Specific Learning Disability
WAC 392-172A-03055 Definition of SLD
WAC 392-172A-03080 Specific documentation for the eligibility determination of students suspected of having specific learning disabilities
DEFINED: (i) Specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or using spoken or written language, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia, that adversely affects a student’s educational performance. (ii) Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of intellectual disability, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage. Also does not include those with limited English proficiency, lack of exposure (attendance) or lack of adequate instruction.
EVAL STATMENT: Eligibility based on the following (1) whether a student has a disability, (2) whether the disability adversely affects his/her performance in the general education curriculum, and (3) the nature and extent of the student’s need for specially designed instruction and any necessary related services.
EVAL STATEMENT: The basis for making the determination, including an assurance that the determination has been made in accordance with WAC 392-172A-03040;
EVAL STATEMENT: The relevant behavior, if any, noted during the observation of the student and the relationship of that behavior to the student's academic functioning;
EVAL STATEMENT: Any educationally relevant medical findings;
REMEMBER: if the student can be qualified as OHI, HI, V, etc. then SLD CANNOT be used.
REMEMBER: We must demonstrate that the student exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, relative to age, state grade level standards, or intellectual development, that is determined by the group to be relevant to the identification of a specific learning disability, using appropriate assessments, and through review of existing data.
WAC 392-172A-03050 Specific learning disability
Determination: The group described in may determine that a student has a specific learning disability if: (1) The student does not achieve adequately for the student's age or meet the state's grade level standards when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the student's age in one or more of the following areas:
(a) Oral expression
(b) Listening comprehension
(c) Written expression
(d) Basic reading skill
(e) Reading fluency skills. Fluency must comprise: accuracy, rate, and prosody
(f) Reading comprehension
(g) Mathematics calculation
(h) Mathematics problem solving
WAC 392-172A-03065 and WAC 392-172A-03070 Use of discrepancy tables and method for documenting severe discrepancy If the school district uses a severe discrepancy model, it will use the OSPI's published discrepancy tables for the purpose of determining a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and academic achievement. NOTE: IQ can be given once every six years (not at every re-eval) after a base-line of two consecutive, similar scores are obtained.
Instructions for Using the Discrepancy Table:
1. FOR IQ:
A total or full scale intellectual ability score;
Determine the intellectual ability score - chronological age and age-based norms.
A non-verbal intellectual instrument for identified non-verbal students and/or English language learners (ELLs) must be used
2. FOR ACHIEVEMENT:
Determine the age-based achievement score on one of tests listed. Pay attention to what composites can be used for qualifying areas.
Use of grade-based achievement score is appropriate when the student has previously been retained (i.e. we can’t hold a student responsible for curriculum they have not been exposed to) and the use of grade based norms needs to be stated.
3. FOR DETERMINATION OF SERVICES:
Determine the cut-off score using the criterion scores listed in Table 1.
(a) Determine if a severe discrepancy exists ----If the age-based achievement score is equal to or smaller than the criterion discrepancy score, a severe discrepancy is indicated.
(b) Professional Judgment: In order to determine the presence of a specific learning disability www.wsasp.org/pdf/position/professional.pdf
(c) Data obtained from formal assessments, reviewing of existing data, assessments of student progress, observation of the student, and information gathered from all other evaluation processes for students being identified for a specific learning disability must be used when applying professional judgment to determine if a severe discrepancy exists. When applying professional judgment, the group shall document in a written narrative an explanation as to why the student has a severe discrepancy, including a description of all data used to make the determination through the use of professional judgment.
EVAL STATMENT: NEED to document what interventions have been attempted, for what periods of time,
EVAL STATMENT: regarding students continued performance below grade level expectations, classroom tests/school screeners/state wide assessments supporting this,
EVAL STATMENT: SCORE documenting performance of SD below the approximation to cut off score reported in SD below the mean or greater than -1.5 SD
PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT applied to IQ…..if full scale IQ is not representative (index scores have a difference of 1.5 SD (or more) between them (22pts), than the higher index may be used as the criterion via professional judgment
If you are using GAI in you interpretation, not considered professional judgment, but you need to have solid reasoning as to why you have chosen that score above the more stable, FSIQ, and discuss that in eval.
WAC 392-172A-03075 Observation of students suspected of having a specific learning disability. School districts must ensure that a student who is suspected of having a specific learning disability is observed in the student's learning environment, including the general education classroom setting, to document the student's academic performance and behavior in the areas of difficulty.
The evaluation group must:
(a) Use information from an observation in routine classroom instruction and monitoring of the student's performance that was done before the student was referred for an evaluation; or
(b) Have at least one member of the evaluation group conduct an observation of the student's academic performance in the general education classroom after the student has been referred for an evaluation and parental consent is obtained.
In the case of a student of less than school age or out of school, a group member must observe the student in a learning environment appropriate for that student. *need to discuss for home school kids specifically ·
Note: This means that testing observations are not enough. Need at least one classroom (or academic based) observation of a minimum of 20 minutes
SPECIAL NOTES:
For reading fluency qualification: “Evaluation teams are responsible for determining methods and assessment instruments needed to complete a comprehensive evaluation of a student. Test administrators should take care to ensure cluster and/or composite scores for fluency represent relevant components to qualify (i.e. accuracy, rate, and prosody. Not all available assessments measure all three areas of fluency. Thus, the evaluation group may need to employ more than one assessment as well as curriculum based measurement (CBM) to address all performance areas of reading fluency.”
WJ-fluency is a subtest and not a composite or cluster score- therefore, not appropriate for qualifying for reading fluency alone.
Minimum Intellectual Ability Level A student must have a full scale or overall composite intellectual ability score above a score which could establish eligibility for special education under the intellectual disability category (i.e. SS= 70).
Students Below Grade One The application of the severe discrepancy table is inappropriate for student.
TO COME IN THE FUTURE: Process based on a student's response to scientific research-based intervention who are not yet enrolled in first grade.
TO COME IN THE FUTURE: Process based on a student's response to scientific research-based intervention.
1. School districts using a process based on a student's response to scientific, research-based interventions to determine if a student has a specific learning disability shall adopt procedures to ensure that such process includes the following elements:
(a) Universal screening and/or benchmarking at fixed intervals at least three times throughout the school year;
(b) A high quality core curriculum designed to meet the instructional needs of all students;
(c) Scientific RTI as defined in WAC 392-172A-01165 are identified for use with students needing additional instruction;
(d) Scientific RTI used with a student are appropriate for the student's identified need and are implemented with fidelity;
(e) A multi-tiered model is developed for delivering both the core curriculum and strategic and intensive scientific research-based interventions in the general education setting;
(f) Frequent monitoring of individual student progress occurs in accordance with the constructs of the multi-tiered delivery system implemented in the school consistent with the intervention and tier at which it is being applied; and
(g) Decision making using problem solving or standard treatment protocol techniques is based upon, but not limited to, student centered data including the use of curriculum based measures, available standardized assessment data, intensive interventions, and instructional performance level.
2. Such policies and procedures outlined in subsection (1) of this section shall be designed so that districts can establish that:
(a) The student's general education core curriculum instruction provided the student the opportunity to increase her or his rate of learning;
(b) Two or more RTI’s identified to allow the student to progress toward his or her improvement targets.
(c) The duration of the intensive scientific research-based interventions that were implemented was long enough to gather sufficient data points below the student's aim line to demonstrate student response for each of the interventions through progress monitoring to determine the effectiveness of the interventions.
3. OSPI has developed guidelines for using response to intervention to assist districts in developing the procedures required under this section.
WAC 392-172A-03080 Specific documentation for the eligibility determination of students suspected of having specific learning disabilities
DEFINED: (i) Specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or using spoken or written language, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia, that adversely affects a student’s educational performance. (ii) Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of intellectual disability, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage. Also does not include those with limited English proficiency, lack of exposure (attendance) or lack of adequate instruction.
EVAL STATMENT: Eligibility based on the following (1) whether a student has a disability, (2) whether the disability adversely affects his/her performance in the general education curriculum, and (3) the nature and extent of the student’s need for specially designed instruction and any necessary related services.
EVAL STATEMENT: The basis for making the determination, including an assurance that the determination has been made in accordance with WAC 392-172A-03040;
EVAL STATEMENT: The relevant behavior, if any, noted during the observation of the student and the relationship of that behavior to the student's academic functioning;
EVAL STATEMENT: Any educationally relevant medical findings;
REMEMBER: if the student can be qualified as OHI, HI, V, etc. then SLD CANNOT be used.
REMEMBER: We must demonstrate that the student exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, relative to age, state grade level standards, or intellectual development, that is determined by the group to be relevant to the identification of a specific learning disability, using appropriate assessments, and through review of existing data.
WAC 392-172A-03050 Specific learning disability
Determination: The group described in may determine that a student has a specific learning disability if: (1) The student does not achieve adequately for the student's age or meet the state's grade level standards when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the student's age in one or more of the following areas:
(a) Oral expression
(b) Listening comprehension
(c) Written expression
(d) Basic reading skill
(e) Reading fluency skills. Fluency must comprise: accuracy, rate, and prosody
(f) Reading comprehension
(g) Mathematics calculation
(h) Mathematics problem solving
WAC 392-172A-03065 and WAC 392-172A-03070 Use of discrepancy tables and method for documenting severe discrepancy If the school district uses a severe discrepancy model, it will use the OSPI's published discrepancy tables for the purpose of determining a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and academic achievement. NOTE: IQ can be given once every six years (not at every re-eval) after a base-line of two consecutive, similar scores are obtained.
Instructions for Using the Discrepancy Table:
1. FOR IQ:
A total or full scale intellectual ability score;
Determine the intellectual ability score - chronological age and age-based norms.
A non-verbal intellectual instrument for identified non-verbal students and/or English language learners (ELLs) must be used
2. FOR ACHIEVEMENT:
Determine the age-based achievement score on one of tests listed. Pay attention to what composites can be used for qualifying areas.
Use of grade-based achievement score is appropriate when the student has previously been retained (i.e. we can’t hold a student responsible for curriculum they have not been exposed to) and the use of grade based norms needs to be stated.
3. FOR DETERMINATION OF SERVICES:
Determine the cut-off score using the criterion scores listed in Table 1.
(a) Determine if a severe discrepancy exists ----If the age-based achievement score is equal to or smaller than the criterion discrepancy score, a severe discrepancy is indicated.
(b) Professional Judgment: In order to determine the presence of a specific learning disability www.wsasp.org/pdf/position/professional.pdf
(c) Data obtained from formal assessments, reviewing of existing data, assessments of student progress, observation of the student, and information gathered from all other evaluation processes for students being identified for a specific learning disability must be used when applying professional judgment to determine if a severe discrepancy exists. When applying professional judgment, the group shall document in a written narrative an explanation as to why the student has a severe discrepancy, including a description of all data used to make the determination through the use of professional judgment.
EVAL STATMENT: NEED to document what interventions have been attempted, for what periods of time,
EVAL STATMENT: regarding students continued performance below grade level expectations, classroom tests/school screeners/state wide assessments supporting this,
EVAL STATMENT: SCORE documenting performance of SD below the approximation to cut off score reported in SD below the mean or greater than -1.5 SD
PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT applied to IQ…..if full scale IQ is not representative (index scores have a difference of 1.5 SD (or more) between them (22pts), than the higher index may be used as the criterion via professional judgment
If you are using GAI in you interpretation, not considered professional judgment, but you need to have solid reasoning as to why you have chosen that score above the more stable, FSIQ, and discuss that in eval.
WAC 392-172A-03075 Observation of students suspected of having a specific learning disability. School districts must ensure that a student who is suspected of having a specific learning disability is observed in the student's learning environment, including the general education classroom setting, to document the student's academic performance and behavior in the areas of difficulty.
The evaluation group must:
(a) Use information from an observation in routine classroom instruction and monitoring of the student's performance that was done before the student was referred for an evaluation; or
(b) Have at least one member of the evaluation group conduct an observation of the student's academic performance in the general education classroom after the student has been referred for an evaluation and parental consent is obtained.
In the case of a student of less than school age or out of school, a group member must observe the student in a learning environment appropriate for that student. *need to discuss for home school kids specifically ·
Note: This means that testing observations are not enough. Need at least one classroom (or academic based) observation of a minimum of 20 minutes
SPECIAL NOTES:
For reading fluency qualification: “Evaluation teams are responsible for determining methods and assessment instruments needed to complete a comprehensive evaluation of a student. Test administrators should take care to ensure cluster and/or composite scores for fluency represent relevant components to qualify (i.e. accuracy, rate, and prosody. Not all available assessments measure all three areas of fluency. Thus, the evaluation group may need to employ more than one assessment as well as curriculum based measurement (CBM) to address all performance areas of reading fluency.”
WJ-fluency is a subtest and not a composite or cluster score- therefore, not appropriate for qualifying for reading fluency alone.
Minimum Intellectual Ability Level A student must have a full scale or overall composite intellectual ability score above a score which could establish eligibility for special education under the intellectual disability category (i.e. SS= 70).
Students Below Grade One The application of the severe discrepancy table is inappropriate for student.
TO COME IN THE FUTURE: Process based on a student's response to scientific research-based intervention who are not yet enrolled in first grade.
TO COME IN THE FUTURE: Process based on a student's response to scientific research-based intervention.
1. School districts using a process based on a student's response to scientific, research-based interventions to determine if a student has a specific learning disability shall adopt procedures to ensure that such process includes the following elements:
(a) Universal screening and/or benchmarking at fixed intervals at least three times throughout the school year;
(b) A high quality core curriculum designed to meet the instructional needs of all students;
(c) Scientific RTI as defined in WAC 392-172A-01165 are identified for use with students needing additional instruction;
(d) Scientific RTI used with a student are appropriate for the student's identified need and are implemented with fidelity;
(e) A multi-tiered model is developed for delivering both the core curriculum and strategic and intensive scientific research-based interventions in the general education setting;
(f) Frequent monitoring of individual student progress occurs in accordance with the constructs of the multi-tiered delivery system implemented in the school consistent with the intervention and tier at which it is being applied; and
(g) Decision making using problem solving or standard treatment protocol techniques is based upon, but not limited to, student centered data including the use of curriculum based measures, available standardized assessment data, intensive interventions, and instructional performance level.
2. Such policies and procedures outlined in subsection (1) of this section shall be designed so that districts can establish that:
(a) The student's general education core curriculum instruction provided the student the opportunity to increase her or his rate of learning;
(b) Two or more RTI’s identified to allow the student to progress toward his or her improvement targets.
(c) The duration of the intensive scientific research-based interventions that were implemented was long enough to gather sufficient data points below the student's aim line to demonstrate student response for each of the interventions through progress monitoring to determine the effectiveness of the interventions.
3. OSPI has developed guidelines for using response to intervention to assist districts in developing the procedures required under this section.