1 of 36

Evaluation and Eligibility Determination for Gifted

Using Response to Intervention

www.ksdetasn.org

2 of 36

Agenda

New Gifted Resources
Why Use Response to Intervention?
General Education Interventions (GEI)
The Evaluation and Eligibility Determination Process

Response to Intervention Method of Evaluation
The Two-Prong Test of Eligibility
Using the Indicators Document

Linking evaluation data to the IEP

www.ksdetasn.org

3 of 36

New Gifted Resources

Gifted FAQs

https://www.ksdetasn.org/resources/2483

www.ksdetasn.org

4 of 36

Underrepresented Populations in Gifted Services In Kansas

Subgroup	Percent of state enrollment	Percent of state gifted placement
SES Eligible for Free/Reduced lunch Not eligible for F/R lunch (paid)	45.7% 54.3%	14.7% 85.3%
English Learners (EL)	5.0%	0.4%
Gender Male Female	51.3% 48.7%	57.2% 42.8%
Ethnicity White African American Hispanic Asian Multi-ethnic AI/AN (American Indian) NH/PI (Pacific Islander)	64.1% 6.7% 20.1% 3.1% 5.3% 1.8% <0.1%	77.8% 1.8% 6.9% 7.8% 5.3% 0.4% 0.1%

www.ksdetasn.org

This chart shows Kansas demographics for the 18-19 school year.

The recommendations for better identification within these subgroups share a great deal of commonality. In general, the recommendations that appear most often across studies and subgroups are:

conduct screening,
use local norms,
use multiple measures and multiple criteria, and
conduct nondiscriminatory assessment.

The importance of authentic procedures includes assessing rate of progress within material that the child has been taught, without assumptions about opportunities for prior learning. Whenever curriculum-based methods of assessment are used, the standard should be comparison to other students who possess background and educational experiences that are as close as possible to the target student being assessed. The implementation of this practice may lead to the need to develop local norms. All the data collected regarding the student being assessed for gifted identification needs to be considered in the context of that student’s experiences and background. Because this background may be very different from that of students on whom the most frequently used tests are normed, there may be a need for screening to identify students not typically identified as gifted, and using multiple measures and multiple criteria instead of using inappropriate assessments. No matter what assessment methods are used, teams need to look for convergence in the data. This convergence should reveal patterns of performance indicating a child with high ability and achievement when compared to students of similar experience, language, and background.

These recommendations for the various subgroups for whom there are underrepresentation concerns fall within the realm of conducting an evaluation using a Response to Intervention approach. We have also been hearing of inappropriate evaluation practices being used that fail to meet state requirements for a nondiscriminatory assessment (See the FAQ guidance). While an RTI approach can be used for any student’s evaluation, it is especially important that teams consider using RTI for evaluations of students who are within an underrepresented subgroup.

5 of 36

Why Use Response to Intervention?

As a way to conduct a nondiscriminatory assessment for students of poverty or for students with racial, ethnic, or language differences.
As a way to utilize the information already available about a student, if your building uses Kansas MTSS, and thus reduce the time needed for testing.

www.ksdetasn.org

6 of 36

GENERAL EDUCATION INTERVENTIONS

www.ksdetasn.org

7 of 36

General Education Interventions

Kansas describes two models of GEI

MTSS (protocol interventions + systemic problem-solving)
Individual problem-solving

In both models the school must carry out interventions and document the child’s progress

The interventions and progress monitoring data will provide information about the child’s needs, including

the intensity of instruction needed
the supports required for the child to be successful

GEI

www.ksdetasn.org

There are two models for the GEI process in Kansas.
Within a school-wide multi-tiered system, children will receive GEI as a part of the system in place for all students. Data collected at each tier should guide school personnel as to the next steps to take based on the child’s response to interventions tried. Tier 2 interventions are generally protocol interventions, selected on the basis of screening and diagnostic assessment. For students receiving Tier 3 interventions, individualized problem solving is probably needed to design the intensive individualized support the child will receive. Parents are to be provided with copies of the child data collected as interventions are implemented and monitored. For students who appear to have high ability when compared to peers, Tier 2 often consists of protocol interventions for high achievers to provide curriculum extensions. Tier 3 may provide intense and individualized interventions for students from underrepresented subgroups, who appear to be learning faster than their peers with similar ethnic and educational experience backgrounds.
The individual problem-solving process is typically carried out through the collaborative teams. These teams design and provide support to any child who may be experiencing difficulty (academic or behavior). Typically, these teams carry out a problem-solving process which results in the refinement of an intervention plan which documents the child’s area of concern, the interventions implemented, the data reflecting the child’s response to the intervention, and the recommendations as a result of the child’s response to the intervention. However, all steps should include parent involvement – not just informing parents, but including them in decision-making whenever possible.
Remember, GEIs are required by state regulation before a student is placed in special education. If a parent insists that evaluation begin immediately, GEIs must be conducted concurrently with the initial evaluation.

8 of 36

GEI Using MTSS

Universal screening, the diagnostic process, and other available information is used to determine student intervention.
Interventions are refined & intensified based on progress monitoring data and data-based decision making for adjusting instruction.
Collaborative teams have charts and intervention logs that show the results from all the steps above.

www.ksdetasn.org

For buildings using MTSS, the GEI process is carried out by the collaborative teams.
For GEI in schools implementing MTSS, data from universal screening and the diagnostic process is used to determine student intervention.
Frequent progress monitoring and data analysis occurs, and this information is used in a problem solving process to refine the intervention.
Instruction is intensified as needed, based on the progress monitoring data and the steps for adjusting instruction.
If student growth is insufficient, individual problem-solving is conducted. This planning, which may include formal diagnostic assessment, is used to customize the intervention
Collaborative teams have charts and intervention logs that show the results from all the steps above.
Use of MTSS requires additional parent notification—see page 25 of the Special Education Process Handbook.

9 of 36

GEI Using�Individual-Student Problem Solving

GEI/SIT/SAT/CARE teams meet to conduct individual problem-solving.
Progress monitoring data is used to refine intervention.
GEI/SIT/SAT/CARE teams have charts and meeting notes or intervention logs that show the results from the steps above.

www.ksdetasn.org

10 of 36

What are examples of GEIs for potential gifted students?

During “Walk to Intervention” time, student receives learning extensions adapted for the individual’s needs and characteristics
Accelerated placement or advanced placement classes (if allowed for general education students)
Individual projects in an area of interest or strength

www.ksdetasn.org

11 of 36

Challenges to Successful Interventions for �High Performing Students

Peer pressure not to be a high achiever
Student may not wish to take on more (or more difficult) work
Social mores against high achievement (especially for girls)
Responsibilities for sibling care
For older students, job responsibilities

www.ksdetasn.org

12 of 36

EVALUATION AND ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION

Using Response To Intervention

www.ksdetasn.org

13 of 36

Basic Premises of Response to Intervention

GEI data are available from district and classroom assessments, including universal screening and perhaps the diagnostic process.
GEI data are available from progress monitoring individually planned interventions.
Decisions about additional assessments, interventions, and evaluation are based upon the referral question and student needs.

www.ksdetasn.org

14 of 36

Moving into an Initial Evaluation

Referral from Parents
Self-Referral from Adult Student
At the point that school staff suspect the student may be a student with an exceptionality and needs special education, a referral must be made

www.ksdetasn.org

15 of 36

Documentation Needed �Prior to Referral

That appropriate instruction was provided to the student,
What education interventions and strategies have been implemented,
The results of repeated assessments of achievement which reflect the formal assessment of the student’s progress during instruction,
That parents have been provided the results
The results indicate an evaluation is appropriate

www.ksdetasn.org

16 of 36

Outline of Initial Evaluation and Eligibility Determination Process

Determine additional data needed

What, if any, additional assessment is needed?
What, if any, additional intervention is needed?

Obtain informed parent consent, then collect needed data
Determine eligibility using two-prong test of eligibility

Consider Prong 1—presence of an exceptionality
Consider Prong 2—need for special education

www.ksdetasn.org

17 of 36

1. Determine Additional Data Needed

Conduct a review of the existing data on the child, including:

Evaluations and information provided by the parents of the child
Current classroom-based, local, and state assessments and classroom-based observations
Observations by teachers and related services providers
Intervention data collected during GEI

www.ksdetasn.org

18 of 36

Determine Additional Data Needed

Identify what additional data, if any, are needed to determine:

The present levels of academic achievement and functional performance of the child. If the child is identified as eligible, this information will constitute the PLAAFPs of the IEP
Whether the child a child with an exceptionality
Whether the child has a need for special education and related services

www.ksdetasn.org

19 of 36

Think Carefully about Needed Assessment

The definition of gifted has three requirements:

performing or demonstrating the potential for performing at significantly higher levels of accomplishment in one or more academic fields
due to intellectual ability
when compared to others of similar age, experience, and environment

Do you have data that provides evidence of these three requirements?

www.ksdetasn.org

Think about the information you already have regarding this student. Don’t spend time in testing if you already have evidence regarding these three requirements. If you have trouble identifying the types of evidence that can be used, look at the Indicators Document, available on the KSDE website, www.ksde.org. Many of the indicators reflect the type of information collected within the RTI method of evaluation. Some examples of this type of information is below:

Here are some examples of evidence for requirement #1:

Measures, record reviews, interviews, and/or observations indicate child demonstrates superior reasoning and problem solving ability.
Progress monitoring indicates child’s skill level in one or more academic areas is much above that of peers.
Grade Point Average, classroom assessments, portfolios, or rubrics indicate significant excellence in academics.
District, state, and national assessments indicate significant excellence in academics.
Provide opportunities for learning and monitor rate of progress

Here are some examples of evidence for requirement #2:

Measures, record reviews, interviews, and/or observations indicate child shows persistent intellectual curiosity and asks searching questions.
Measures, record reviews, interviews, and/or observations indicate child shows initiative and originality in intellectual work.
Ease of task completion indicates a significantly high level of intellectual ability.
Rate of acquisition and retention indicate a significantly high level of intellectual ability.
Products from home or school indicate a significantly high level of intellectual ability.
Provide opportunities for learning and monitor rate of progress

Here are some examples of evidence for requirement #3:

Multiple characteristics of giftedness exhibited when interventions provide adaptations, enrichment, or acceleration as compared to peers, with consideration given to cultural or linguistic differences.
Persistence to task and generalization of knowledge gained indicate a remarkably high level of accomplishment.
Coursework analysis indicates a significantly high level of intellectual ability and excellence in academics when provided with interventions.
Performance significantly higher than peers in one or more areas on benchmark assessments, curricular objectives, or state assessments, with consideration given to cultural or linguistic differences.
Compare the student to other students who possess similar background and educational experiences (may need to develop local norms)

Do you already have data providing evidence of these three requirements? If not, how will you collect the needed data?

20 of 36

Plan a Non-biased Assessment

Tests must be selected based on their appropriateness for use with students with the characteristics of the referred student
Consider: language background, ethnicity, cultural background, socio-economic background, educational history, etc.
Think about those factors before planning the evaluation and select assessment methods and processes that take those factors into account.

www.ksdetasn.org

21 of 36

Considerations for the Determination of any Necessary Additional Data

What information is needed to ensure a comprehensive evaluation?
Is any information needed to identify services and supports needed by the student?
The need for additional data must be decided on an individual basis. The team could decide no additional data is needed.
The evaluation teams identifies which measures to use and who will collect the data.

www.ksdetasn.org

You must answer each of the following questions as you are determining what additional data is needed:

What information is needed to assure a comprehensive evaluation?

What domains and abilities need to be assessed related to the child’s current needs?
Are there any issues related to attention, behavior, etc.?

Ensuring a comprehensive evaluation does not mean you have to conduct a test in every area. It does mean you need to collect enough information to know whether or not any area of functioning is a concern. This information may come, for example, from a teacher’s report, or an observation, or a file review. Any reporting regarding the areas of functioning should not only indicate the student’s level of functioning, but how you collected that information.

Is any information needed to identify services and supports needed by the student?

Are there any interventions that need to be conducted during evaluation to identify needed services and supports?

These considerations for additional data to be collected during the evaluation need to be individualized. The evaluation team should not be administering the exact same test battery to all students being evaluated for eligibility for gifted services.

22 of 36

2. Obtain Informed Parent Consent Then Collect Needed Data

Provide PWN and obtain parent consent for the evaluation.
Complete the initial evaluation by collecting the needed additional data.
Make sure that you have completed a comprehensive evaluation.
Make sure you have conducted a nondiscriminatory evaluation.
Make sure you follow the 60 school day timeline

www.ksdetasn.org

23 of 36

RTI Practices

Assess educationally relevant cultural and linguistic factors
Provide opportunities for learning and monitor rate of progress
Compare the student to other students who possess similar background and educational experiences (may need to develop local norms)
Support conclusions via data convergence and multiple indicators

www.ksdetasn.org

The importance of using authentic procedures includes assessing rate of progress within material that the child has been taught, without assumptions about opportunities for prior learning. Whenever curriculum-based methods of assessment are used, the standard should be comparison to other students who possess background and educational experiences that are as close as possible to the target student being assessed. The implementation of this practice may lead to the need to develop local norms. All the data collected regarding the student being assessed for gifted identification needs to be considered in the context of that student’s experiences and background. Because this background may be very different from that of students on whom the most frequently used tests are normed, there may be a need for screening to identify students not typically identified as gifted, and the use of multiple measures and multiple criteria instead of using inappropriate assessments. Ortiz (2014) points out that no matter what assessment methods are used, teams need to look for convergence in the data. This convergence should reveal patterns of performance indicating a child with high ability and achievement when compared to students of similar experience, language, and background.

24 of 36

3. Determine Eligibility

The Two-Prong Test:

Exceptionality + Need

Eligibility

www.ksdetasn.org

25 of 36

Eligibility Determination

Is

Application of critical thinking skills to the evaluation process
Data-based team decision making
Professional judgment

Is Not

The application of rules
The administration and interpretation of any specific assessments
Based on a single score

www.ksdetasn.org

26 of 36

Eligibility Determination

Prong 1

Is the child a child with an exceptionality?

4�Decision

www.ksdetasn.org

27 of 36

Steps to Answering Prong 1

Do the evaluation data match one of the definitions of exceptionality in state/federal regulations?
Are the data congruent with indicators for that exceptionality?
Note that exclusionary criteria do not apply to the category of gifted.

www.ksdetasn.org

28 of 36

Match the Definition

The definitions for each of the exceptionality categories are listed in the Eligibility Indicators Document (August, 2018).
The team considers whether the student’s data match or do not match the definition of the exceptionality category under consideration.
There are 3 requirements for Prong 1 for Gifted.

www.ksdetasn.org

29 of 36

Using the Indicators Document

Prong 1: Definition of gifted—3 Requirements:

performing or demonstrating the potential for performing at significantly higher levels of accomplishment in one or more academic fields
due to intellectual ability
when compared to others of similar age, experience, and environment

www.ksdetasn.org

30 of 36

Eligibility Determination

Prong 2

Does the child need special education and related services?

4�Decision

www.ksdetasn.org

31 of 36

Prong 2

Determine Whether the Child Needs Special Education and Related Services as a Result of the Exceptionality.

What are the child’s needs related to the intensity of instruction and supports required for the child to be successful?
Does the child have specific needs which are so unique as to require specially designed instruction in order to access and make progress in the general education curriculum?

www.ksdetasn.org

32 of 36

Steps to Answering Prong 2

What is needed for the student to participate in the general or an advanced curriculum?
Is there a need for specially designed instruction?
Is the child’s need for having adapted content, methodology, or delivery of instruction so great that it cannot be provided in regular education without the support of special education?

www.ksdetasn.org

It is helpful for teams to remember that by definition special education means specially designed instruction (KAR 91-40-1(kkk)), and, that specially designed instruction means adapting the content, methodology or delivery of instruction to address the unique needs of a child that result from the child’s exceptionality to ensure access of the child to the general education curriculum in order to meet the educational standards that apply to all children (KAR 91-40-1 (lll)). This implies that in order to have a need for special education, the child has specific needs which are so unique as to require specially designed instruction in order to access and make progress in the general education curriculum.

The team must review the evaluation data in such a way as to understand the extent of the child’s needs with regard to specially designed instruction. Teams should be able to use the data to describe the intensity of the support needed to assist the child in accessing and progressing in the general education curriculum. It is only through this discussion that the team can determine whether or not the child’s need for having adapted content, methodology, or delivery of instruction is so great that it cannot be provided without the support of special education.

The indicators for Prong 2 for each of the exceptionality categories are listed in the Eligibility Indicators Document (August, 2018).

Consider whether the data are congruent with the indicators for Prong 2. Most data for Prong 2 comes from the General Education Interventions process or from interventions conducted during the evaluation process.

33 of 36

Using the Indicators Document

Prong 2: Need for special education (specially designed instruction) and related services

Examples of evidence:

Progress monitoring data
Evidence of mastery
Changes/modifications needed
Intensity of supports needed

www.ksdetasn.org

34 of 36

Complete Eligibility Report

Specific to RTI:

(iv) If the child has participated in a process that assesses the child’s response to scientific, research-based intervention, the report must also document

the instructional strategies used; and
the student-centered data collected.

Documentation that the child’s parents were notified about the process, including the following information:

the State’s policies regarding the amount and nature of student performance data that would be collected and the general education services that would be provided;
strategies for increasing the child’s rate of learning; and
the parent’s right to request an evaluation (K.A.R. 91-40-10(e), (f); K.A.R. 91-40-9(a)(2)(3); 34 C.F.R. 300.309(a)(3); 34 C.F.R. 300.311(a)).

www.ksdetasn.org

35 of 36

Linking Evaluation to IEP

The evaluation provides information for the Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PLAAFPs)
Information required in the PLAAFPs:

Current performance for both academic achievement and functional performance
Statement describing the impact of the child’s exceptionality on his/her ability to access and make progress in the general education curriculum
Baseline data for goals

www.ksdetasn.org

36 of 36

Questions?

Deb McVey (TASN)

deb4tasn@sunflower.com

Melissa Valenza (KSDE)

mvalenza@ksde.org

www.ksdetasn.org