Special+Education

ARRA/Idea Funds ||||  || ARRA/Idea Funds ||||  ||
 * Page 1 ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||
 * Assessment & ESL || Curriculum || LT & CTE || Professional Development || Special Education || Student Interventions ||
 * Approach || Person(s) Responsible || Timeline || Resources || Formative Evaluation || Summative Evaluation ||
 * L. Create and implement a structured learning model (Intervention Lab) that enables struggling students to receive focused and intensive academic support outside the classroom which is consistent across the District for the purpose of student acceleration. ||||||  || Maintain a log of lab use, interventions delivered based on SAT referral data and student progress in the intervention. || Increased student achievement as measured by TAKS and closing of student learning gaps. ||
 * Deployment ||||||  ||||   ||
 * 1. Identify an Intervention Lab Focus group || Director of Special Education; Director of Student Interventions || Fall 2009 || Time and Effort ||||  ||
 * 2. Communicate the funding parameters || Director of Special Education || Fall 2009 || Time and Effort ||||  ||
 * 3. Develop a district-wide Intervention Lab model that includes a progress monitoring / universal screening tool as Tier 3 of the BISD RtI Model || Director of Special Education; Director of Student Interventions || Fall 2009 || Time and Effort
 * 4. Establish procedures and processes for the Intervention Lab program || Director of Special Education; Director of Student Interventions || Fall 2009 || Time and Effort ||||  ||
 * 5. Provide training to campus teachers and administrators || Director of Special Education; Director of Student Interventions || Fall, 2009 || Time and Effort
 * 6. Implement the Intervention Lab program || Campus administration || Fall 2009 || Time and Effort ||||  ||
 * Approach || Person(s) Responsible || Timeline || Resources || Formative Evaluation || Summative Evaluation ||
 * M. Ensure that the needs and services provided to at risk students are effective and in compliance with State law ||||||  || 100% of at risk coordinators are trained and at risk students are coded accurately upon audit. || Gaps between at risk and non-at risk students decrease as measured by TAKS. ||
 * Deployment ||||||  ||||   ||
 * 1. Develop and refine standardized procedures to support at risk students including entering, reviewing and exiting the at risk program. || Director of Student Interventions || January 2010 || Computer, printer, paper, projector |||| To be determined ||
 * 2. Provide an overview for campus at risk coordinators related to student information into Skyward including the at risk criteria || Director of Student Interventions || September 2009 || Time and Effort |||| Complete ||
 * 3. Provide a 1-day session for at risk coordinators to enter student information into Skyward || Director of Student Interventions || October 2009 || Computer, Projector, Time and Effort |||| Complete ||
 * 4. Establish passing standards for the readiness test criteria for K-2 in reading and math || Director of Student Interventions, Director of Curriculum || September 2009 || Time and Effort |||| Complete ||
 * 5. Provide gap analysis between at risk and non at-risk || Director of Student Interventions || November 2009 || Time and Effort, Computer, Printer, Paper, Binders ||||  ||
 * 6. Ensure that meeting the needs of At Risk Students are addressed in each CIP in that SCE funding is included in the resources || Director of Student Interventions, Principals || November 2009 || Time and Effort, CIP ||||  ||
 * 7. Ensure that each Title I campus addresses how student needs are being met through Title I funding on the CIP and that the funding is documented in the CIP || Director of Student Interventions, Principals || November 2009 || Time and Effort, CIP ||||  ||