Session 3 | Building Better Outcomes | Building Sustainable Support Systems

Hello everybody. Good afternoon. Good evening. I'm Lauren Kenny, the Director of Business Development at Parallel. Thank you so much for joining us today. While we wait for a few more folks to join us, we're gonna run a quick poll. I'm really curious to hear what is your go-to genre when you're picking out a book to read, maybe at the end of a long week, or maybe you just came back from spring break. And you're reading something hopefully on the beach or during your staycation. So is your go-to a thriller/mystery, a romance novel, historical fiction, or some nonfiction to maybe learn a couple more things? Or are you strictly reading IEPs these days? Really curious to hear what everybody's— reading right now, because I know that as special education leaders, your days are completely packed, your brains are always on, and you're constantly pouring yourself and your time and your energy into your students, the families that you serve, as well as your staff. And because of that, we want to create a space just for you to recharge, connect, and maybe step away from the IEPs for just a little bit. So I'm thrilled to announce that we are officially launching a Parallel Book Club. But before we make any decisions or pick our first read, we really wanted to build this around what you actually want to read. So thank you so much for sharing today and more to come soon on the first book that we'll pick. And it looks like mystery or thrillers stepped out ahead, but just behind there we see nonfiction/biography. So I'm excited. to share more about the book club soon. Before we jump into the session with Dr. Bateman, I wanted to take just a minute to introduce Parallel and our virtual special education instruction and related services offerings. What we've learned from working with districts across the country is that no 2 partnerships look exactly the same. Some districts already have virtual services in place and are thinking about how to expand them or improve them. Others right now are looking at options for next school year and are curious about adding virtual services in intentionally, but they have some important questions that they want to work through first. So wherever you fall on this spectrum, our goal at Parallel is to meet you and your district where you are to build the support that best fits the needs of your students and your special education teams. So a lot of what you'll hear today actually comes directly from conversations with special education leaders like you, the questions you've asked, the challenges you're navigating, and the challenges you're trying to solve in your districts right now. So you'll see a QR code at the bottom of the screen throughout the presentation. If something we talk about resonates with you and you'd like to continue the conversation with Parallel, please feel free to scan that to schedule some time with our team. We'll also drop the link in the chat so it's easy for you to access throughout our Dr. Bateman's presentation today. Please feel free to pop questions into the Q&A. It will be at the bottom of the Zoom toolbar, and we will be recording this session, and it will be sent via email to every person who registered. So without further ado, I would like to introduce you to Dr. David Bateman. He is someone. who is truly a trusted voice in our field. Many of you already know his work. With over 3 decades in special education and experience presiding over more than 580 due process hearings, he brings both deep legal insight and practical understanding of the real challenges districts face every day. We're incredibly grateful to have him, and with that, I'll turn it over to you, David.

Thanks for the great introduction, Lauren. I really appreciate that, and I appreciate what you guys say about me. I just want to be really clear before we get into where we're going that my perspective comes from a whole bunch of due process hearings, the volume of cases, and just pattern recognition about what I'm seeing. I'm not guessing what goes wrong. I've seen it play out hundreds of times, and that's the problem. So everything we're going to be talking about comes from real failures. I can't make this This stuff up. If you— and so I'm just going to share this with you. But before, before we get into the detail, let me just real quickly— and this is, if you want to contact me, don't hesitate to contact me, or you can reach out through Parallel. They clearly know how to contact me, and they're doing a great job as a part of this one. Is, um, this— I bet that emphasizes the, the legal disclaimer. I got to say this. I'm not going to give anything that sounds like— I'm not going to give— I'm actually going to say things that sound like legal advice. But this is not legal advice. I want to make sure you understand the context matters, the application varies, but the patterns, they don't change. So we want to emphasize what we're talking about as a part of this one and emphasize what we can do. All right. So this is going to be different from— if those of you who attended previous ones, just let you know, this is going to be slightly different because we're going to use some scenarios to make some cases about this one. And this is scenario-based for a reason. I'm not just going to stand up here and give you definitions and hope they translate into practice, because that doesn't work. I want to set the— I want to set the contrast. Districts don't lose cases because you didn't know the definition of SDI, though I've got a great book on SDI if you're interested about this one. You lose cases because of decisions made in real situations with either incomplete information, under pressure, Not staffing things appropriately or making things too quickly. Now, let's define the purpose of what we're going to be talking about throughout the course of the next 45 minutes or so. This session is about how decisions actually get made and how those decisions hold up when someone reviews them later. And that's what I want to emphasize as a part of this one, because I want to clarify that, yes, I work as— I worked as a first-tier hearing officer. I now work as a second-tier hearing officer in several states. I've worked as a mediator in several states. I now work as a complaint investigator because their parents are filing complaints because they're not going to OCR anymore. But let's just break this down. These are not hypothetical issues. They are exact patterns that show up in complaints and hearings across the country. I have not been a part of a due process hearing since Monday of this week, so I'm kind of on a break right now. So, but I, and I don't have to testify again until Tuesday next week, so I'm pretty excited. All right. But with the big things we're going to see that I'm going to emphasize here, I've been seeing staffing shortages. I'm seeing weak infrastructure. I'm seeing role confusion. I'm seeing delayed decisions that pave— okay, if you've been in school for more than a year, you've seen these. And we're going to look at these situations very through a specific lens. Where is the risk? Is not— not— and this is one a man can understand. We're not— and I led the trainings for hearing officers nationwide about 3 weeks ago. I was the speaker there. And what I emphasized is we're not looking for ideal. Or we're looking— how does— we're going to talk about what you did as a part of this, as a part of making a decision, as part of this. Risk is not about fear. It's about understanding where your systems fail under scrutiny. Okay? And that's the standard we're working towards as a part of this one. All right. So let me just, let me just move through this and just talk about some of the overviews. Okay? So we got real-world situations submitted by people like yourself. And we, we happy to talk more about this one, and we have— we'll have links. Please use the QR code if there's questions. And this is being recorded live. I'm at a remote location at my— I'm actually at my parents' house, and that's why things may look a little differently here. And they've been very gracious about housing this. And so, hi, Mom. Hi, Dad. So we're emphasizing this one. Okay, but we're going to talk about not edge cases. I'm not going to talk about this. I'm not talking about extreme examples. I'm talking about everything, everyday breakdowns that happen as a part of this one. And the big thing I'm going to emphasize, and not because I'm doing a lot of workshops on SDI, again, a great book that I just wrote, but for each scenario, we're going to ask 2 questions at the same time. Is this legally compliant? And is this actually good instruction? That's what we're emphasizing as a part of this one. And those are not always the same things. And that's where districts get into trouble. And I want to clarify the tension that relates to as a part of this one. You can be technically compliant. You can, you can cross all the T's and dot all the I's and still not be, not being, not delivering meaningful instruction. You can be doing good things instructionally, but not documented in a way that's defensible. You need both, or you're exposed. And I want to emphasize this one, and this is where most training fails. People are good at identifying problems. They're much worse at deciding what to do next. So we split it. Okay. So what we're going to talk about is we're going to talk about immediate actions. And then we're going to talk about long-term fixes as a part of this one. And we can't always fix all problems like I recently did to my puppy, but what we can do is we can solve and move things forward as a part of this one. So what changes the system so it doesn't happen again to another kid? What prevents drift? That's what I want to focus on as a part of this one. So this is not a session about— this is not just what went wrong. This is what do you do next Monday when you walk into the building and this is happening? If you leave with insight but no action, nothing changes. And, and the same issues will show up again and again, just with different students. So let's talk about our guiding questions we have. All right, the guiding questions. First question is, where is the risk? What, what could we— what could go wrong here? And if you want to lock me in a room, I could come up with a whole bunch of things that might keep you up at night, but don't do that. Okay, where could this be challenged? And clarify, this is not about worst-case thinking. It is about realistic vulnerability as a part of this one. If you do not, if you do not identify risk, you cannot manage it. All right. Second, documentation. What would the record show? What evidence exists? I do witness preparation for due process hearings, and one of the things I do is I like the fact that teachers have memories and thoughts, but I need documentation that shows something happened as a part of this one. It is not what you intended. Just make sure you understand it is not what you intended. It is what you can prove. And then Is this SDI? This is the core instructional question. I've done workshops at the CASE Conference, I've done workshops in Utah on this, I've done workshops in Oklahoma recently on this one, and Missouri. This is the core. Is instruction actually different? Is it targeted? Is it intentional? Support, and there's a big difference between accommodations and SDI. Giving kids extended time on tests does not teach them anything. That's an accommodation. Teaching them how to take a test, That is instruction. Teaching them skills that they can transfer to other things, that's instruction. So we want to make sure they understand there are kids who need both. They need accommodations and instruction. But if you can't point to instruction, you don't have SDI. And then immediate fixes— what would you do right now? What reduces risk immediately? Got some suggestions for that one. What improves instruction today? And you don't want to wait for perfect conditions. If we're going to wait for perfect conditions, you are Your act, it's gonna, it's gonna take a long time. Delay, and this way, delay is a decision, and we don't want to emphasize this one. But let's talk about long-term fixes also. How do you prevent this from happening again? I do a workshop for, for school districts where I talk about taking a car crash— I'm sorry, a plane crash approach instead of a car crash approach. Many of you have been in car crashes, and we can talk about this one. You've been in a car crash. We move someone off to the side, we exchange insurance information, but we don't often change the structure of the road, training for the drivers, or anything along those lines. In plane crashes, we analyze the snot out of it so it doesn't happen again. And I speak from this because having, having me as a plane crash survivor myself, I remember this. They changed the runway, they changed the training for the teachers, for the pilots, they changed the design of the plane as a part of this one. So they look at this one. So I want to talk about taking a long-term approach to this and making sure we can emphasize this one. But these are these 5 questions we need to work together. Risk tells you where to focus. Documentation tells you what you can defend. SDI tells you what instruction is appropriate. Immediate fixes stabilize the situation. Long-term fixes prevent recurrence. So let's talk about this one. All right. And let's just go through a few scenarios. And I'm betting you've encountered these scenarios. All right. All right. Context. Let's talk about this one. All right, let's start with it actually happening. Some of you have some vacancies. Reach out to us. We can help. All right. You've got coverage issues and aides are stepping in to keep things moving. I want to lay it out clearly. Staffing shortages are unfilled special education positions. Substitute coverage is inconsistent. Teachers stretch across multiple groups. This is something that is a part of— and I've looked at the data, it's consistent with 49 states report that there's a shortage of special education teachers, and that 50th state is a liar because I know there are shortages there because I was in one of the divisions this morning. So this tight attention, this is where the line starts to blur when we see aides running small groups, reading, teaching reading or math content, or leading intervention blocks, sometimes doing that independently. Okay, this is where the— is this support or is this instruction? Let's clarify the difference. Support is reinforcing. Support is assisting. Support is practicing. Instruction is introducing. Instruction is designing. Instruction is delivering new learning. In many, in many schools, aides are not just supporting, they are teaching, and that's where the risk starts. And what began as coverage may become— say this again. What began as coverage becomes your actual service delivery model, and that's a problem. So let's talk about this risk, about this one. The due process risk is a part of this one, is what could trigger a complaint. And this is where districts get into trouble. Frame it through these core issues. Who's responsible for delivering the specially designed instruction? Is it an unqualified aide delivering SDI? Because aides are not certified teachers. They are not trained to design instruction. They are not accountable. And you may have aides that are great. We know, we know we pay them crap, but they might— SDI is not just working with a student. It is designing instruction based on a need. You need to be able to articulate what is the designed instruction you've provided for this kid based on that student's individual needs, not just giving them a warm body. Just giving a warm body is a problem. So let's talk about lack of supervision. Is the teacher not present? Teacher not directing instruction? Is the teacher unaware of what is actually happening? Now, if an aide is delivering instruction independently, the teacher is no longer driving the program. Let's bring in a hearing perspective. All right, the question becomes, who designed the instruction and who ensured it was appropriate? If instruction is happening without a certified teacher driving it, you have a risk. And the more independent the aide becomes, the harder it is to defend. Wait, there's more. Let's talk about documentation. This is where districts think that they're safe, but they're not. I want you to ask this question: what would you actually show to defend this? Well, I want to— you want to— you want— what I want to walk through— what do you think they have? They think they have schedules showing service time. They think they have an aide assigned to the student, and there are aides who need to be assigned to students to provide 1-on-1 support. It's a standard question that parents are seeking as a part of this one. Okay, and you have notes that say support provided. That doesn't answer the real question. Now, let me define what we actually need. I want clear SDI descriptions. What skill is being taught? What method is being used, and how is it individualized? That's what I want to be able to emphasize as a part of this one. Because teachers plan the instruction, teachers review implementation, and teachers adjust based on data as a part of this one. So if you can emphasize this one, I want to make sure if your documentation just shows support, but the reality is instruction, you lose. The record will not match what actually happened because that, that's what's going to get exposed. And we have to think about this one. Okay, so let's, let's look at the SDI analysis, and I want to emphasize this one. All right, apply the test. Is this actually SDI? Is it individualized based on the student's specific needs? I don't care what the kid's disability label is because the disability label does not drive instruction. It's the actual needs of the kid because all the disability labels are basically umbrella terms. Best example is the category of OHI. Go ahead, try to think of what we would give kids as OHI treatment for that one. But with the same thing applies to the category of learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, and autism. Or we have to address this and pay attention to where we are with this. So keep that in mind as we're paying attention. Or is it generic support? Is it generic support we need to pay attention to? And okay, so the question, the great question has been posed: can the aide deliver instruction if supervised by a teacher? Yes, absolutely. Where they focus on the direct instruction of the teacher, it's teacher-designed, teacher-monitored, and teacher-affected as a part of this one, and planned in advance. If you're doing this and delivering it consistently, you're doing what you're supposed to be doing. If it— but pause. But if an aide can walk in and deliver with no training, that tells you something. If an aide can deliver without training, it's probably not SDI. And if it requires training that they haven't received, that's a different kind of problem. So your immediate action, let's talk about your immediate action. And this is where, this is where I want to emphasize, okay, is immediate action. This is where leaders need to act quickly and cleanly. First, stop the drift. Okay, stop the drift. And then give— let me give you some examples. Aides support instruction. And that, that question came through, clarifies that very specifically. All right, aides support instruction, but make it very specific about what aides can do. Teachers must plan the instruction, teachers must check the implementation, and teachers must be visibly responsible for ensuring what's going on. Not delegating and walking away. If an aide is teaching new content independently, running interventions without support, that must stop. So keep that word as we address this. All right, so identify where aides are functioning as teachers, prioritize those settings for correction, and don't wait for staffing to improve. Fix the practice now and address this one. The longer this continues, the harder it is to fix. So let's talk about a long-term fix. All right, this is not about one classroom. It's about your system design. Let's break this down. You need a plan that defines how instruction is delivered even when staffing is tight. Ask the question, who's responsible for SDI? Ask another question, who is— how is coverage handled without compromising instruction? If your plan is, we'll figure it out, You don't have a plan, and that's what we want to emphasize. So define roles across the systems and emphasizes if aides are part of instruction, they must be trained appropriately, not to design instruction, but to support it consistently. You must also know when drift happens, but for leadership, this is where accountability sits. And I want to make sure you understand this. You need to be able to ask these very specific questions. Who is teaching the student right now? What instruction is being delivered? How do we know it's appropriate as a part of this one? If your system relies on aids to deliver instruction, it will fail. And when it fails, the documentation will not save you. Okay, so let me— so keep that in mind as we talk about this one. Wait, I'm going to spend more on SDI, so stay where you are. All right. Minutes met. All right, let's talk about minutes met, SDI a week. I'm focusing on SDI because, yes, I wrote a book with my colleagues Peggy Weiss, Michael Vigellubi, and Lisa Sagoran that we've gotten a lot of publicity from, but I'm seeing people come to me with these questions. So these are very real questions. All these questions are very— are ones that have been generated just in the past month. These are, these are common things. Okay, so we have these on paper. Everything looks fine. Minutes are being delivered, schedules are being followed, service logs are complete. But when you walk into a classroom Nothing is actually different. When you walk through, you see students doing independent work with packets, with Chromebooks or worksheets. Teacher checking in but not really teaching is a part of this one. Then I'm also seeing accommodations only, extended time, reduced workload. These are access supports, those aren't instruction. And then the student is getting help completing work, not being taught the skills they're missing. This is one of the most common failures that I see across the country in all the different districts I'm working with. Because it feels compliant, compliant, and that's what makes it dangerous. It feels compliant. What we've got is we've got inputs, but we don't have outputs on this one. So let's talk about this one. Let's talk about what we mean by this. All right. So the due process risk here is let's separate compliance from defensibility. Compliance is a low level, and I work as a compliance officer and reviewer. And so I see this. The difference between that and what we need for a due process hearing is worlds apart. You can, you can be fully compliant and lose at a due process hearing. So just keep that in mind as we address this one. Minutes is not the same thing as FAPE. I want to break this down. If a kid is not receiving explicit instruction tied to an IEP goal, there's no instructional design or no evidence of skill development, what we have is we don't have what the kid needs. I see logs that show minutes being delivered, I see staff— I do when I do witness preparation— staff believe they're meeting requirements and leaders assume everything's fine. That's where districts get blindsided. No one asks, did you deliver? No one asks, did you deliver 300 minutes? What you need to ask is, what happened during those 300 minutes? You can deliver every minute and still lose because FAPE is about progress. It's not about presence. And that's what I want to emphasize here. We can give all the inputs, and if the kid is not making progress, we're not doing what we're supposed to be doing as a part of this one. So that's one thing. Okay. And this is what this is, and this is, this is where, this is where cases are met. SDI is weak. This is where cases are won or lost. If I open your records, what do I see? I typically see a service log. What is as part of this? 30 minutes provided. Great, that's wonderful, that's a start. Okay, but I need progress reports, and I need progress reports that clearly indicate yes or no whether the student is making progress. Not just— and not just making progress, I need evidence that this is happening as part of this one, and I need instructional detail that helps with this. Now, this talks— now, that tells me nothing about the instruction. What you should have, you should first have evidence That the skill was taught, how, what method was used, and how it differed from the general instruction for that kid as a part of this one. Then with that's first, that's first. Then second, you should have data, skill-specific progress monitoring, the measurable change over time, a connection between instruction and outcome. And then decisions that are made based on this one, and decisions that are made based on this one that talk about Because service logs don't prove learning. They prove time, not impact. And I mean this, if your documentation can't tell the story of instruction and progress, you don't have a defensible program. Reach out to me this fall. I've got a book coming out on this one, on progress monitoring from the hearing officer's perspective. It's great fun. All right, things like this. The SDI analysis, though. How can we ask the core question, is SDI actually happening? Is instruction different? Are you using different methods, materials, different levels of support? If not, it's basically general education that's watered down. It needs to be tied to a very specific skill deficit that the child has and aligned very specifically to an IEP goal that the child needs assistance. Or are you just helping the student complete assignments? That's not specially designed instruction. Okay, is it intentional? And I mean, is it planned? Is it consistent? Is it based on data that the student has? And that's what we need to focus on as a part of this one. All right, and so keep that in mind. Okay, instruction looks the same. Okay, if instruction looks the same as what every other student is getting, then it's the same. If it looks like general education, it is general education, and general education with accommodations is not SDI. So what are, what are some immediate steps we need to think about right now? Okay, ask these questions, and this is where you stop the bleed. Step 1, identify where time is being wasted. That's again easier said than done, I'm well aware of that one. But look for independent work blocks and look for passive support, look for just check-in services, and then act, and then work to address those as part of this one. Replace with explicit instruction, teaching, guided practice, skill-focused work. Tied to the individual needs that student has. And you need, when you're doing your observations, I think we, I think I've generated a handout on this, so I'll get to you. But you may— what's— you'd be able to ask, what skill is being taught? Don't just tell me we're working on the next page in the book. Don't just tell me we're working on the next module on AIMSweb, or just tell me what is, what is happening. How does this connect to this child's IEP? And clarify what the teacher is doing, not just circulating, not just assisting, but actually teaching intentionally. That's what we need to focus on about this one. All right, so keep it— address this and pay attention to this one. Let's go on to the next one. Let's talk about it as a long-term fix. This is not a classroom issue. It's a system definition problem as part of this one. You must be able to answer what counts as SDI, what does it look like in practice, because then— Let's go back. I mean, the federal law says very specifically and defines specially designed instruction as what we're providing for kids eligible for special education related services. And many of your state definitions define a kid as eligible for special education is because they have a disability and require SDI, as opposed to just needing services. Okay, so keep in mind as we talk about this one, right? But address this one. But ask the question, was the service— I want you to shift from was the service delivered to what instruction occurred. And it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter the location where this is occurring. I mean this with all seriousness. General education teachers, full inclusion settings can provide this. It doesn't have to be just in a special education classroom. That's one of the big misnomers about this one. It can work as a part of this one. We will make sure that the kid is getting the instruction that they actually require as a part of this one. That's what we need to emphasize. Because too often what we think about when we make placement decisions is send the kid to the special education program, but we need to actually think about, can we actually replicate that in a general education matter better? I did an article for the National Association of Elementary School Principals magazine in October, November about this one, where we need to make determinations based on what's going on. Reach out to me. I'll make sure you can get a copy of this one. Okay, but more, more building on this one. Okay, what I want you to do as a, as a, as a, as a fix, as a long-term fix, require data review cycles. What data do you have on this child? What data do you have on this child that helps us understand whether this child is making progress? And then after you find out yes or no, whether the child's making progress, look for instructional adjustments. And this may seem strange, okay? Just want to emphasize, when I did— when I led the training for hearing officers the other day, we emphasized to them, we're not looking for perfection. Okay, some of— I did the training for Maryland hearing officers last week. I'm doing the training for Texas hearing officers in 2 weeks. And what I say, we're not looking for perfection. We're looking for how you paid attention to when a kid was having a problem. And then what did you do about it? Because some of these kids just don't automatically absorb the material or learn. So we have to think about if they don't get it from the first try, what are we going to do in the second try to adjust this? And that's what we need to pay attention as a part of this one. But I'm looking for documented rationale and what's going on. If instruction doesn't change when progress stalls, you are out of compliance. And that's what we need to think about this one. So your questions: What is being taught? How is it different? And how do we know it's working? If you can, you need to be able to answer all 3 of those questions. If staff think that minutes equals compliance, you'll repeat the— you'll repeat failures. And that's what we emphasize. Okay? Because you lose— you'll lose cases that you think you're going to win as a part of this one. So keep that in mind as we address them. So there's, for this scenario, what I want to emphasize, this is the quiet— this is probably the quietest failure here. Because everything looks fine until someone actually asks what is actually happening. And so keep that in mind. All right, so let's go to the next one. All right, overloaded case managers. I'm betting most of you don't have this, but just in case, I'm going to talk about it. All right. All right, because everyone's probably seen this. Caseloads go up, expectations don't change, and something has to give. Let's walk through actually what happens as a part of this one. We see poor planning, we see IEPs written quickly. Goals not tightly aligned to the need. The SDI is vague or generic. I see minimal monitoring on this one. Data collected inconsistently with no clear review schedule. Progress reports that say making progress without any evidence whatsoever on that one. That's a loser. Okay, and then reactive instruction, waiting until things are clearly not working and then scrambling to respond. This isn't about effort. Most of these teachers are working really hard. It's about capacity colliding with expectations. This is not a staffing problem, it's a system problem. And what we have to think about this one is a part of this one. So let's talk about this, talk about the due process risk. Okay, let's look how this could show up legally. And I'm not trying to make you, uh, cause many of you to stay awake at night, but I want to make sure that you're aware. The question is, and I want you to frame this, As a question, when did the district know and when did it act? And break down the risk. The best— the typically delayed responses when we show data shows lack of progress, or that weeks or months pass and there's no changes, there's no change of instruction. So what we hear, okay, this is if you don't have— if you don't have documentation that emphasizes when a child is having problems and that you were able to clearly change what was going on as a result of this one. That's where you're going to lose. Again, we're not seeking perfection as hearing officers. What we're seeking for is statements that you saw a problem, you saw a problem, whatever that problem is, and then you did something to change the problem for the child, to alter the instruction, alter the learning, alter something as a part of this process. Okay? It's not because you— delay is one of the fastest ways you lose a case, and that's why I emphasize you delay, delay, delay. That's a decision in and of itself. Okay, it's not because you make a bad decision, but because you make no decision at all. Making no decision is actually a decision. So what I'm looking for as a part of this one is documentation, right? What must be in the IEP? Well, let me tell you what I look at for when I pull a file. What I look for, I look for baselines. I look for baselines established. I look for goals that measure just one thing at a time. They can be measurable and that you measure these things. Then progress reports that help me understand, yes or no, is the child making progress, expected levels of progress? Those of you who remember the Endrew Supreme Court case from 9 years ago, I was there for the oral arguments sitting next to Mitch Yell. We had a great time. What's interesting about this, the parents were making the case that all kids were expected to make 1 year of progress every single year. I want to make sure you understand that there are some kids, no matter what we do, they're not going to make a year's worth of Progress. But what we can do, um, so try to make sure that we're emphasizing what we can do as a part of building the gaps. So when a kid is not making progress, we have altered something about this one. So silence is the record, and that's the problem. So what we need to have: data reviewed regularly, we have decisions documented as a part of this one, instruction adjusted with rationale clearly stated. Okay. And when you summarize this one, Let me give you a tip on this one. Let me give you a tip is when you're summarizing what data you reviewed and how you made a decision about this one, write it for someone who is not in the room. These kids move there. Some of these kids are highly transient. Sometimes complaint officers read these later. A compliance investigator might read this later. A hearing officer might read it. Attorney or someone might read this later and not have any sense of what's going on. Write it for someone in the room, for someone who's not in the room about this one. Okay, so let's talk about this SDI analysis. Okay, ask, is SDI actually happening or are we just maintaining services? So I want to make sure that what we're doing is what— survival mode in this one is doing what we can in the moment.

Okay.

With no clear plan. When caseloads are high, survival mode becomes the default. And what we have to think about Survival mode is invisible in documentation. The record is blind to this when we talk about this one, and— but it's also indefensible in a hearing. Reactive teaching is not SDI. We need to think more about what the specific needs of that child, that, that, and how we're going to address that and move that child forward. If instruction only changes when things fall apart, you don't have a system, you have a crisis response, and that's what we have to think about as a result of this one. So let's talk about this one. The immediate action we can do on this one. But this is where leaders often freeze because the problem feels too big. You're going— you're not going to fix workload overnight, so stop trying. Yeah, you fix decision-making first. Who is not making progress? Who is at risk right now? Those are the questions, right? Not all students carry equal risk at any given moment. There are some students who make progress in spite of us. They still make progress. Okay, so what I want to emphasize is a short, a short review cycle every 2 to 3 weeks for some of these kids. Look at real data, not summaries, data that is clearly tied yes or no to whether that student is making progress on his or her goals and objectives that are part of this one. And ask the question, is the student on track? And then if they're not, ask the question, if not, what changes now? Every review must end with either continue, change, or intensify. Continue, change, or intensify. Okay, because— and you only continue if the student is making appropriate progress. You change if they're not, and intensify if they're really falling behind or plateaued a long time ago. Monitoring without decisions is just watching failure happen as a part of this one. Okay, so what you can do is you can ensure consistency You can ensure you— because you don't fix everything, but you must fix something intentionally. If everything is a priority, nothing is being managed. The long-term fix on this one, the long-term fix on this one is this is where you stop relying on individuals and start building a system. You need to think how, how the work is distributed, not just the number of students, but think about the complexity of needs, the intensity required for some of these students, the time demand for monitoring. A caseload of 20 is, is, is not the same as a caseload of 20. Okay, I say this because my daughter was a special education teacher for a number of years. She had 8 students in her classroom, all with intense needs. All were nonverbal and aggressive. They required— that classroom required 7 aides and a dedicated BCBA for her classroom at all times because of the intense needs. There are teachers out there who have 8 other students on their caseload. who don't have that kind of intensity. So I want to make sure you understand a caseload of 20 or caseload of 8 in that situation is not the same load as a caseload of 20 or 8 in other situations. But every case manager understands, understands what their expectations— because performance, if they don't understand what their performance is, it becomes inconsistent. So you need to emphasize this one. All right. But I, I want to, before I go into the next one, your monitoring system, you cannot leave your monitoring decisions Or leave monitoring to individual decisions. You need to build regular review cycles, team-based data decisions, and require documentation of decisions as a part of this one. If monitoring is optional, it won't happen consistently, and that's what we want to focus on. All right, so let's talk about another one. Okay, push-in not working. This is a, this is a real thing about this one. Okay, on paper it looks great. Students are in general education services are being delivered in the least restrictive environment, and I don't want to go down the road defining least restrictive environment, but I could if you want me to. We don't have that kind of time. Okay, what we're seeing in practice is something very different. I want to walk through what actually happens. You see special education teachers circulating, checking work, sitting next to students, supporting instead of instructing. There's no differentiation, the same lesson for everyone. No changes in method, no changes in materials, no changes in expectations. For some students, they don't need the change. Then they don't need specially designed instruction. Then they don't probably necessarily need special education. Keep that in mind as we talk about this one. And when you just have teachers just milling around seeing what's going on, what do you do? You don't have co-teaching, you have proximity support. The reality, the special education teacher is present, but the instruction hasn't changed. And so this is the illusion of inclusion as a part of this one. Students are physically included but instructionally not there, and so unsupported. Okay, the due process risk on this one. And this, going through this, think about this one. All right, start with the core issue. SDI is supposed to be instruction designed to meet disability-related needs. If instruction is identical to general education, SDI is not happening. Now, if the student doesn't need SDI, they don't need special education. Make them understand the difference between the 2. So talk about this. So there's a role confusion in push-in places. Who's responsible for instruction? Who is monitoring progress? Who's adjusting instruction as a part of this one? I was in Montgomery County, Virginia, school district out by Black— surrounding Blacksburg, and I saw a great model where the teacher was actually pushing in. And providing instruction. And on things like this one, it was very clear what was doing— who was doing what, what's going on. There are models out there that work, and I'm happy to talk about this one. But the problem is, is, okay, the hearing question is not, were both teachers in the room? The question is, what is the special education teacher doing that is instructionally different? If no one owns instruction, no one is accountable. And that's where, okay, and when no one is accountable, the district cannot defend its program as a part of this one. So what documentation look for as part of this one?

Okay.

This is where districts think they're fine and then realize they're not. Okay, what would you be able to actually show to prove that SDI occurred in that classroom? Common weak answers include lesson plans, co-teaching schedules, service minutes. They don't tell me that the child has received specially designed instruction. May sound like I'm kind of harsh on this, but the reality of the situation is we're seeing a dramatic rise in litigation across the United States. Every single venue is about this one. Many states have already capped out for this year, this academic year. They had more complaints this year than they had last year. So the reality of the situation, it's coming and you need to prepare for this one. Okay, so let's go back to this one. Lesson plans, they don't tell me what the student was taught differently. Okay, what I need, I need this description of instructional Differentiation. What I need is evidence of targeted teaching aligned to IEP goals. What I need is documentation of what, who delivered what. Okay, so a bad example. Give me a bad example. Stay seated where you are. Student received push-in support during math. All right, that doesn't tell me what they received. Okay, defensible. Student received explicit instruction in multi-step Problem solving using scaffold modeling and guided practice aligned to goal X. It's a math goal, have to have an X, all right? Delivered by a special education teacher during push-in block. If you can't describe the instruction, you don't deliver SDI. If you can't prove it, it didn't happen. So keep that in mind as we address this one. All right, so the SDI analysis: is instruction individualized? Is it targeted to the needs, or is it generic support? And that's where we often lose things. Is it okay? So, is what happened— what it does— what happening connect to a goal? I'm seeing teachers just going to the next page in the book. It has no connection whatsoever to a goal that the child has. Helping a student finish work, moving through a textbook, is not the same thing as teaching a skill. So, so, is it intentional? Is it planned in advance? Is it based on student needs, or is it improvised in the moment as a part of this one? If the special education teacher is making it up as they go, that's not designed instruction. Okay, proximity is not SDI. Being in the room does not equal delivering instruction. So keep that in mind. So the immediate action I want to emphasize as a part of this one, immediate action. Okay, and this is fixable. But only if you stop tolerating the current model. Step 1, stop calling it co-teaching if it isn't. Okay, I was— I worked as a co-teacher. That's where I learned about Sudoku. I played Sudoku in the back because they— the general education teacher didn't actually really want me there. So I sat in the back and there was— I was— it was a waste of time. It was a waste of money as a part of this one. Okay, but you need to make sure that your staff are planning very specifically what skill is being taught. How it will be taught differently and who is delivering it. If there's no plan for differentiation, it won't happen. So keep that in mind. So what I want to make sure— have teachers just stop circulating aimlessly, stop completing work for students, stop acting as a paraprofessional. What replace with direct instruction, small group targeted teaching, and explicit strategy. Every action must be tied to a goal. Every action must be tied to a skill deficit. And as part of this one, a long-term fix on this one, okay, is— okay, you must define what push-in actually means and what that means in your system. Options are parallel teaching, station teaching, alternate teaching. Okay, each must include intentional SDI for the students. If the model is figured out in your room, you don't have a model. I emphasize this one. Co-teaching without planning is theater. Okay, require scheduled planning times, defined instructional roles, and alignment to IEP goals. If teachers are not planning together, they're not co-teaching. You must observe for instruction, not just presence. Differentiation happens in real time with instruction tied to goals with clear— so if your walkthrough tool can't detect SDI, it's useless. And that's one of them. Okay, so this is where leaders either fix it or allow it to continue. What is the special education teacher as a part of this one? Okay, most, most— and this, this, this talk about just inclusion— most inclusion models don't fail because of intent. You understand this one? Most inclusion models don't fail because of intent. They fail because no one defined what instruction should look like for these kids as a part of this one. Okay, I got an opportunity for one more scenario before we move on, and I'm going to go through this Fairly quickly. Stay seated, stay where you are. All right. Okay. Staffing— this is called What Is. Creating— okay. Creative scheduling is usually in response to staffing problems, not a strategic decision. You've got vacancies, you've got people covering multiple roles, and suddenly the schedule starts to shift. You got mixed groups. We're combining students who don't actually have the same needs. We have different adults with different approaches with no continuity. We're cutting time, but pretending the service is the same. Okay. That looks like flexibility on paper, but it's often inconsistency in practice. This is where, this is where systems start to drift, not all at once, but slowly. One change and then another. Then suddenly what's being delivered no longer matches what is being designed. And the dangerous part, everyone tells themselves it's just temporary. So let's talk about this, talk about the due process risks. Right, right. Frame it through a neutral reader. What would a neutral person think about this one? And then the question would be, what did the district promise and what did the student actually receive? Break this down. Okay, is there a loss of individualization? Is there inconsistency in delivery? When services are inconsistent, progress becomes unpredictable. And when progress is unpredictable, the district loses control of the narrative. And that's what we want to emphasize as a part of this one. If service changes without an IEP team decision, you've effectively changed the program unilaterally. You know where I'm going to land on that one. That's not a good thing. That's how you walk into a denial of FAPE argument, because you can't explain what the student was actually receiving. That's a problem. Okay, so keep in mind as we talk about this one. So let's talk about documentation, right? What must be in the IEP? And this is, again, this is where most districts collapse. This is, again, over many, many, many hundreds of these that I've seen. This is not just a one-time thing, but it's come— it could be coming to a district near you. Ask directly, does your documentation reflect what is actually happening or what you intended to happen? Let's walk through what gets exposed. The IEP says for a student 5 times a week, 30 minutes specialized reading instruction. The reality, 3 times a week, mixed group, rotating staff, shortened sessions. That gap right there, that's the case. You have a difference between what they— and I took contracts in law school, so I understand this one— but the difference between what we're promising— we're not promising, we're not guaranteeing as a contract. What we're doing is we're, we're going to implement the contract as, as written. And if you write that the child is supposed to receive this, those of you who've been in manifestation determination reviews understand this one. You can't go to question 2 unless you can say question 1, we implemented it as written. You're, you're going to have some problems as part of this one. Okay. Okay. So I want to push harder on this, not just on delivery of minutes. What data do we have that shows that the SDI occurred? I'm not looking for attendance. I'm not looking for minutes logged. I'm not looking— I'm not looking at the student was present. I'm happy. That warms my heart that the student came to school. I want to see evidence of instructional records that show that the child actually made progress on their goals. Not— I don't want to see attendance. I don't want to see grades. I bet if we were to lock ourselves in a room just for a minute, we could all come up with all these different reasons of why grades can be misinterpreted and cause problems. Grades are crude indicators. We lock onto them, but they don't actually help us understand yes or no about what's going on. You need instructional records with— it talks about consistent methodology with progress tied to instruction delivered. The IEP, okay, is a promise, and your records don't match it, you've broken the promise. Okay, and in hearing, I want to make sure you understand this: nobody cares what you meant to do. They care about what you can prove happened. Understand the difference? You may have the best intentions, but if you don't do what you're supposed to be doing, There's a term in Virginia called SOL, and so you— it stands for standard learning. Apply it however you want on this one. Okay, the SDI analysis. The question we need to ask now, we ask the most important question: is this still SDI? Are students being individualized? Are students grouped based on shared skill deficits, or are they just based on— is it— are they just grouped based on availability? Is instruction aligned to each student's goal, or is everyone getting the same lesson? I remember my first year of teaching, I was so ecstatic about this one. I had 4 boys coming to my classroom who were all the same grade level in reading. They were all— I taught upper elementary, and it was a classroom of kids with learning disabilities and behavior disorders, and all the students had a grade equivalent of 3.1. I said, wow, this is amazing. I've got a group. One could read every word on the page, couldn't comprehend a single thing. One couldn't read a single word on the page but could comprehend everything. One was just low on multiple things, and the other one, he was up and down on all variety of things. But when you aggregate the grade equivalent, they all had the same thing. 4 very different kids. My group worked for about 3 days, and then I realized that wasn't going to work about this one. So we have to talk about this one as part of the instructional analysis. If a student's experience changes depending on the day, the adult, or the group, that's not designed instruction. Efficiency is not the goal. Effectiveness is. You don't get legal credit for being creative. Really, you don't. All right, you can evaluate on whether instruction was appropriate, and that's what we want to emphasize. All right, so let's talk about the immediate action we can do as a part of this one and ask— this is where leaders tend to hesitate. Don't. Be direct. Step 1, stop pretending the current schedule is working. Give concrete moves. Align services to the IEPs immediately. If the IEP says individual or small group instruction, fix the grouping. If frequency is off, adjust now, not next month. Stabilize delivery. Reduce rotations so that it's consistent providers when possible as a part of this one. Prioritize high-risk students. Students with the least progress as a part of this one, students with the most intensive needs, prioritize them as a part of this one. Okay, and then document the correction, document what changed, why it changed, when it changed. Again, you don't need perfection, you need alignment. The worst move is to keep a broken system running while you wait for staffing to improve. All right, so keep this one. So let's talk about a long-term fix. Let's talk about a long-term fix. This is not a scheduling issue. It's a systems design issue. I just want to walk through each component. Staffing. You need a plan that assumes instability. What happens when positions are unfilled? Who covers and how is instruction protected? If your model only works when fully staffed, it's already broken. Okay, 2nd, define SDI, what that looks like operationally. Group size limits, uh, tied to need, required instructional design, role clarity between staff is a part of this one. Without a defined model, people improvise, and improvisation leads to inconsistency. Okay, then you need a monitoring system. You need to know when drift starts, not after it's a problem. You need to make sure that you look at your group composition, you look at your instructional delivery, and your progress trends. If you only monitor minutes, You will miss failures. And then last, leadership expectations. This is where the proverbial rubber hits the road. Okay, this is where accountability lives. You need to ask, is this instruction or just coverage? Require evidence of SDI. Intervene when drift starts. If your system depends on perfect staffing, it's not sustainable. Building a system that holds under pressure. All right. All right. So I want to make sure you build a system that holds under pressure or will break when it matters most. So keep this in mind. So let me close on all these scenarios. I've thrown a lot at you, but what I want you to think about very specifically is what I want to address as a part of this one. The scenarios— okay, this scenario doesn't fail loudly. It fails quietly over time. And by the time you see the data, you're already behind. And that's what poses a problem. So things that I really want to focus on about this, and what we're going to have opportunity to have some closing comments on this one, but I want to make sure that you pay attention to. You need to be able to document what you're specifically doing for the kids and then make sure that documentation clearly articulates the needs of that child and where that child's going and how this specifically, this specially designed instruction that will be provided that student to go from where they are to where they need to be. You also, you also need to be able to document if the student is not improving at an appropriate trajectory, what steps have you done to alter or change the program for that student so that the student just doesn't plateau, the student just doesn't stagnate, that we're doing something very concrete for that student that will change what's going on for them. Many parents come into the special education meetings and IEPs and others and talk about that the child has a disability that will prevent the student from learning. The disability is only the starter point of the conversation. It is not the driving aspect of this one. We need to do a better job of clearly articulating what's going on with these students and understanding what's going on. As a hearing officer in multiple states, right, I don't want to list all of them, I don't want to bore you, but it is interesting about this one. Is hearing officers Don't look for perfection. What they look for is an analysis of when there's a problem, of what you did to solve or adjust that problem as a part of this one. We, we as hearing officers— and this, this was part of the presentation I made for as part of the national training for hearing officers, as part of the cadre training just 3 weeks ago— is what we had to emphasize is we're not looking for perfection. And we realize that if the kid is not making, is not making progress, You change something, and if that's not working, you change something else. And if that's not working, you change something else. Sometimes some of these kids, it takes 3, 4, 5 changes, but we have to emphasize this as a part of this one.

Right.

So last thing we have, we have, I want to make sure you can, you can email questions as a part of this to us and give us information about this one. But if you have further questions, don't hesitate to reach out to me. Okay, don't hesitate to reach out to me. I'm, I will do everything I can to get you a timely answer. to your questions so that you understand precisely what's going on and understand where we are with this one. Okay, so the last things, um, I think I'm going to turn it over to Lauren for the, the last part about this one. But I appreciate your patience, and I applaud all of you for what you're doing. Lauren, chime in. All right.

Thank you so much, Dr. Bateman, for sharing your time and your expertise with us. We really appreciate the insights and perspectives. And thank you everyone who joined us today. Please be on the lookout for a follow-up email from us that will include the presentation from today as well as the recording. But before we wrap up, we would love to have your insights so that we can design our fall leadership series around what will make the biggest impact for you. So please scan the QR code here. It's also linked in the chat. We'd love to hear about what you're working through right now at your district and what challenges you're facing, because chances are there are other leaders on this webinar today who are experiencing something similar, and we'd love to tailor our fall learning series to exactly what you need. Thank you again for spending part of your day with us. I know that you all have a lot going on, and we really, really appreciate you taking this hour. We'll go ahead and leave this call up for a few more moments so everybody has a chance to scan and share, and we look forward to seeing you all again soon.

Thanks, Lauren.