Thursday, April 23, 2026

Improving our Special Education Program for All Stakeholders

We were not in search of a pat on the back when we commissioned a study of our special education program. Granted, the platitudes were very nice, but that wasn't the point. As I mentioned last week, one of the overarching concerns was to understand whether or not we had the right mix of administrative support for the general supervision of the program. Based on our analysis of the report, we do. In my time with you last week, we discussed all the positive attributes of our program and recognize there is a lot to be proud of. Our staff, teachers and paraeducators alike work incredibly hard and are getting solid results. We continue to ask more and more of them each passing day, and they do their jobs without complaint. But at the same time, we have to recognize and be sensitive of asking too much. Today I want to share with you our priorities moving forward and some of the recommendations the report proposes.

There really are three main takeaways outlined in the report where opportunities for improvement exist, and all are connected in one way or another. Behavioral support systems, time and collaboration, and ensuring equitable implementation of IEPs through enhanced professional development and accountability structures. 

In recent years, we have begun to see much more complex behavior needs from some of our students. Correcting problematic behavior starts with a comprehensive schoolwide behavior support system. You may be familiar with the 'Keys of Excellence' program that is currently in place in our school district. What makes programs like these effective is consistency across each grade level throughout the district. The implementation of a common language, clear expectations, and progressive consequences that are consistent for each student, especially those served in our special education programs that require specially designed instruction for behavior. Truth be told, Keys of Excellence predates me and was implemented well before my tenure began. In the intervening years as the natural turnover of staff has occurred, the fidelity with which the program was originally implemented has begun to deteriorate. With new counseling staff coming onboard next year this is a perfect opportunity to 'reset' the program and perhaps take the time to see if another program might better serve the district. This could enable us to implement a system that allows educators to regularly review this 'Tier One' data and address behavioral concerns in the same manner as academic concerns part of a full system of support with 'Tier Three' interventions being the most intense. 

Time to do the work and collaborate with colleagues was an area of concern identified by the our professional staff. Teachers have indicated they are having difficulty keeping up with their workload. This includes the time that is required to collaborate with other teachers on matters of instruction as outlined in the student IEP (individualized education program). I'm not surprised. One disruptive student can take a tremendous amount of time and energy to manage. Additionally, the paperwork trail that is created with an IEP is voluminous and takes constant updating and record-keeping. Part of the reason for this feeling of overload is a problem of our own making. You see, the staffing pattern that we anticipated a year ago did not end up being the reality that materialized. Unlike general education where class sizes are evenly divided, special educators workload is governed by our service delivery plan and a concept known as caseload. Students served in special education are weighted from 1 to 3 points depending on the intensity of the services needed, and our plan calls for no more than 20 points per teacher. Now, while our caseloads are within the margins, in many instances it has still been very taxing on staff. This is because of the staffing pattern deployed. Logistically, caseloads should be banded together: K-2; 3-4; 5-6; 7-8; 9-10; 11-12. That is not the approach we took this year. Special education teachers may have had a second grade student as well as a fifth grade student. On paper, we were able to balance the caseloads. In practice, it made the management and mandated collaboration time almost impossible to coordinate. Granted, determining caseloads when there is a transitory nature to the program makes this all the more difficult. However, moving forward we are being much more thoughtful, not just about whether or not it works on paper, but if the logistics of scheduling are also appropriate. Our hope is this will enable us to establish protected collaboration time for special education teachers and general education teachers across the district. 

Finally we now turn to enhanced professional development and accountability structures. One could probably argue that sometimes the details of the IEP are lost in translation when it comes to deploying accommodations in the general education setting. Perhaps this is one of the reasons legislation was posed that would require general education teachers to read each IEP from top to bottom. Perhaps theoretically a good idea (or colloquially speaking, 'looks good on paper'), but in practice I don't believe this will have the desired outcome. Instead, an approach that incorporates professional development into practice would have a much better chance of being implemented with fidelity. Understanding where to find the accommodations page and reasons for the accommodations is likely more important than analyzing the trendline or being able to explain the 'effect of disability statement' with any level of coherence. To help with some of this work, next year we have appointed a teacher leader to serve in this capacity. In addition to carrying a caseload, they will assist in the development of quality and useful professional learning for all staff; professional development that also links the relationship between the special education, general education; and perhaps most importantly the paraeducator. After all, they are the ones most likely to be tasked with implementing the accommodation. Shouldn't they understand the reasons why as well?

We are proud of the work of our special education staff and the work they do! The results of our study underscored the results they get daily. At the same time though, we recognize that changes can be made that can take some of the pressure off. Hopefully these changes will assist in that effort. 

No comments:

Post a Comment