SDI Is Not a Place: Writing IEP Instruction a Teacher Can Use Tomorrow | Dr. David Bateman

Latte with Dr. David Bateman. I know many of you know David and the work he does to support special education teams in Virginia. As a consultant, author, and former teacher and administrator, he literally wrote the book on specialized instruction and specially designed instruction. So we're very excited to bring his perspective to you today. David is a Parallel advisor, and we feel truly honored to be able to bring that professional learning to you. Also, special thanks to Jen Matheny and Shenandoah Valley Regional Program for co-hosting with us today. And of course, thank you to all of our participants for carving out time in your day. I know that's not easy, and we truly do appreciate your time. My name is Crystal Weber. I am the Director of District Partnerships at Parallel, and I will share a brief overview of Parallel. David, you can go to the second slide for us before we turn it over to David, but we are gonna do a quick poll to get started, and actually we'll jump to slide 3. So Now that you're back in full swing of school, I want you to think about the most— the thing that most often gets in your way of delivering specially designed instruction the way the IEP says. So you can vote in the poll that should have popped up on your screen. Number 1, not enough people and caseloads are too high. This is a tale as old as time, and if caseloads are already high, they're only going in one direction. So that's tough. But number 2, covering gaps when a provider leaves unexpectedly. This is hard on everyone— administrators, principals, teachers— and if we're the team that's all hands on deck, we are really putting a strain on our existing team and resources. Number 3, it looks different from building to building. So wouldn't it be nice if we had an SDI wand? Specially Designed Instruction is not one size fits all, or it shouldn't be. But what does that mean in practice? And this is why we're here today. So hang tight for David. And number 4, this is— or it's hard to show what is working. So not only how do we show progress, But how do we replicate it by our planning and actions? All right, so let's see if we have— wow, okay. So we have the winner is not enough people and caseloads are too high, closely followed by it looks different from building to building. And then looks like a little bit of a tie between gaps when a provider leaves or is out and it's hard to show what's working. So thank you for sharing that and participating in the poll. This also helps David as he walks through what SDI really means and what it should look like in practice today. We can go to the next slide, which is how does Parallel support districts? And I'm going to speed talk so that we can get to David's speed talking session. We work with districts in these 4 areas, but as one partner, not 4 vendors or teams. So we are one team for specialized instruction, speech-language pathology, psychoeducational assessments, and behavior and mental health counseling. And we do this by structuring our services as a partnership model. So within this model, you'll have providers who participate in all things IEP, as well as clinical and customer success managers who are assigned to your district to ensure compliance oversight. There are options for onsite onboarding and finally access to our in-house tech support. So this is what a virtual partnership should look like. The Parallel standard, and so when I talk about the partnership model, next slide, David, thank you. When I talk about our partnership model, one of the statements that I truly stand behind is that we truly do things different at Parallel. Starting with, we only hire the top providers for our network and work incredibly hard to support those providers to ensure they are the best fit for your team. This means offering clinical management, mentorship, and systems that allow the providers to prioritize you and your students. We have a premium platform that tracks data, session notes, and progress monitoring, which is monitored then by our clinical and customer success managers. And because of this, we have better outcomes, and this allows you to prioritize existing staff and us to— as the staff to prioritize where your training and expertise is. So on the next slide, speaking of one of our better outcomes, um, the proprietary platform called Pathway was built for therapy instruction and assessment. So our providers use Pathway. It's FERPA compliant. It allows us to provide services more efficiently, to continuously track progress and maintain visibility on outcomes throughout the year. It was built on the research of our Chief Clinical Officer, Dr. Jordan Wright. And so the capabilities in Pathway are It's really a game changer. I've seen this happen for the success of our providers, as well as at some point in the future, sneak peek for your district team. So stay tuned on that. And then our pathway promise. So, and speaking of Dr. Jordan on the next slide, one thing we're really proud of is having the data to back up what we say. So when virtual services are delivered the right way, students can absolutely meet and even exceed their goals. We looked at outcomes from the 24-25 school year. And the results were really encouraging across all of our service lines. 98% of students met or exceeded their IEP goals. Stay tuned for the '26-'27 outcomes. Another thing we do is routine outcome monitoring, which means students get a say. They get to say how they think their sessions are going, which gives us a lot of important insight as we are looking at how, you know, specially designed instruction is truly specialized. All right, and finally, next slide, your Virginia team. This is my wonderful partnership team here in Virginia. Some of you have heard from Tamar, I'm sure. as we are partners in outreach for Virginia, we'll both be at VCASE in a few weeks. So for any of our directors who are on the call today, please stop by the booth and say hello at the conference. And Linda, your customer success manager, I can't say enough about Linda. She is an incredibly valuable partner for districts. She's a former administrator, very— so she understands what it's like to be in the district. She's very empathetic and proactive and a teletherapy veteran. And truly, when I say you're in good hands with Linda, it is a true Blessing to have her with our partner district. So that said, be on the lookout for the Virginia team. And then real quick, before we get to David, for everyone on the call to get today's resources, we're gonna ask you to scan this code for the recording. So this will give you access to the recording for access to David's ultimate toolkit, and you can ask David a question directly. And he is so wonderfully accessible in this way, which is really hard to do. And I see him over and over constantly just being accessible to, you know, folks that we are presenting with and presenting to. So please do that. If you're a district administrator, you can book a meeting with me to discuss how we could take today's information and put it into practice. So everybody follow the same code for access to the tools and to David, and then for administrators, if you scroll down, there's a yellow box that gives you access to my calendar. And as always, I say meet with me when you don't need me. But what we're really here for today is Dr. David Bateman. So who's ready? I definitely am. And again, I can't say enough about working with David and how wonderful it is to partner with him. I learn something new every time I see him present, and I know you will too. And with that, David, I will turn it over to you.

Thanks, Crystal. I really appreciate the opportunity. I do highly recommend that you reach out to scan this, scan this code because it could help you in a tight pinch. All right, so now we're going to be turning to specially designed instruction, or SDI. And she didn't emphasize this, but I just want to make sure that you guys are fully aware That, yeah, I'm not in the Valley right now, but I got my teaching start in Waynesboro at Berkeley Glen Elementary School, and that's where I started my career. And I had a— and I'm still in it. So, it wasn't completely negative, but it was things like this. And I just ran the Park-to-Park Half Marathon and did really well on that a few weeks ago. Well, 2 months ago. So, I could show you the medal to prove that I did it. But I'm frequently— I haven't been in the Valley since yesterday. And I'm not going to be in the Valley till about 5:30 today. I'll be driving past Buc-ee's and complaining about all the construction on 81 and how they can't keep us the same speed. But you'll hear me about— you'll hear me yelling and screaming as I drive this. But let's go back to SDI. This is where the IEP moves to identify needs to change what actually happens in a classroom. And I mean that sincerely. My central argument today is going to be very simple. SDI is not a place. It is not a staff member, it's not a label, or it's not a block of minutes. STA is what we change instructionally because the particular— because this particular student needs something. If you remember one question today, not that I want you to tune out after this, but remember this, okay? I'll make it this: what is the adult going to teach or do differently with a student the next time they see them? We're going to put that question to work in reading, We're going to put that question in math, executive functioning, behavior, and social-emotional instruction. So we're going to go through a lot today. So what I recommend is you just sit down, pull up your pants, get ready because we're going to go. But before we begin, I want to ask this one fair question. I want to think about the last IEP you read. Could you tell a substitute special education teacher exactly what to teach differently? Just ponder that for a second. Just ponder. All right, so, all right, so this, this go to the Virginia frame. All right, sitting in the Fair Commonwealth as we speak. It's a gorgeous day, no clouds here in Charlotte, so just let you know. In Virginia, well, there's one. In Virginia, the implementation question is the right starting point. Could a teacher read the IEP tomorrow and know what to teach differently? Administrators should not review IEPs only as service grids. Review them as instructional plans. Look for the connection between a documented need, a skill, an adaptive method, a deliverable plan, and evidence of learning. Teachers should be able to name the skill they're teaching. Why is it hard for this student? Don't worry, I'm going to give you some background on this one. And know what they— and know whether that approach is working. That is much more useful conversation than asking, did we check the SDI box? The local Virginia division's forms and procedures still control how the plan is recorded. The examples today are thinking tools, not substitute forms, and not models of IEPs to copy indiscriminately. But I want you to ask administrators— this is the pause. This is directed to you. The others can not pay attention to this one. Administrators, ask yourself, would our current IEP review process catch a vague SDI statement? Teachers, now this is time for you to pay attention. Administrators, you can put your fingers in your ears. Ask yourself, could another teacher pick up the plan tomorrow? Why am I emphasizing those questions? Because those are the questions that surface when a plan is challenging. Why does this matter? When a disagreement about services becomes serious, the conversation quickly narrows to 3 questions. Very specifically, what did the IEP require? What was actually provided? And where is the evidence? Those are not abstract legal questions. They are practical implementation questions. Imagine, just play with me at home, imagine the IEP says reading support in a small group. The teacher can show a schedule and an attendance. They may show the student was present, but that does not tell us what reading skill was taught, what approach was used, or whether the student responded. If instead the IEP says explicit decoding instruction with modeling, guided practice, Immediate correction and cumulative review. Now the team can describe what should have happened and compare it with lesson records and progress data. Clear descriptions protect students and help staff deliver what the team intended. So, okay, again, ask this question. This is a ponder ball. If I opened 3 IEPs in your division, would I be able to answer all 3 questions without interviewing the person who wrote them? Okay, so here, this is what we're going to cover, so stay seated. All right, 4 moves today. First, I'm going to define SDI precisely. I do a lot of witness preparation and due process hearings, and teachers cannot identify this. General education teachers especially. Principals can't identify this. But we're going to, we're going to talk about what content, what method or delivery is adapted to address a disability-related need. Second, We're going to draw the line between accommodations and instruction. Third, we're going to take apart weak IEP statements that sound helpful but do not tell us what is going to be taught. Fourth, we're going to rewrite those statements so a teacher can actually implement them. You will see a series of quick A, B, C, or D decisions. You're going to be quizzed on this one, so get ready. I'm less interested in whether you get every letter right than whether you can explain your reasoning. Throughout this session, I want you to keep asking. What is the adult teaching? What is the adult adapting? What is the adult measuring and then eventually fading? Okay, so let us establish the definition. And I'm not doing this to talk down to you. I'm doing this to ground you because you got to get ready for the quiz. So what is SDI? Under IDEA, and IDEA does not stand for I Do Enough Already, under IDEA, specially designed instruction means adapting as appropriate. The content methodology or delivery of instruction to address the unique needs that result from a student's disability and, and, and, as when possible, ensure access to the general curriculum. Those 3 words give us a useful framework. Content means what is taught. For example, systematically teaching phoneme-grapheme correspondence before expecting independent grade-level decoding. Methodology means how we teach explicit modeling, scaffolding practice, error correction, rehearsal, and cumulative review. Delivery means how we arrange instruction so the student can learn it. The pace, the intensity, the grouping frequency. Delivery is not just naming the room. A small group can be part of individualized delivery design, but small group by itself does not say when instruction is different, and a placement or service decision should not substitute. for an instructional decision. Put simply, SDI is an intentional change to teaching based on an identified need. So watch it. I'm going to give ponderables at each one, so stay where you are. Think of a student whose disability affects reading. That doesn't narrow it down, I know. What changes? The reading skill we prioritize, the method we use, or the intensity and delivery? Frequently, more than one changes. Now let's translate this into everything.

All right.

Okay, let's just translate. We should be able to complete the 2 sentences for any SDI decision. First, here is exactly what changes in instruction. That might be the skill sequence, the explicit teaching routine, additional opportunities to respond, immediate corrective feedback, or the fading of prompts as the student becomes independent. Second, here is why that change is necessary for the student, because the evaluation and present levels show a difficulty with decoding automaticity. They show written organization or initiation of tasks. Notice what is not enough. We use this because it works for everybody. A strategy can be an excellent teaching tool, but it's still not established why this particular student requires it in individualized instruction. The stronger explanation connects the adaptation to the disability-related instructional needs. Here is the FAST test. Quick, quick, quick, quick test. If you deleted the student's name and the exact name SDI sentence, would fit every child in class, the team probably needs more detail. The definition has 2 purposes, not one. So let me talk about the 2 critical points. Look at the 2 parts of this slide. SDI addresses unique needs resulting from disability. And it ensures access to the general curriculum. We need both. If we only focus on disability-related deficits and never connected instruction to general curriculum expectations, We risk creating an isolated program with no meaningful access. If we only built— if we only provide access supports such as reading text aloud or allowing more time without teaching the underlying disability-related skills, we may provide accommodations but miss the specialized instruction the student requires. Neither side alone answers the full question. The instructional plan should help the student participate in and progress in the curriculum while directly addressing what is preventing that progress. So question, question. Ask yourself which error you see more often: specialized work with no clear curriculum connection or accommodations without actual skill instruction. So here is the 4-question review test I would use. Ready? Take any statement labeled SDI and ask these 4 questions. First, what disability-related need are we addressing? What specifically changes in instruction? Who delivers it? How often and where? And what data will tell us whether it's working? Not every detail has to appear in one sentence or one software field, but it has to be clearly documented. And it has to be clearly documented in an identifiable and accessible part of the IEP. The problem is when the plan leaves the key decision to staff memory or informal conversations. A capable teacher may fill in the gaps, but the IEP should not depend on a particular teacher being available. If we cannot answer these 4 questions, SDI becomes a heading rather than an instructional plan. Question here: remember these 4 words: need, change, delivery, data. I'm going to return to them repeatedly and redundantly over and over again. I'm from the South. I can do these things. And these 4 words should fit within one coherent IEP. All right, so this, this pocket. Let's start at the left with the evaluation. What did we learn about the student's disability-related educational needs? Start with that. Okay, now let's talk about the strengths, the baseline, the data, and the specific obstacles to learning. The annual goal identifies the measurable change we expect. SDI states what we will teach and how we will adapt instruction to help the student achieve that change. Progress data tells us whether the plan is working, and the team uses those data to reconsider the instruction or revise the IEP when needed. These components do not have to be word-for-word duplications. They must, however, be logically aligned. A common breakdown happens when a team moves directly from a disability label to a resource room and a number of minutes. Autism, dyslexia, ADHD tell us a great deal about the specific instructional plan that they— That But they don't tell us what we know about the specifics of this kid. Okay, so keep this in mind as we address this one. So consider a goal for written organization. The SDA is simply teacher support. I want you to think about what link is missing. The instructional method is missing. To draw that link, we have to distinguish access from teaching. So keep this in mind. I don't want to draw a line here. All right, the question on this slide is not, is the support helpful? A great many supports are helpful. The question is what function the support serves. An accommodation generally reduces a barrier so the student can work toward the same learning expectations. For example, having directions read or being given extended time— that helps the student access things. SDI adapts what, how, or how intensively we teach a disability-related skill. Some practices do both depending on how they're designed and used. A visual checklist could be an access tool, or it could become part of explicit instruction planning and self-monitoring. Do not classify based on the name of the tool. Classify based on what the adults are actually teaching. And so this is, if you learn nothing else in the next minute, I want you to learn this. The 4 different boxes, and they're mostly different colors, they're mostly, mostly, they're close. The 4 colored boxes on this updated, on this slide are 4 possible settings. A resource room where I taught at Berkeley Glen, a small group table, a general education classroom, and a therapy room. They tell us where a student receives something. None tell us by itself what is specially designed about the instruction. A student may receive excellent explicit instruction in any of those places. A student can also sit in a resource room for 30 minutes and receive no meaningful specialized teaching. At all. The setting may matter for the service delivery plan and for least restrictive environment decisions. It does not substitute for the method. When you see a location standing alone in the SDI field, ask what skill is taught there, using what approach, and why that approach is needed. Okay, so at first, SDI is not a place. Here's the second thing to learn. Ready? Stay. SDI is not minutes. 30 minutes weekly tells us a frequency and duration. That's often an essential for service scheduling. I was a building-level administrator. I needed to know how much time people were spending with me. But it tells us almost nothing about the teaching itself. What skill is addressed? In what sequence? Through what instructional method? What feedback will be given? What data will be reviewed? A service grid and a description of STI serve different purposes. And we need to— we need them to agree. The amount of time should be sufficient for the instructional plan and individualized need. But do not assume that completing the scheduled minutes proves the right instruction was delivered. Minutes are evidence of opportunity. Instruction and student response tell us the rest of the story. So keep that in mind as we talk about this one. So we talked about— we've talked about rooms, we've talked about minutes. Wait, there's more.

Okay.

STI is not an accommodation. The left side. Let's look at the— let's look at the— look at your left side. Well, wherever it is on you. Look on your left side. It's on my left side. The left side gives examples that commonly function as accommodations. We give kids extended time, preferential seating, repeated directions, breaks, and text-to-speech. They are often, often very important for these students in order to participate. Sometimes indispensable, but they do not necessarily teach a new skill. On the right are examples of actually instructional actions: explicit teaching, guided role play, corrective feedback, a planned sequence of prompts, or a generalization practice. Here's the useful distinction: are we helping the student access the task, or are we directly teaching the skill the student needs to master? Often the appropriate IEP includes both. Do not remove an accommodation merely because it's not SDI. That would misunderstand the student's actual needs. Equally, do not relabel accommodations as SDI and assume the team has developed a teaching plan. So play out this one, play this, this example. Here's the question for this slide. If a student uses a text-to-speech for science, what are we doing? Are we providing access? If we teach separate— if we separately teach decoding explicitly, what are we doing? We're providing instruction. And STI— this STI is not simply giving ordinary teaching a special education label. Which brings us to more. Stay away, right? Ready? STI is not generic good teaching. I'm a huge fan of generic good teaching, by the way. I think we should do more of it. Consider the sequence. Okay, school staff will support the student. It sounds compassionate, and perhaps the staff are doing good work. But it's not a teaching plan. Support with what? For which skill? Through which instructional approach? With what feedback? On what date? I got more questions, don't, don't go away. But good universal instruction benefits everyone. An IEP must describe the individualized response required for this learner. We should not blame teachers for weak language in an IEP template or a system that invites vague entries. We should improve the system so teachers can describe what they're already doing, what they intend to do. A practical test is whether language could be copied into 50 IEPs without changing a word. Okay, so now let us test how the boundary works in real examples. This is where you got to pay attention. If you've not been paying attention, now's the chance.

All right.

Okay, so what do we have here?

All right.

Okay, so, okay, here are 4 choices for each scenario.

Okay.

I've got an accommodation, specially designed instruction, could be either depending on how it's provided, or not enough information. Do not overthink the labels. Ask one organizing question for each. Did we only remove a barrier, or did we change instruction to teach this, this, the student? Sometimes we lack enough detail to know. And practice. Recognizing missing information is a skill. It's not a failure. We will move fast. So for each example, decide silently or type the letter in chat and we'll discuss the answer. Okay, so first, 5 reading accommodations. Ready, set, go. 5 reading accommodations. I want you to real quickly, real quickly look at this. Is that number 1, is it an accommodation? Is it an SDI? Could it be either or not enough information? Number two, same thing. Number three, same thing. Number four, same thing. Number five, same thing. Okay, I'm gonna let you. I'm gonna give you ten seconds. That's what you get. Ten seconds. Do do do do do do do do do do do do. I really want you to look at number 3 now that I've given you your 10 seconds. Okay? Does small group actually tell us what the teacher is going to teach? Okay, let's reveal something. Let's reveal the answers. Are you ready? Stay seated. Right? Okay. Student receives text-to-speech.

All right.

Text-to-speech. Number 1, an accommodation because it provides access to print without describing adaptive decoding instruction. Number 2, explicit decoding instruction. B, it's SDA. All right, we will still have skill and recognizable instructional methods as part of this one. Number 3, small group reading support. Not enough information. Grouping is a delivery feature, not a description of what is taught. Number 4, shortened passages with the same essential vocabulary targets. Could be either. The decisive issue is whether the passage is being adjusted for access or used within an individualized instructional sequence. The team should also check that the learning expectations really remain intact. Number 5, highlighting directions and vocabulary. It's A, right? Presentation support, unless the team is separately teaching a targeted strategy. The bigger point is that the evaluation recommendation cannot stop at the word support. The team has translated into the student's skill need and instructional supports. Okay. So what I want to think about this one is I want you to think about which of these 5 recommendations would be easiest to copy into an IEP without improving it. It's usually the one we see is small group reading, right? Okay, so let's go to a less obvious one.

Okay.

Okay, the student struggles to initiate, organize, and finish classroom tasks. This is, this is a common thing. Okay, if you don't have students who have this problem, let us know. We can get you some. Again, classify each statement. A teacher gives a checklist at the start of work. The student is explicitly taught a planning routine. Assignments are chunked. Finally, the team collects weekly initiation data about this one. We need to be particularly careful with this checklist. A checklist can simply be handed to a student or it can become a tool. So put your votes up on this. Number 1 and number 3, would you call each an accommodation? SDR or something that depends on the actual teaching. Okay, I'm gonna give you— I'm about to give— you're about to be done, so I'm gonna give you 10 seconds. That's it, that's it. I'm drinking. And yes, it's just water I'm drinking because I'm about to drive up 81, and I hope I don't experience what I experienced on Tuesday night with all the construction. Yep. All right, so let's go. Answer. Look at this checklist. Think about this one. The checklist is C. It could be an accommodation if staff simply provide it, but it could be part of STI if we explicitly teach a student to create, use, check, and gradually manage the routine independently. The taught planning sequence is B. That is direct instruction in executive functioning skill. Chunking with check-ins is C because it can be access support or be part of planned scaffold that builds upon independent self-monitoring. Extended time is A, an accommodation in this example. The 5th answer is B, as the slide frames that the team uses initiation and completion data to adjust prompts as part of instruction. A clarification matters here: data collection by itself is not instruction. The SDI is the explicit teaching and responsive adjustment of the prompts, practice, and the feedback. If the only action we're tracking assignments, We would still need instructional plan. The aim is greater independence, not permanent adult hovering. All right. I'm staying away from academics. I'm going to go to a counseling one just to frustrate you. But I want you to think about it because FDI is not just academic instruction. We have to think broader about this one. Okay. The student escalates when corrected. Then probably don't have this problem, but we can get you some if you need some of these.

Okay.

Student escalates when corrected, has difficulty repairing conflict. Here are 5 possible recommendations: a break when frustrated, explicit teaching by the school psychologist of a routine or notice emotion, name the problem, choose the response, and repair, attendance at a weekly counseling group, a calm-down card and visual scale, and data review leading to changes in role-play practice. The word counseling does not automatically tell us whether the instructional skill is being taught. Counseling may be a valuable related service, and the student's IEP might also require explicit instruction in self-regulation or social problem solving. We do not— we need to know which function the activity serves. So before I reveal a slide, consider the weekly group. Does showing up once a week tell us whether the student is learning to recognize, practice, and generalize a specific skill? So 10 seconds, I'll let you finish. Yeah, I've been talking. I've been talking.

Okay.

I'm, I'm done. I'm done. Ready? All right. The break is C. It commonly serves as an accommodation, but could also be part of individualized instruction in identifying when to request a break and how to return to learning. Teaching the emotional problem response repair routine is B. That is direct skill instruction. Weekly counseling group attendance is D. It describes the service setting and frequency, not what is being taught. The calm-down card and visual scale are C. Providing the tools may be accommodation, while systematically teaching and fading may make them part of the SDI. Finally, using observed errors to modify role-play practice is B in the context of individualized teaching plan. The message is not that counseling is unimportant. The message is when a student requires instruction in a skill, the plan should name the skill, teaching routine, practice opportunities, generalization data, and fading. Services instruction can overlap. The description has to tell us how. You can probably see a pattern. The weakest language sounds supportive but remains instructionally— instructional guesswork. So now that we've taken the quiz, hopefully you got better as a part of this, but hopefully you have a better understanding what we're doing with this one. Okay, so I've got some bad SDI statements. I'm, I, I'm involved in a lot of lawsuits. Oh boy, am I involved in a lot of lawsuits. Haven't been involved in a lawsuit since about 2:30 today, and so I'm on break right now, so I'm kind of cool and don't testify until Tuesday next week. Thank God. Thank— we have— thankful we have a 3-day weekend. But I've seen bad stuff, some bad stuff. All right, so let's go through some bad SDI statements and then we'll move to positive ones in a minute. All right, bad SDI. Number 10. Yes, we're working our way down. Student will receive support in the general education classroom. My, my response is support doing what? By whom? And how is the instruction adapted? General education is the location and support is a broad promise. Okay, so keep this in mind as we address this one and keep this in mind as we address this. All right, and pay attention to this one. All right. So number 9. Okay, look at this one, right? Number 9, teacher will provide assistance as needed. This is one of the most common ones I see. Who decides what is needed? What prompts are used, and what happens to those prompts as the student progresses? As needed is not a substitute for identifying the conditions, frequency, or method. Number 8, student will receive small group instruction. Again, we have a grouping arrangement and possibly a very useful delivery feature. I love small group instruction. I love that. Okay, but we still don't tell what the skill is. We don't need to talk about the instructional routine or feedback plan as a part of this one. Okay, so what we have to think about— I want us to stop equating presence with instruction. None of these statements has to be deleted from the IEP. If it accurately describes where and how the services are delivered. They simply cannot be the only description in the IEP. So quick challenge. What I want you to think about is choose one of these 3 and finish the sentence. During the time the student teacher explicitly teaches the student to and give you something missing as it. Next 3 even sound more personalized, but they have the same problem. Stay where you are.

Okay.

Number 7. Student will be provided reteaching. Reteaching what? Which misconception or error will be identified? Will the teacher use a different method, more explicit modeling, or a different practice sequence? Simply repeating the same lesson more slowly is not necessarily an individualized instructional response. I can go on about that one. I just want to go to a wedding and talk about that. Number 6, special education staff will help the student with assignments. That describes assistance in completing work. If a student cannot plan or initiate assignments, we must name the skill we're teaching, not just promise an adult will help. Number 5, instruction will be modified to meet the student's needs. It uses the vocabulary of individualization without revealing what is being modified. We must distinguish changes to instructional approach from changes to learning expectations. If expectations are being changed, the IEP team needs to understand the implications. The common improvement is to name the specific need, the target skill, the adapted routine, and how we know whether the student is becoming more successful. I want you to ask which of these 3 statements would be hardest to defend without concrete evidence. Any of those, unless we specify what happens. Okay, wait, there's more. Stay seated. Okay. Student will receive individualized instruction in reading. Individualization is a label, not a description. What reading skill? Decoding, fluency, comprehension, morphology, and what method? Number 2, yes, we're going down. Student will receive specialized instruction in math for 30 minutes. The area and minutes are very useful service facts. I needed those as an administrator. But are we teaching quantity? Are we teaching operations, word problem analysis, or mathematical reasoning? What is actually different? Number 1, specially designed instruction will be provided as outlined in the IEP. That sends us in a circle. The IEP promises SDI, and the SDI description points back to the IEP. We cannot implement or evaluate a circular instruction. Across these statements, the issue is the same. The reader is asked to assume that someone will know what teaching is intended. We need to replace that assumption with an explicit plan. Before we advance, what would a new teacher need to add to make sure that they understand precisely what one of these sentences are teachable tomorrow? Okay, this— okay, so keep this as we address this one and keep this in mind. So here are some construction alternatives, right? So let's talk about doing SDI correctly. If you want to improve an SDI statement, work through these 5 questions, these 5 questions in order. What skill is being taught? Why is that skill instruction disability-related for this student? How is instruction adapted? Who will deliver it, when, and how often? What evidence will tell us whether it is working? A useful SDI description does not have to be lengthy or full of jargon. It has to answer the question that matters to implementation. I would rather read 2 precise sentences that tell the team what to do than a long paragraph of impressive terms that still leaves the teacher guessing. Remember, the purpose is not to produce the most elegant IEP. The purpose is to deliver instruction consistently. So let's go. I've got tips. You think, do you think we're going to do this without some tips? Here are some tips. 10, 9, and 8 belong together. Start with the disability-related instruction need, not the name of the service. The evaluation and present levels might show that a student cannot decode unfamiliar multisyllabic words, cannot organize a written response, or cannot initiate independent work without repeated prompts. Next, identify the specific skill that instruction will target. Reading is too broad. Applying syllable division, sit patterns to unfamiliar words is something we can actually teach and access. Then describe the instructional method. For decoding, that might mean explicit modeling, guided practice, immediate error correction, and cumulative review. For executive functioning, it might mean modeling a planning sequence, rehearsing it with real assignments, and checking independent use. The point is not to name a fashionable program. It is to make the teaching routine visible enough to implement. So use this test. If your IEP team said, and your IEP says small group, what method would you add to make that description instructional? Next, be clear about the teaching and how the teaching is different and connected to the goal. So tip 7, tell the readers how instruction is different. Is it more explicit? Does it use a different sequence? Does it use different materials, response mode, or feedback? Tip 6: Distinguish accommodations from the instruction the student is intended to learn. Text-to-speech may give a student access to grade-level science content while a separate SDI plan teaches decoding. Both can be necessary. Tip 5: Connect SDI to the present levels and annual goals. If the present levels show a serious deficit in writing organization, and the goal is an organized paragraph, the SDI should describe how planning, drafting, and revision will be explicitly taught. Otherwise, the goal becomes a wish without a treatment plan. A strong IEP lets us trace the need to the goal, from the goal to the teaching. So wait for the next 3. Tip 4: Include the frequency, duration, and provider in the proper service and delivery section And make sure those details match the teaching approach. Tip 3, write what the adult will actually teach. Avoid stopping at verbs with— avoid saying verbs such as support, help, or assist. Replace them with teach, model, rehearse, prompt, correct, review, fade. And those are methods the team has chosen. Tip 2, build in progress monitoring. Please, please, please build in progress monitoring. Identify what data will show that the target skill is improving. Perhaps a decoding probe, a writing rubric, a task initiation latency, or observed count of successful replacement skill could be, be part of this one. Then ask the team what will change if the student is not responding. Progress monitoring is not an extra report attached to instruction. It closes the loop between what we do and what the student learns. So what is one measure you're already collecting that could actually inform a change in method? Not just report a score. Okay, now this last method brings it all together. My number one test is staff change. Imagine the person who wrote the IEP is out tomorrow. Could a new special education educator read it and identify the skill, the routine, the schedule, and the evidence to collect? If the answer is no, the plan is too dependent on unwritten knowledge. That is all— that is not a criticism of teachers who had developed sophisticated practices. It is a reason to make those practices portable. Staff turnover, a long-term substitute, a change in caseload, or student transfer should not erase the instructional plan. That is what I mean when I say the best SDI survives a staff change. It is clear enough to be taught, monitored, and adjusted by the next qualified person. So ask yourself, which of our current SDI statements could survive that test? All right, so I got 2 more quizzes. I got 2 more quizzes. You thought I was done with the quizzes? No, stay seated. All right, now consider a student who leaves class, argues, and misses instruction during independent work. The team has completed a functional behavior assessment and is developing a behavior intervention plan. We have 5 items to classify: a 3-minute break pass, teaching the student to request help, request a break, return and restart, moving the seat near the door, an adult prompt before escalation with prompts faded over time, and class-wide PBIS expectations. Notice that the FBA and the BIP can be essential tools, but the documents themselves do not teach the student. A functional assessment helps identify why behavior occurs. A behavior plan lays out how adults will respond and what replacement behaviors should be taught. The actual instruction in what is in that replacement skill is what we're looking for. So I'm going to give yourself 10 seconds. 10, go! I'm ready. Okay, let's go. Let's go to the answers. The break pass is C because it simply provides access to a brief break, or it could be part of explicit instruction sequencing, recognizing any need and appropriately requesting a break. Teaching the replacement behaviors is B. That is SDI. Moving a seat near the door is A. An environmental accommodation in that example. Pre-escalation prompting with a fading plan is C because it may be management strategy or part of an individualized teaching practice. Reviewing school-wide PBIS expectations is, is placed with access and generalized supports on this slide. I would add that a universal class-wide routine is not automatically an individualized IEP accommodation, much less SDI. The crucial distinction remains: do we teach Practice, reinforce, monitor, and fade a replacement behavior. A functional assessment informs instruction. A BIP can organize it. The student must still receive the teaching. Okay, our final quiz. This is our final one. I'm sorry, we could keep going, but this is the final one for today. Those who need more quizzes, let me know. I've got them. Final quiz asks whether collecting data is the same as providing instruction. Okay, the teacher wants to know whether instruction in self-regulation is working. Here are the 5 statements. The teacher reports how often the student leaves class. The school psychologist teaches the student a self-rate escalation and selects a coping strategy. A behavior chart goes home on Fridays. Instruction is revised when the student— when the data shows a student can label feelings but cannot choose a response. The student receives a quiet testing location when anxious. Notice the difference between measuring a problem and actively teaching a solution. We absolutely need data. I'm happy to talk more about that with you in the future, and it's important to record behavior accurately, but a frequency count does not teach self-regulation. Likewise, sending home a chart may communicate information without building independent skill. So which item shows a data-based change to instruction?

Okay.

Here is how to read those answers. I'm not going to give you 10 seconds. I'm running out of time. Okay, so Recording departures from class is D here. There's not enough information to call measurement itself SDI. Explicitly teaching self-rating and coping strategies and selection is B. Sending a behavior chart home is D for the same reason as item 1— reporting is not teaching. Changing the instruction after data reveals a gap between naming feelings and selecting a response is B within the individualized teaching cycle. The quiet testing location is A. An accommodation. If you remember nothing else from these 5 quizzes, remember this: data collection, consultation, and reporting are defensible only when they are connected to action. We should know what skill we are teaching, what the data says about the skill, and what changes in instruction, and when that progress is insufficient. So here is the transformation.

Right?

Here's a transformation I want your teams to be able to make. A weak statement is— okay, here's a weak statement: student will receive reading support. It does not say whether we mean decoding, fluency, or comprehension, and it does not say what anyone will do. Compare the stronger version: because decoding accuracy is below expected levels, the special educator will provide explicit phonics instruction using modeling, guided practice, error correction, and cumulative review 4 times per week. With weekly probes reviewed every 4 weeks. Now we can plan lessons and assess whether that intervention is working. The second weak statement: student will receive adult support as needed. The stronger version identifies the actual need. The student does not independently initiate tasks. The teacher explicitly teaches a task start routine, provided guided practice, systematically fades prompts, and tracks independent starts daily. Note the difference. We are not simply assigning more adult help. We are teaching the student how to start work without that help. These are illustrations, not generic IEP clauses to paste into every plan. The stated baseline, the instructional dosage and responsible staff and review schedule still must be individualized to the student. So what I want you to do, I want you to think about this one. Choose one sentence in an IEP you have reviewed recently. Mentally rewrite it using need, skill, method, delivery, and date. That's the kind of revision I want people to make tomorrow. Okay, let's go. But let's go. Let's go. Here are some examples across academic domains. Okay, in reading, the need is persistent weakness in foundational decoding, even though the student is receiving classroom reading instruction. The SDI names explicit Systematic instruction in phonemic awareness and phonics, blending, error correction, and cumulative review. Had to think of that last one. The data are weekly decoding probes reviewed on a defined schedule. That's something we need to talk more about. That links a specific need with specific instructional response. In math, the need is difficulty understanding quantity operations or the steps in solving problems. The STI uses a concrete representational abstract sequence with modeled problem solving and guided practice. We would then monitor probes tied to the targeted math skill, not just a quarterly course grade. The method matters. Extra math time alone may provide more exposure without changing the student's access to understanding. The questions for both domains is whether the team can explain why this teaching approach matches the student's actual instructional needs. I want you to ask this question. Would a report card grade by itself prove that a coding or math intervention is working?

No.

We need measures sensitive to the skill being taught. So let's move on to writing and executive functioning. Just 2 ones that often pose problems for us in our measurements. Writing probes are often described as poor written expression. But that is not a teachable target. Suppose the student generates ideas orally but cannot organize a written response. The instruction could teach planning, sentence frames, graphic organizers, rehearsal, and explicit revision routine. We monitor with writing examples and a rubric that matches the goal. Compare that with a student who needs executive functioning instruction. The present levels show an 8 to 10 minute delay before beginning independent work. That's a long time, by the way. We teach a task start routine: identify the first step, gather materials, set a brief start target, begin, and self-check. The adult models the routine, guides practices, gives feedback, and fades prompts systematically. Daily latency data help us see whether independence is improving. Notice that both— in both cases, the plan specifies an instructional sequence rather than merely listing a tool like an organizer. Keep that in mind as we talk about this one. Okay, now let's apply the same logic to behavior and social-emotional. And behavior— a student who escalates during non-preferred tasks or transitions may need to learn replacement communication, a transition routine, self-monitoring, and problem-solving skills. Those are teachable steps. We would monitor both the challenging behavior and the student's use of those replacement skills. A reduction in disruption without an increase in independent replacement behavior does not tell the whole story. In social-emotional learning, a student may struggle to recognize early signs of anxiety and then refuse tasks. Explicit instruction may teach recognition of body cues, selection of coping strategies, and appropriate help-seeking and returning to task. We can measure use of the strategy, return to task time, and successful completion after support. The intervention should be responsive to the function of the behavior and the student's development and communication needs. In both examples, the aim is not simply compliance. It is skill acquisition and increased access. Self-regulation is a part of this one. So keep this in mind. So let's talk about this one. Let's talk about implementation. So I suggest a quick 5-question walkthrough. Can I trace? Each important evaluation finding into a present level. Do the goals match the baseline data? Does the SDI teach the skill named in the goal? Does the actual service delivery model create— provide a credible opportunity to deliver that instruction? And will the data show whether the instruction is working? This is not an invitation to hold teachers to a secret checklist. Make the questions transparent. Use them in team meetings. Coaching and IEP quality reviews. Imagine discovering that a goal addresses independent task initiation, but the SDI says only adult assistance, and the data measures assignment completion. That IEP has a gap. The team can clarify the, the taught initiation routine and collect data on independent starts. The problem requires an IEP change. Make it through the appropriate team and procedural process rather than informal rewrites as a part of this one. So I want you to think about this one is, I think we can end with 4 expectations that make all this manageable. First, 4 things. SDI is instruction. It must be individualized. It must be observable, meaning we can see what staff will teach and practice. And it must produce data that help the team judge student response. None of those statements means teachers have to create a separate binder for each student. The work is to design instruction and record enough information for the plan to be delivered consistently and reviewed responsibly. Here is the single test I would use: could a new team member implement the SDI tomorrow? If the answer is no, the description is not yet finished. Clarity is not paperwork for its own sake. It's what makes specialized instruction teachable, monitorable, and defensible as a part of this one. So questions moving forward. Think about where your team most often lose the connection between present levels, goals, SDI services, and progress data. Is it the lack of a clear baseline, an annual goal that does not reflect the evaluation, service minutes with no documented method, or monitoring that reports scores but never informs instruction? Think also about disability-related needs. are hardest to translate into explicit instruction— executive functioning, behavior, social communication, writing, or another domain. Here is my proposed turnaround task. Pick one existing IEP, not entire caseload. Trace one need from the evaluation through the present levels, the goal, the SDI, and the data. Identify the first place the story breaks. Fix the point through the appropriate IEP process Make the result your team's example for the next review. The fastest improvement is often alignment, not another form or another compliance slogan. I would like to answer— again, think about this one. Okay, on the screen is a free follow-up resource series with printable tools and checklists intended to help leaders and teams put these ideas into practice. The QR code on this version of the slide is one of the— is the one to use for those materials. You do not need to scan anything to apply today's lessons. The immediate practical step is still the same. Take one IEP, find the disability-related skill, make the adapted instruction visible, and identify how you will evaluate progress. Okay, so I can't emphasize this enough. We have field-tested this, the toolkit information that you would receive from this, but there's a guide on 504s, there's a guide for gen ed teachers. There is good stuff here and it's all free. We have field tested these things. I validated these things from all— I've been involved in over 1,000 hearings. We're trying to give you the best information possible. Get this out to building-level administrators, general education teachers, others who might benefit from this. I want to make sure you understand this one. Okay, so, all right, so what I wanted you to do also, this QR code is now labeled for session resources. Okay, these include the slides and the recording. As well as a short SDI self-check that your team can use when reviewing an IEP. For district administrators who want to continue the discussion about implementation, this slide also identifies an optional conversation with Crystal from Parallel Learning. You use whichever resources are relevant to you. You do not need a separate call to put today's ideas to work. For my most part, I want you to leave with a question you can use for as part of every next IEP meeting. Can we say exactly what we're going to teach differently? Who will teach it? And how will we know it worked? When the team can answer that clearly, the IEP becomes a much stronger instructional plan. So thank you. I just want to see if there's any questions that we may take at this point. I'm going to stop sharing my screen and leave this.

Thank you, David. I will jump in. I have a little bit of access to the questions here, and there are a few, and we have a couple minutes. So One thing that jumped out to me, because I hear a lot about new teacher support, is what is an easy way to present SDI to new teachers, or maybe an effective way to bring them into the fold of all the things that you're talking about?

So that, that's a great question, because I wish we did a better job at higher ed on this one. I have a textbook that I hope people would buy as a part of this one. But what I think about this one, Is start with the definition. Talks about the content and talk about the methodology delivery or instruction, but also show what it really isn't. Giving extra time is not necessarily SDI. We need to explicitly teach a strategy for organizing completed time. Reading direct directions aloud—that's that's that's not necessarily SDI. That's systematically we need to systematically teach the coding. Sitting near the teacher. There are some students when I was a teacher I did not want sitting near me, but they sat near me anyway. We need to directly teach and practice self-monitoring strategies. What I say, sitting near the teacher is not SDI, but direct instruction about this one. But then often, often see is not necessarily SDI. It was— I see as a common thing we see is checking for understanding. Instead, we need to provide systematic instruction targeting a specific skill deficit and adjusting teaching based on students' responses. So my formula is identify this disability-related need plus the specialized instructional approach plus the progress monitoring. That gives it a solid for this one. So that's what I'm gonna focus on. Okay.

Amazing. Thank you. And just real quick before the next question, y'all be sure to submit your question in the form because we can follow up with an answer to that question. So absolutely, it may take a little bit of time because we also put David's AI clone to work, which, if that's something that you didn't know, it's a fun project that we're doing with David. With all of his resources and content, we're able to get to more questions and more people, and he monitors and looks at that. So you will have access to that as well. So put those in the form. Another question is, and I'd love to do 2 more, or I guess we only have time for one more, David. So what is the most effective way to train general education teachers to understand the difference between a modification versus SDI? I feel like we could do a whole hour on that.

But yeah, we could. Most effective way to talk to gen ed teachers about this one is, I want— I would stop presenting special ed SDI as a special ed compliance requirement and start presenting it as an instructional responsibility shared by both. I would build the conversation around this one sentence. When a student with a disability is not learning from the way we are teaching, what are we going to change about that instruction? What I want to do is get gen ed teachers thinking about instruction rather than paperwork. But I would emphasize that SDI is about what teachers do, not where students go. Accommodations are not the same, and talk about this one. But what we have to think about is when the student is not learning the way we're teaching, what are we going to change about the instruction? And that's what I want to solve as a part of this one. So, all right. And we're happy to take additional questions. Okay. And we will, we will do what we can to get these to you in a timely fashion. But I do appreciate Parallel and I appreciate the opportunity to share this with you. And if you— and I do recommend if you are having a problem with staffing, filling gaps, reach out to Parallel. Okay.

Thank you, David. It's always a pleasure. And thanks again to Jen. Matheny at Shenandoah Valley for helping us to host this and, and bring so many of you to our Learn a Latte. We really appreciate that. And David, again, always a pleasure, and we'll see you next time.

Yeah, and I'm gonna be driving down 80— 81 North in about an hour, so wave. Thank you very much.

Okay. Drive safe.

Bye.