementing the standards
  required for high quality.

12
The Self-Assessment Validation System
13
2006 SAVS - Revised

• In an effort to continually improve practice and
  program assessment a revised SAVS now consists of
  criteria in each of the following 16 program
  component areas, derived from the Abbott
  Preschool Program Implementation Guidelines.
• The NJ Office of Special Education Programs were
  involved in this revision to ensure programs
  continued to include young children with
  disabilities into community programs.

14
2006 SAVS - Revised

• Administration,
• Recruitment and Outreach
• Facilities
• Community Collaboration
• Head Start
• Curriculum and Program
• Supporting English Language Learners
• Inclusion

• Preschool Intervention and Support
• Staff Qualifications
• Professional Development
• Child Screening
• Child Assessment
• Health and Food Services
• Parent Involvement
• Program Evaluation.

15
2006 SAVS - Revised

• Following each criterion are one or more
  indicators. These indicators are essential
  components to consider when rating a criterion.
• Scoring protocol was adapted from The
  Accreditation Criteria Procedures of the
  National Association for the Education of Young
  Children (NAEYC, 1988).
• For the 2005-06 process, the rating scale has
  been expanded from a three-point scale to a
  five-point scale as follows

16
2006 SAVS - Revised

• Scoring Procedures
• Not Yet- There is no evidence that this statement
  accurately describes the program.
• Partially Met- There is some evidence that this
  statement accurately describes the program and
  plans have been developed and some implemented.
• In Progress- There is evidence that this
  statement describes activities initiated or
  planned in this program. Plans have been
  developed and initiated, but full realization is
  not yet accomplished.
• Substantially Met- There is a great deal of
  evidence that this statement accurately describes
  the program. For a criterion to rate a
  substantially met, all indicators related to
  the criterion must be present. (It also is
  possible for all indicators to be present without
  rating the criterion substantially met.)
• Exemplary Implementation- The evidence exceeds
  all indicators and expectations.

17
2006 SAVS - Revised

• Key Terms were also added to ensure that programs
  understood that the district was to include in
  its self-assessment all classrooms and teachers
  including children who continue to be in
  segregated settings
• Criterion Standard by which the components of
  the program will be rated.
• Indicator Important points to consider when
  rating a criterion.
• Preschool Program All preschool classrooms.
• Teacher All teachers in preschool classrooms.

18
What We Observed

• After the first SAVS validations in the spring of
  2004, it was observed that the number of children
  referred for special education for behavior
  issues had been increasing over the initial years
  of implementation.
• It was originally expected that this would slow
  down as the classrooms used more developmentally
  appropriate practices, but in certain districts
  it did not.
• In response, Preschool Intervention and Referral
  Teams (PIRT) were strengthened in the districts
  and the Intervention and Support section was
  added to the SAVS document.

19
Program Area Intervention and Support

• Rationale Working with classroom teachers,
  paraprofessionals and family members, early
  childhood administrators and dedicated early
  childhood intervention professionals have a
  unique opportunity to successfully identify
  preschoolers at risk, and work with their
  teachers and families, which will help to
  decrease referrals for special education.
• In addition, as more children are enrolled in
  preschool, teachers are reporting an increase in
  challenging behaviors exhibited by children.
  Specific support from preschool intervention
  specialists in strategies and interventions to
  reduce these behaviors will allow more
  preschoolers to successfully participate in a
  regular education preschool program.

20
Program Area Intervention and Support

• Criterion 1 A preschool intervention and
  referral team is fully staffed and functioning
  according to the Abbott Preschool Implementation
  Guidelines.Indicators
• ? An established protocol for referral to
  the intervention team
• clearly outlines who can refer
  children, under what conditions,
• and what appropriate response will
  follow. All early childhood
• staff including teachers, center
  directors, master teachers,
• and administrators, are familiar
  with and adhere to, the
• protocol to ensure effective
  communication and follow-up.
• The preschool intervention and referral teams
  role and
• responsibilities are clearly articulated, and
  do not entail
• direct therapeutic services to children.

21
Program Area Intervention and Support

• Preschool intervention and referral specialists
  confer regularly with
• the general education teachers and master
  teachers, supervisors,
• and other professionals (special education,
  nurses, etc)
• All preschool intervention and referral
  specialists have expertise in
• early childhood education, and have
  received training in a
• developmentally-appropriate, research-
  based model approved by
• the DOE (e.g. Positive Behavior Support).
• The preschool intervention and referral
  specialists assist with
• transitions from one program to another.
• The preschool intervention and referral team is
  fully staffed
• according to the DOE approved budget

22
Program Area Intervention and Support

• Criterion 2 The intervention and support from
  the team meets the needs of the early childhood
  staff.
• Observe, provides feedback and models appropriate
  strategies and interventions to teachers and
  master teachers.
• The team plans and implements professional
  development for preschool teachers, master
  teachers, assistants and/or administrators to
  facilitate preschool inclusion.
• Assist with planning strategies, modifying
  teaching practices or adapting environment and/or
  materials that will assist preschoolers in
  meeting the Preschool Teaching and Learning
  Expectations Standards of Quality.

23
What We Learned and How It Changed Our Practice

• Added Positive Behavior Support . Dr. Lise Fox,
  Project Director
• Positive Behavior Support is a process for
  understanding and resolving the problem behavior
  of children that is based on values and empirical
  research. It offers an approach for developing an
  understanding of why the child engages in problem
  behavior and strategies for preventing the
  occurrence of problem behavior while teaching the
  child new skills.
• Positive behavior support offers a holistic
  approach that considers all factors that impact
  on a child and the childs behavior. It can be
  used to address problem behaviors that range from
  aggression, tantrums, and property destruction to
  social withdrawal.

24
What We Learned and How It Changed Our Practice

• Added The Mastery Outreach Project . Geneva
  Woodruff Ph. D. Project Director
• The Mastery Project has been designed to promote
  the social and academic skills of children ages 2
  to 8 in special and regular education early
  childhood preschool to grade 3 classes, who have
  challenging behaviors. The Mastery training is
  based upon empirically supported intervention
  practices for young children. These intervention
  practices have been shown to reduce disruptive
  behaviors in young children, promote their
  positive behaviors and allow them to succeed in a
  classroom environment both socially and as
  learners.
• The Mastery Project provides year long training
  and technical assistance on ways to 1) work
  effectively with the children in their
  classrooms, and 2) involve the children's
  families. To date, over 90 of the children being
  followed in the Mastery program have attained
  their behavioral goals.

25
What We Observed

• In observing in the districts and monitoring the
  December 1 count, it came to came to our
  attention that our inclusion rate remained
  relatively steady most programs were continuing
  to provide related services in a pull out model.

26
Program Area Inclusion

• Rationale According to the Individuals with
  Disabilities Act (IDEA), every child who is
  eligible for special education services is
  entitled to a free and appropriate education in
  the least restrictive environment (LRE).
  Therefore, preschool children with disabilities
  should be afforded the opportunity to participate
  and interact with their peers who do not have
  disabilities in natural settings.
• Such settings include, but are not limited to,
  home and family, play groups, child care, nursery
  schools, Head Start programs and neighborhood
  school classrooms (CEC-DEC).
• Many positive outcomes have been reported that
  support these practices, including increased
  performance of children with disabilities and
  improved classroom behavior, as well as, positive
  effects on the attitudes of typically developing
  students concerning children with disabilities.

27
Program Area Inclusion

• Criterion 1 Children with disabilities are
  included in general education classrooms to the
  maximum extent possible.
• Children with disabilities are placed in general
  education classes in the proportion that they are
  found in the districts general population.
• Master teacher inclusion specialists are employed
  and have specialized knowledge in inclusion
  practices and provisions.
• The master teacher inclusion specialist provides
  appropriate guidance and information to general
  education teachers regarding inclusion strategies.

28
Program Area Inclusion

• The general educators are trained to adapt
  curriculum and materials to meet the needs of
  children with disabilities.
• Support services are in place to support
  individual student needs (e.g. occupational
  therapy, physical therapy, speech, preschool
  intervention and referral specialists).
• The classroom teacher collaborates with the child
  study team, master teacher, preschool
  intervention and referral specialist and parents
  as determined by the students individualized
  education plan (IEP).
• The classroom teacher participates in all
  meetings of the IEP process (Identification
  meeting, Eligibility meeting, IEP Planning and
  Development meeting, and the Annual
• Review meeting).

29
Program Area Inclusion

• Criterion 2 Integrated therapies are offered
  within the general education class.
• Therapies are carried out within the regular
  activities of the classroom.
• Therapists work directly within the classroom,
  modeling for the classroom teacher and providing
  consultation.

30
Program Area Inclusion

• Criterion 3 Administrative supports are in
  place that facilitate inclusion.
• Meetings between early childhood and special
  education departments are regularly scheduled.
• Opportunities for collaboration and consultation
  among teachers, therapists, child study teams and
  preschool intervention and referral teams are
  built into school schedule.
• Effective horizontal articulation takes place
  regularly between district-operated programs, and
  provider programs.
• Classroom teachers use and have ongoing access to
  the written IEP.

31
What We Learned and How It Changed Our Practice

• Added LEAP Outreach Project University of
  Colorado Denver. Dr. Phil Strain, Project
  Director
• LEAP (Learning Experiences - An Alternative
  Program for Preschoolers and Parents) is a model
  for developmentally-integrated preschool classes
  for typically developing children and peers with
  autism. It offers a comprehensive parent
  education program providing real help in
  real-world home and community settings. The LEAP
  program is research based and is a training model
  that had been funded continually by the Office of
  Special Education Programs from 1981 -2004.
• A network of replication sites exist in school
  districts throughout the United States. The
  benefits of this program on child and parent
  behavior have been demonstrated in some 36
  peer-reviewed studies.

32
What We Learned and How It Changed Our Practice

• Added The National Individualizing Preschool
  Inclusion Project "A Project of National
  Significance" Robin McWilliam, Ph.D  Project
  Director  
•                                                   
                                                    
               
• The Individualizing Inclusion approach hinges on
  three critical components functional
  intervention planning, integrated therapy, and
  embedded intervention.
• Functional intervention planning is carried out
  principally through a routines-based assessment,
  featuring an interview of the family and the
  teaching staff.
• Integrated therapy consists of specialists using
  models we have labeled individualized within
  routines and group activity to provide special
  education and related services.
• Embedded intervention involves the use of proven
  instructional principles, especially incidental
  teaching, in the context of developmentally
  appropriate activities. 

33
What We Learned and How It Changed Our Practice

• Added NJ OSEP Professional Development Proactive
  Workshop Series.
• School year workshops and summer institutes
  for teachers and
• administrators were focused on topics that
  came out of the SAVS
• reviews. Topics included
• Adapting and Modifying Instruction in the
  Inclusive
• Classroom ,
• Observing and Evaluating a High Quality
  Inclusive Classroom for
• Administrators
• Transition to K,
• The Role of the Paraprofessional in the
  Inclusive Preschool
• Classroom

34
What We Observed

• We observed through data and articulation with
  the NJ Early Intervention System that children
  who were transitioning from Early Intervention to
  the Preschool System during the school year were
  being placed in self-contained settings at a high
  rate.
• A Transition section was added to the SAVS
  document in the 2004-2005 validation year.

35
Program Area Transition

• Rationale Transition is an ongoing process that
  should facilitate and maintain continuity between
  programs. Preparing families for the transition
  process helps to orient them to the program,
  anticipate services based on each childs needs
  and provides valuable insight to information
  about the child and family.

36
Program Area Transition.

• Criterion 2 Transition activities are planned
  for children entering the preschool program from
  early intervention and other settings
• Flexible scheduling and planning provide many
  opportunities for families to learn about the
  preschool program, such as open houses, spring
  orientation, and individual meetings with
  families.
• Preschool and special education staff
  collaborates to meet the needs of children with
  disabilities entering the preschool program from
  early intervention
• Access to general education classes is available
  to students who are transitioning from early
  intervention during the school year.

37
What We Learned and How It Changed Our Practice

• Added Interagency Transition Task Force. Pilot
  Project - NREIC.
• NJ has 4 Regional Early Intervention
  Collaboratives serving the 21 counties. The DOE
  and Northern Regional Early Intervention
  Collaborative have formed 3 countywide task
  forces to address specific issues relating to the
  transition of children from the Part C to the
  Part B systems for those specific stakeholders.

38
Looking Ahead

• Plans for the 2006-2007 school year include
• Inclusion Master Teacher Institute run jointly
  with the NJ Dept of Ed Office of Early Childhood
  Education. Division of Abbott Implementation.
• Joint Transition trainings with the NJ Early
  Intervention System, Department of Health and
  Senior Services.