California Department of Education, Special Education Division’s special project, California Services for Technical Assistance and Training (CalSTAT) is funded through a contract with the Napa County Office of Education. CalSTAT is partially funded from federal funds, State Grants #H027A080116A. Additional federal funds are provided from a federal competitively awarded State Personnel Development Grant to California (#H323A070011) provided from the U.S. Department of Education Part D of the Individuals with Disabilities Education act (IDEA). Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the U. S. Department of Education.
Improving Special Education Services (ISES) is a collaborative stakeholder group convened by the California Department of Education, Special Education Division. The State Performance Plan (SPP), Annual Performance Report (APR), and State Personnel Development Grant (SPDG) are guided by these stakeholders in addressing issues such as personnel development, statewide assessment, and progress monitoring through a unified planning process. ISES is the unification of what were previously the Partnership Committee on Special Education (PCSE) and the Key Performance Indicator (KPI) group. The committee is a broadly diverse and representative group of individuals involved in, or concerned with, the education of children with disabilities. ISES meets twice annually. This meeting was June 9, 2011, and the next meeting is scheduled for December 9, 2011.
June 2011's meeting had a typical number of participants, with 71 stakeholders supported by 5 workgroup facilitators and 5 CalSTAT staff members. More CDE staff attended than were recorded due to a large number of unregistered attendees who walked in.
ISES Meeting June 2011 Page 2 The meeting included three major activities:
Indicator workgroups are a focal point of the ISES meeting, where participants discuss progress and collaborate to generate recommendations. Recommendations are reported out to all ISES participants in a final group session, are posted online, and inform development of the SPP and implementation of improvement strategies.
| Workgroups | Topics Discussed in the Workgroups |
|---|---|
| Workgroup #1 | Disproportionality: SPP Indicators #4, #9 and #10, facilitated by Patricia Skelton, Ralph Scott, Dough McDougall and George Triest. |
| Workgroup #2 | Transition and Postsecondary: SPP Indicators #12, #13 and #14, facilitated by Meredith Cathcart, Jill Larson, and Dan Boomer |
| Workgroup #3 | SPDG facilitated by Janet Digmon, Anne Davin and Li Walter |
Anonymous end-of-event surveys were distributed to participants at the beginning of the event and collected at the end. Of the 81 participants who registered, 33 completed end-of-event surveys. Due to the fact that many of the facilitators and CDE staff feel completing a survey would be inappropriate, this number suggests a response rate of roughly 50% among other participants.
Participants rated the meeting from one ("poor"/"no") to five ("great"/"definitely") in response to four questions. Responses ranged from 1 to 5, with an average response between 4.1 and 4.2. Participants were also invited to respond in more detail to the open-ended questions which are summarized on page 4.
| Number of Comments | What were the most positive aspects of this meeting and why? |
|---|---|
| 11 | Discussion, Brainstorming and Opportunity for Input "Discussion, ideas for improvement." "Time for focused, small workgroup discussions." "Another great opportunity to a large group of stakeholders to discuss these important issues that affect us all!" |
| 9 | Updates and Dissemination of Information "Listening to the work that has been done so I can take that back to constituents at home." "Latest on APR." "Learning how the SPDG and CalSTAT work and how goals are developed." "The ability to synthesize the amount of information into specific presentations that help guide the discussions and workgroups." |
| 5 | Leadership and Facilitation |
| 4 | Networking "Networking and collaboration." "Connections." |
| 3 | Workgroups "Discussion in small group." "Group work." "The afternoon session." |
| 5 | Other Positive Comments |
| Number of Comments | Number of Comments How could we improve future meetings? |
|---|---|
| 5 | Suggestions Around Workgroups |
| 4 | Post Materials for Review Sooner |
| 3 | Provide Previous Recommendations for Review |
| 3 | Provide Specific Information Around SPP and SPDG] |
| 2 | Distribute PowerPoints |
| 2 | Use Microphones |
| 2 | More Emphasis on Parents |
| 4 | Other Suggestions and Comments |