10/25/16
3 Diagnostic Centers
California Department of Education
Alternative Assessment as a
Means to Reduce
Disproportionality in Special
Education: A PSW Approach
3 Diagnostic Centers
California Department of Education
DEL
NORTE
SISKIYOU
•  Diagnostic Center-Northern
MODOC
SHASTA
TRINITY
LASSEN
HUMBOLDT
TEHAMA
PLUMAS
GLENN
MENDOCINO
BUTTE
COLUSA
YUBA
LAKE
•  Diagnostic Center-Central
SIERRA
NEVADA
PLACER
SUTTER
EL DORADO
YOLO
NAPA
SONOMA
ALPINE
SOLANO
SACRAMENTO
CONTRA
COSTA
MARIN
School Psychologists
James F. Hiramoto, Ph.D., Brentwood Union School District,
Carolyn Sakkis, MS, Mount Diablo Unified School District, and
Kristina Calander, MS, Mount Diablo Unified School District
SAN
MATEO
AMADOR
ALAMEDA
SAN
JOAQUIN
•  Diagnostic Center-Southern
CALAVERAS
DCN
SANTA
CLARA
SANTA
CRUZ
TUOLOMNE
STANISLAUS MARIPOSA
SAN
BENITO
MERCED
MONO
MADERA
DCC
MONTEREY
FRESNO
TULARE
KINGS
SAN
LUIS
OBISPO
INYO
KERN
(North & West)
KERN
(South & East)
SANTA
BARBARA
SAN BERNARDINO
LOS ANGELES
VENTURA
DCS
RIVERSIDE
ORANGE
SAN DIEGO
IMPERIAL
2
Diagnostic Center, Northern California Resource
CAPTAIN
California Autism Professional Training and Information Network
(by invitation only)
!
www.captain.ca.gov
!!
ence
Evid
d!
Base
s!
ctice
!Pra
—  Trainer of Trainers Model
www.askaspecialist.ca.gov
—  Summit 2016-2017
“Implementation Science”
Questions Answered by Specialists in the Areas of:
ASD
AAC/AT
AD/HD
MENTAL HEALTH
MEDICAL
TRANSITION
BEHAVIOR
CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE
— December 6-7, 2016 Southern CA, Ventura
— January 23-24, 2017 in Northern CA, Stockton
—  Summit Participants (by invitation/nomination)
— SELPA ASD Specialists
— Regional Ctr. ASD Reps
— Family Empowerment / Resource Centers Reps
—  Website
—  Trainings
—  Coaching/Technical Assistance
ASSESSMENT
Another Diagnostic Center
Resource
Links to
ASD
Resources
CAPTAIN
Website
Hosted by
DCN!
CAPTAIN
Social Media
Links
www.captain.ca.gov
[email protected]
www.pent.ca.gov
California Positive Behavior Initiative that provides information and resources
for educators striving to achieve high educational outcomes through the use of
proactive positive strategies.
North Forum: March 14-15, 2017 (Stockton)
South Forum: February 28-March 1, 2017 (Fontana)
*PENT Forums by invitation only
1
10/25/16
Who’s not in favor of the
Discrepancy Model
—  NASP and many other state organizations call it
the “Wait to Fail Model”
Who else disapproves of the
Discrepancy Model
The 9th Circuit District Court
—  Why? Because by the time a student qualifies under
this criteria, the amount of direct instruction
needed to help most SLD students to “catch up” is
insurmountable and they are in special education
for life.
2
10/25/16
Predictive Validity of Tests of
Cognitive Ability (Intelligence)
Weakening?
—  When I was in grad school in the early 90’s, we read papers
citing studies where intelligence tests were correlated with
achievement at about r = .70. Squaring r we found that
about 49% of the variance in achievement tests is
accounted for by one’s performance on an intelligence test.
—  APA’s 1996 report stated that g correlated with school grades r
= .50, which was about the same for social status (25% of
variance) and with income (r = .41, 16.67% of variance).
What factors may be accounting for
this weakening trend?
—  The factor structure of cognitive ability tests
—  Designed with Narrow Ability Subtests
loading onto Broad Factor Abilities
—  Overall measure of ability, ‘g’ , less a
measure of how one would integrate all of the
Broad Abilities in the real world, but rather a
statistical one
—  A latent variable of a latent variable
Ulrich Neisser, et al. "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns," American
Psychologist 51(2) 1996:77-101.
What factors may be accounting
for this weakening trend?
—  Poverty. There is a growing amount of
research that demonstrates this link.
—  Look at the following two graphs.
—  One is for free and reduced lunch by
ethnicity and the other is drop out rate.
—  See a relationship?
3
10/25/16
Dropout Rate in California 2010
30
Emotional Wellness
25
20
Who these tests are standardized
on
15
10
5
vs
ic
a
er
m
W
hi
te
n
c
ni
pa
is
ic
a
A
fr
ul
ti
Who these tests are used on
nA
H
M
an
Is
la
nd
er
si
A
ci
fic
Pa
N
at
iv
e
A
m
er
ic
a
n
0
http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/cohortrates/GradRates.aspx?
cds=00000000000000&TheYear=2010-11&Agg=T&Topic=Dropouts&RC=State&SubGrou
p=Ethnic/Racial
Embed video
PSW and
.
—  PSW has support from
—  Diagnostic Center Northern California
—  http://www.dcn-cde.ca.gov/altassessment/
index.html
—  California Association of School Psychologists
—  http://www.casponline.org/pdfs/positionpapers/SLD-PSW%20position%20paper
%20final.pdf
—  Ventura County SELPA has developed a procedural
manual on PSW assessment for SLD
—  http://www.venturacountyselpa.com/
PatternofStrengthsandWeaknesses(PSW).aspx
What is PSW?
—  Alternative to the discrepancy model
—  “Patterns of strengths and weaknesses commonly refer to
the examination of profiles across different tests used
historically in the identification of children with SLD” (p.
46654). OSEP
—  Way of organizing data from a comprehensive evaluation
It’s RIOT not TRIO
—  Record Review
—  Interviews
—  Observations
—  Testing (Standardized and Non-Standardized)
—  Several specific models- all have common threads
4
10/25/16
About Mount Diablo Unified
School District
Mt. Diablo is one of the largest school districts in the state of
California, with over 56 school sites and programs. The district's
statistics for ethnic/racial diversity, average class size, test scores,
numbers of Limited English Proficient (LEP) students and the
primary languages they represent, mirror those for the State of
California as a whole.
Student Population: K-12 31,829 (Dec. 2012)
Special Education: 4,092 (Dec. 2011)
Languages: More than 50
Enrollment Diversity:
White (43.0%); Hispanic (35.9%); Asian (7.2%); African American
(4.8%); Filipino (4.3%); Pacific Islander (1.0%); Native American
(0.5%)
Information from www.mdusd.org
Mt. Diablo had gotten into
some trouble…
“Mt. Diablo Unified School District Rehauling Discipline Policies
with Measurable Results Review of Student Discipline Data
In the 2013-2014 school year, the Mt. Diablo Unified School
District (MDUSD) began to change its student discipline practices.
The change was prompted by a review of their student discipline
data in the 2011-2012 school year, which revealed that African
American and Latino students had much higher suspension and
expulsion rates than their peers, and that the majority of students
were being suspended for willful defiance.A B The data also
revealed disproportionality in the number of African American and
Latino students who were being identified as emotionally
disturbed.
Mt. Diablo had gotten into
some trouble…
In addition, the review showed that suspension and expulsion
practices and procedures were inconsistent district-wide, including
which education code was used to cite students and the number
of days students missed due to suspensions, even when students
were cited for the same infraction. As a result of their review,
district officials determined that student discipline practices in the
district had to change.”
…and they got themselves out
…and they got themselves out
—  Data Discussion with Key Stakeholders
—  District-Wide Discipline Committee
—  Prevention Efforts
—  Finally, the district has invested in a range of prevention
strategies including the introduction of the Positive
Behavioral Interventions & Supports (PBIS) program in
every school. 5
10/25/16
But what about Special
Education?
Matrix
Identify Strengths/Weaknesses under each domain; note emerging skill/important information in Comments
Domains
Description Reasoning
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Problem Solving
Abstract Thinking
Inductive Thinking
Deduction
Intuitive Thinking
Language/Communication
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
AAC
Abstract Language/
Reasoning
Articulation/
Phonological/
Oral Motor
Fluency/Prosody/Voice
Language Literacy
Language Processing
Semantic Abilities
Social Communication/
Pragmatics
Syntax & Morphology
Verbal Formulation
Social Cognition
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Executive Function
Knowledge
acquired,
directly attributed to
observation of
others in
context of social
interaction/
experience
Vicarious Learning
Social ProblemSolving
Memory / Forming
Expectations
Responsiveness/
Feedback Cues
Social
Metacognition
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Sustained Attention
Selective Attention
Organization
Strategizing
Flexibility/Shifting
Cognitive Sets
Multiple Perspectives
Self-Monitoring
Working Memory
Visual-Spatial
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Strengths
Weaknesses
Comments
Pattern Completion
Spatial Analysis
Part to Whole
Reasoning
Visual Memory
Visual Motor
Integration
E=Formula
E=Formula
A = Districts General Education Enrollment of A
Specific Ethnic/Racial Group divided by Districts Total
Enrollment
N = The number of students in the district of a
Specific Ethnic/Racial Group identified within a specific
special education category.
Standard Error = Square Root (A (100-A))/Total
Number of Students in the district within a specific
special education category.
.
E-Formula = N/Total Number of Students in the
district within a specific special education category
As defined by CDE Special Education Division,
Assessment, Evaluation and Support Unit
Table1.E-FormulaPercentageOverMaximumTolerance2006-2014
(1.0≥isSignificantlyDisproporJonate)
http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
1=MaximumToleranceat3standarderrorsofmeasurement
2.00
1.50
DistrictEDComposi=on(%)
DistrictIDComposi=on(%)
1.00
DistrictSLDComposi=on(%)
DistrictOHIComposi=on(%)
DistrictSLIComposi=on(%)
0.50
0.00
MDUSD
2006-07
MDUSD
2007-08
MDUSD
2008-09
MDUSD
2009-10
MDUSD
2010-11
MDUSD
2011-12
MDUSD
2012-13
MDUSD
2013-14
MDUSD
2014-15
Sample size and missing data contribute to possible inflation of disproportional rates.
Corrections for missing date alone could drop the 2014 proportion from 1.26 to 1.07.
About a 20% reduction in tolerance.
6
10/25/16
Alternative Risk Ratio
Alternative Risk Ratio
District’s Risk (%) for a given ethnic/racial group = District’s Total
General Education Enrollment for a given ethnic/racial group divided
by District’s enrollment of students in that group falling in a specific
special education category (e.g. Intellectual Disability).
State’s All other Risk (%) for all other ethnic/racial group = State’s
Total General Education Enrollment less that of the given ethnic/racial
group divided by State’s enrollment of all other students less that
group which fall in a specific special education category (e.g.
Intellectual Disability).
Alternate Risk Ratio = District’s Risk (%)/State’s All other Risk (&)
Table 2. Alternative Risk Ratio For African American Students
2006-2014 (5.0 ≥ Significantly Disproportionate)
Times More Liklely Than Other Ethnic Groups Combined
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
ED Alternate Risk Ratio
ID Alternate Risk Ratio
4.00
SLD Alternate Risk Ratio
OHI Alternate Risk Ratio
3.00
The Matrix & What
Mt. Diablo Unified Embraced
SLI Alternate Risk Ratio
2.00
1.00
0.00
MDUSD
2006-07
MDUSD
2007-08
MDUSD
2008-09
MDUSD
2009-10
MDUSD
2010-11
MDUSD
2011-12
MDUSD
2012-13
MDUSD
2013-14
MDUSD
2014-15
Conclusion
7
10/25/16
For more information…
Contact Information
On the DCN’s Alternative Assessment Model (aka “The Matrix”)
http://www.dcn-cde.ca.gov/altassessment/index.html
On Guidance on Disproportionality
http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/qa/disproguidance112011.asp
On Calculating Significant Discrepancy
—  James F. Hiramoto, Ph.D., [email protected]
—  Carolyn Sakkis, MS, [email protected]
—  Kristina Calander, MS, [email protected]
ftp://ftp.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/ds/Disproportionality%20Paper%20June%202012.pdf
ftp://ftp.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/ds/Dispro1314_SELPA/Methods.doc
ftp://ftp.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/ds/1314_Dispro/dis201314calculationmethod.doc
8