THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
ALBANY, NY 12234

OFFICE OF VOCATIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL SERVICES
FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES
SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES

QUALITY INDICATOR REVIEW AND RESOURCE GUIDES
 for
SPECIAL EDUCATION INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES - PDF (242KB)

1. Instructional Environment and Practice
2. Committee on Special Education (CSE) Process and Individualized Education Program (IEP) Development  - July 2009
   

The Special Education Training and Resource Center (SETRC) network is one of VESID’s primary resources for school improvement in New York State. This Quality Indicator Review and Resource Guide is one of a series that has been developed for use by the SETRC network to guide their work in assessment of programs and provision of professional development, support and technical assistance to districts and schools to improve results for students with disabilities.

The Guides are intended to be used to support a process that includes:

• Assessing the quality of a school district’s instructional programs and practices in the areas of literacy, behavioral supports and interventions; and delivery of special education services;
• Determining priority need areas; and
• Prescribing and planning activities to change practices and improve outcomes for students with disabilities.

The New York State Education Department (NYSED) gratefully acknowledges participation of the following individuals in the development of these documents:

Special Education Delivery Work Group

Cyndi Besig – Regional SETRC, Monroe I BOCES
Kelly Endres – SETRC, Monroe I BOCES
Elizabeth Fallo – SETRC, Delaware Chenango Madison Otsego BOCES
Susan Goldberg – SETRC, New York City DOE
Barbara Kestenbaum – SETRC, Rockland BOCES
Sally McGuirk – SETRC, Washington Saratoga Warren Hamilton Essex BOCES
Cathy Quackenbush – SETRC, Herkimer Fulton Hamilton Otsego BOCES
Cecilia Dansereau Rumley – SETRC, Dutchess BOCES
Elizabeth Cutter – NYSED/VESID
Lisa Luderman – NYSED/VESID
Mark Ylvisaker, Ph.D. - The College of St. Rose

James P. DeLorenzo
Statewide Coordinator for Special Education, NYSED

Patricia J. Geary
Coordinator, Special Education Policy and Professional Development, NYSED

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This document contains hypertext links or pointers to information created and maintained by other public and private organizations. These links and pointers are provided for the user's convenience. The Education Department does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information. Further, the inclusion of links or pointers to particular items in hypertext is not intended to reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or products or services offered, on these outside sites, or the organizations sponsoring the sites.

The State Education Department grants permission to New York State public schools, approved private schools and nonprofit organizations to copy this for use as a review and quality improvement guide. This material may not otherwise be reproduced in any form or by any means or modified without the written permission of the New York State Education Department. For further information, contact the VESID Special Education Office at (518) 473-2878 or write to VESID, Room 1624 One Commerce Plaza, Albany, New York 12234

Assumptions:

Resources:

Curriculum is based upon NYS Learning Standards for all instruction (general and special education)

NYS Learning Standards and Core Curriculum Guides  
   

High quality instruction for all students regardless of ability/need is a norm in the school/district

Instructional Quality Toolkit – Instructional Quality Indicators

What Works Clearinghouse

School Improvement Planning    

School/district values inclusive practice

Stetson, Frances. 2003. School Based Practices Profile. Stetson and Associates, Inc.
National Institute for Urban School Improvement

Special education is a service not a place that provides individualized, intensive instruction

The Access Center
   

School/district policy and practice demonstrate a system of supports for all students

Dr. Cummins ESL and Second Language Learning Web   
    
Intervention Central Tools; Curriculum Based Measures Warehouse
    
Critical Issues in At-Risk Students

Culturally responsive practice is a norm in the school/district

NYU Metro Center for Urban Education 

Harvard Civil Rights Project
    
Cross Cultural Developmental Education Services

Instructional practices are based on scientific research or are evidence-based

NCREL: Using Scientifically Based Research to Guide Educational Decisions
    
USDOE: Identification and Implementation of Educational Practice Supported by Rigorous Evidence: A User Friendly Guide

Indicator:  Instructional Environment

Component:  Structured, predictable school and classroom environment

Driving Question: 
Do school/classroom structures support student success or present a barrier to it?

Quality Indicators

Look For

Comments/Evidence

The instructional environment is designed to support individual student needs

• Physical environment matches student need for visual, auditory and tactile stimulation
• Classroom routines are evident and predictable
• Cues for routines/schedules are designed to support individual student needs (e.g. color-coded, picture schedules)
• Instructional materials are available in multiple formats
• Assistive technology is used as necessary to support student learning

Student participates in the general education environment including curriculum and instruction, assessment, and social activities based on individual student needs

• Educators plan and implement instruction designed to include ALL students at their developmental and skill levels 1
• Students with disabilities participate in voting in elections, social activities, sports, clubs, field trips, assemblies, class projects, etc. 

High expectations for all students are clearly articulated and defined

• Students are provided multiple opportunities to demonstrate desired expectations in classroom or school routines
• Educators and students understand and can discuss high expectations

Classroom climate is conducive to learning

• Positive, orderly classroom environment is evident
• Students are actively engaged in learning and on task
• Students are explicitly taught skills to manage school/classroom transitions, schedules, routines
• Interactions between and among educators and students demonstrate respect and a desire to build rapport
• Interactions are highly respectful, reflect genuine warmth and caring, and are respectful of individual differences such as age, culture, gender and abilities1
• Adults working in the classroom collaborate effectively to ensure student’s access to instruction with interventions of increasing intensity as needed
• Adults working in the classroom collaborate to provide interventions for any student who struggles, with increasing intensity (frequency, duration, or alternate approaches) as needed 2
• Classroom roles are defined and implemented to maximize student benefit

Resources
Danielson, Charlotte; Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching

Marzano, Robert, Marzano, Jana and Pickerin, Debra. Classroom Management That Works: Research-Based Strategies for Every Teacher

Rose, David H. and Meyer, Anne. Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Available at http://www.cast.org

Instructional Quality Toolkit, Instructional Quality Indicators: Research Foundations 
      
Strategies to Improve Access to the General Education Curriculum      

Indicator:    Instructional Practice

Component:  Planning for effective instruction

Driving Question:
Do the strengths and needs of each student drive instructional decision-making?

Quality Indicators

Look For

Comments/Evidence

Instruction is individually planned to address student needs.

• Individual student’s strength and needs drive instructional decision making.
• Instructional activities are planned for varying group sizes and configurations to allow students opportunities to learn, practice, and generalize knowledge and/or skills.
• Data from frequent formal and informal assessments inform Instructional decisions.
• The justification for use of selected instructional practices is based on research.

Planned instruction is goal directed.

• Instruction is designed to address IEP goals (and measurable post secondary goals for students 15 years of age and older).
• Instruction is aligned with the NYS Learning Standards.
• Students are receiving instruction to address IEP goals.

The plan includes direct instruction to explicitly teach academic content and skills.

• Direct instruction is provided in academic content areas (e.g., social studies, science) and skill domains (e.g. reading, writing):
  • Complex tasks are broken down into small steps or components (e.g. task analysis). The components are either taught (1) one at a time or (2) the complex activity remains integrated but the teacher gives the student responsibility for only one component at a time while the teacher contributes the remaining components (e.g. writing a complex story or doing a science experiment).
• Formative assessments are ongoing during instruction.
• Teachers and therapists model the target skills, processes, and products.
• Instruction includes multiple sessions of both guided and independent practice.
• Instruction is organized and supported so that students are expected to make few if any errors.
• Prompts are faded to support independence in learning.
• The instructional pacing provides many learning trials to maintain focused attention.
• Students are given opportunities for practice, repeated and purposeful feedback, and explicit review of developing skills designed to meet their individual needs.
• In addition to direct/explicit instruction, the student is given opportunities for distributed practice across varied settings and activities to facilitate transfer or generalization of targeted skills.
• Students are given opportunities for review and cumulative review individually designed to facilitate maintenance of learning 3

The plan includes explicit instruction  in the use of strategies for learning.

• Teachers and therapists provide direct  instruction in the use of specific strategies designed to enhance learning throughout the curriculum, improve the five core areas of literacy, 4 improve writing and written composition, and improve mathematical computation and application.
• Strategies are explicitly presented and explained.
• Strategies are modeled by teachers.
• In the early stages of instruction, strategies are used collaboratively by teachers and students in curricular tasks.
• Strategies are associated with mnemonic aids (e.g. acronyms) to facilitate learning.
• Strategies are presented visually if possible (e.g. graphic organizers).
• A variety of cues are used to ensure that the student uses relevant strategies (e.g. think-aloud models, verbalizing. steps/procedures during a lesson, visual and auditory reminders).
• Cues are systematically withdrawn as students gain facility in using strategies.
• Reviews of strategy use are sufficiently frequent to ensure ongoing use of the strategies.
• Relevant strategies are encouraged across content domains for purposes of facilitating generalization and are used from year to year to encourage maintenance.
• In groups, students are encouraged to remind one another of their strategies to encourage deeper understanding of the strategies and generalized use.

Self-regulation/executive functions are an integral part of instruction: compensatory strategies and effective habits of mind are taught.

• Instruction is provided to teach student to:
• Communicate their own strengths and needs
• Understand and advocate for their needs for accommodations, adaptations or modifications (instruction, assessment or environment)
• Students are individually involved in personal goal setting 5(also, http://www.asgc.org/ed-self-determine.htm)
• Students are involved in planning and organizing their schedules to meet their learning goals
• Students are involved in monitoring and evaluating their own progress
• Explicit instruction is provided to students in strategies for effectively managing their thought processes (meta-cognition), learning, social and other behaviors
• Adults model self-regulation strategies
• Students are instructed in, and given practice in, the use of meta-cognitive scripts for self-coaching
• Students are given frequent opportunities for guided practice of self-regulatory strategies
• Instructional plans include specific instruction to students on compensatory strategies necessary to address individual student needs

Instructional and assessment accommodations for learner needs are planned and individualized

• Accommodations support the student’s needs as documented in the IEP
• Accommodations are consistently implemented across all settings and for all types of assessments
• Students are involved in determining their accommodations
• Accommodations are taught to students and practiced to ensure independence

Resources:
Intervention Research for Adolescents with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Outcomes Related to High-Order Processing National Center for LD  

Test Access and Accommodations


What is Direct/Explicit Instruction? The Access Center

University of Kansas, Center on Research for Learning 

Indicator:  Instructional Practice

Component:  Effective implementation of specially-designed instruction 

Driving Question: 
Does the specially designed instruction improve student learning?

Quality Indicators

Look For

Comments/Evidence

Roles and responsibilities of service providers are clearly defined and implemented

• Special educators, related service providers and general education staff work together to enhance/unify instructional planning and implementation
• Educators can describe student needs and their implications

Delivery of instruction maximizes student learning

• All educators have realistic, high expectations for student learning.
• Decisions about provision of instruction (pacing, frequency, duration, alternate approaches) are based on each student’s individual needs
• The learning process is structured to include multiple, varied opportunities for student participation in classroom instruction
• Materials used for student practice are meaningful and lead to the desired learning outcomes
• A variety of instructional strategies are used to address student goals
• Teachers adjust instruction based upon student response to learning
• Instructional groups (composition and size) are fluid and flexible to address student needs as assessed through progress monitoring
• Instructional decisions are data-based and supported by evidence and/or practitioner observations

Instructional groups are appropriate to support learner outcomes

• Instructional groups are based on learner needs in the areas of academics and learning characteristics, social, physical and management needs rather than disability category
• Classroom teaming provides opportunities for increasing instructional intensity for students with disabilities in the general education classroom
• Supplemental instruction addresses student needs for targeted skill development

Supplemental supports and services are effectively used

• Students are provided with and taught effective ways to use assistive technology to support their individual learning needs6
• Instructional materials are available to students in alternate formats
• The roles of different members of classroom teams, including supplemental school personnel (teaching assistants and teacher aides) 7are designed and implemented for efficiency and effective practice
• Roles of paraprofessionals are clearly defined and support development of student independence

Resources
Heward, William. Ten Faulty Notions about Teaching Special Education.
National Resource Center for Paraprofessionals  

Special Connections - Connecting Educators to strategies That Work 

Swanson. H.L. Searching for the Best Model for Instruction Students with Learning Disabilities

The Power of Two (co-teaching)

Indicator:  Instructional Practice

Component:  Ongoing assessment of student progress

Driving Questions: 

• Are instructional decisions data-based and aligned with standards and curriculum?
• Do instructional decisions support participation and progress of students with disabilities in general education curriculum?

Quality Indicators

Look For

Comments/Evidence

Curriculum-based assessments (both formative and summative) are used to monitor student progress

• Formal and informal measures are used to assess student progress
• Information to determine student’s mastery of skills is purposefully collected
• Frequent checks, in a variety of ways, are made of student understanding
• Instruction results in students being engaged in learning

Assessments are aligned with the clearly constructed/formulated objectives of the lesson/unit

• Tools used to measure progress are aligned with the task and the developmental/age of the students.8
• Assessment provides information on student learning characteristics
• Visual representation of individual student learning is used to better understand student trajectory of learning (speed of acquisition of new skills, plateauing, etc.)
• Students are involved in data collection and evaluation of their own progress

Teacher uses formative assessments while teaching to inform instruction

• Teachers use multiple measures of assessment (authentic assessment,9 review of work products, reflective logs, etc)
• Assessment is conducted before, during and after instruction
• Assessment is conducted across different settings to assess generalization
• Teachers use task analysis and the results of progress monitoring to identify the most effective point of intervention when planning instruction
• Educators track and maintain records on student progress toward meeting goals as indicated in the IEP
• Information from assessments guides decisions to re-teach, change pacing, and plan or adjust activities/strategies

Data is recorded and analyzed to inform the instructional planning for students with disabilities 

• Data is collected and recorded to:

• Inform the planning of instruction
• Inform progress towards IEP goals
• Communicate progress in student learning
• Determine future IEP goals

• Data is shared with students and parents in multiple formats (e.g., charts, graphs, tables)

Resources
Marzano, Robert, Classroom Assessment and Grading That Works, ASCD
McMillan, James; Essential Assessment Concepts for Teachers and Administrators, Corwin Press
McMillan, James; Classroom Assessments, Principles and Practices for Effective Instruction, Allyn & Bacon
 Research Institute on Progress Monitoring   http://www.progressmonitoring.org/
Tomlinson, Carol Ann; Differentiation in Practice, ASCD

Indicator:  IEP Development

Outcome: IEPs for students with disabilities developed by the CSE result in student access, participation and progress in the general education curriculum and address a student's other disability needs.
Driving Questions: 

• Did the CSE obtain a comprehensive individual evaluation of the student in all areas of the suspected disability?
• Does the CSE have sufficient information about the student's response to instruction in the general education environment?
• Is all evaluation information and pre-referral information considered and discussed at the meeting?
• Does the CSE have information about the general education curriculum, context, services and assessments to support decision making to make meaningful recommendations for each student? 
• Does the CSE understand the unique nature of the student’s disability and consider that information in making its recommendations?
• Do the members of the CSE/CPSE understand the Committee process and expectations and their roles, including the information about the student, evaluations, curricula and State and district-wide assessment that they are expected to bring to the Committee discussions?
• Are the parent’s concerns and the student’s strengths, preferences and interests evident in the IEP?

Quality Indicators

Look for

Comments/Evidence

Results of individual evaluations provide the information the CSE needs to make its recommendations.

• Evaluation results are reported in a manner that provides sufficient basis for:
  • present levels of performance (PLP)
  • comparison to typically developing peers and grade-level expectations
  • unique learning characteristics and educational needs of the student
  • development of IEP annual goals and, as appropriate short-term instructional objectives and benchmarks
  • transition activities
• Evaluation results provide sufficient baseline information for future determination of progress in all areas of the suspected disability.
• Evaluation reports are written in clear, precise, and easily understood language that is:
  • Jargon free
  • Succinct
  • Provided in the language/mode of communication understood by the parent
• Evaluation reports identify the nature and extent to which the student may need environmental modifications or accommodations; human and material resources to support learning in the general education curriculum and environment.
• Evaluation reports provide instructionally-relevant information that provides insight into the student’s learning characteristics and needs and supports development and provision of instruction likely to result in achievement of the student’s IEP goals.
• A student's performance on State and district-wide assessments is discussed, considered and documented during the CSE meeting.

Student’s strengths and needs guide IEP development

• CSE discussions and IEP recommendations are based on the strengths and needs of the student.
• Clear, concise PLP statements are written in user friendly language, and are a thorough description of student strengths and needs.

The CSE considers the interrelationship of the impact of the student’s disability and the components of the IEP
 

• Parent input is solicited, discussed and given meaningful consideration in the development of the IEP
• The CSE reviews, discusses, analyzes and evaluates the student’s progress toward annual goals in order to address his/her unique needs related to the disability
• The CSE considers the student's progress in his/her current educational program and/or IEP as a baseline for creation of the new IEP.
• The CSE evaluates the current IEP to determine if it was sufficient to achieve educational benefit for a child:
  • annual goals and special education programs and services were identified to address all identified needs
  • the student acquired new knowledge and skills and student’s rate of progress was sufficient to meet IEP goals and objectives
• The CSE considers the level of growth in the student’s social interaction, behavioral, academic and emotional skills in evaluating progress.

IEP development occurs in a structured, sequential manner

• Development of PLP, based on unique student strengths and needs, provides basis for remainder of IEP.
• Goals identify the knowledge and skills the student will achieve by the end of the school year based on needs identified in the PLP, and include consideration of measurable post-secondary goals based on identified transition needs for students who are or will be 15 during the period covered by the IEP.
• Recommended special education program and services, accommodations, and modifications needed for student to achieve goals are discussed.
• Placement is the last recommendation made in consideration of the least restrictive environment in which the student's IEP can be implemented.

IEPs include documentation of recommendations in a clear and specific manner so that the IEP can be implemented consistent with the CSE recommendations.

• Recommendations written in language the parents and educators can understand.
• Recommendations are clearly stated as to identify the district’s commitment of resources to assist the student in reaching his or her goals.

Annual goals are identified to enable the student to progress in the general education curriculum and meet other disability related needs.

• Determination of individual need (i.e., present levels of performance) provide the basis for written annual goals.
• Annual goals, including benchmarks or short-term instructional objectives, are identified to:
• enable the student to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum (or for preschool students, in appropriate activities); and
• meet each of the student’s other educational needs that result from the student’s disability.   
• Annual goals focus on the knowledge, skills, behaviors and strategies to address the student’s needs.
• Goals are developed in consideration of the student's need to progress toward the State standards by identifying the foundation knowledge (e.g., reading/math) necessary to meet the standards and/or the learning strategies that will help him or her to learn the curriculum content.
• Targeted learning outcomes/goals are closely aligned to the general education curriculum and aligned with the age/developmental level of the class or grade level.
• Annual goals define the path from the student’s present level of performance to a level of performance expected by the end of the year.
• IEP goals and objectives are:
  • instructionally relevant
  • measurable
  • aligned with identified targeted needs       
  • reasonably achievable in the period covered by the IEP  
  • congruent with the student’s ability/disability
  • designed to support participation and success in the general education curriculum

The CSE determines how student needs will be met in the least restrictive environment.

• In development of the IEP, the CSE first considers all potentially successful accommodations, program modifications, supplementary aids and services, behavioral supports and services and special education services that can occur within the regular education environment before considering services or programs that remove the student from the regular classroom.
• The CSE actively considers and recommends accommodations or modifications to instruction and/or the use of adaptive technology as necessary to ensure access to the general education curriculum.
• The IEP includes support for school personnel (professional development or technical assistance) as needed to implement the IEP.

The CSE demonstrates knowledge of grade level general education curricular and behavioral expectations and benchmarks

• The CSE membership includes persons with knowledge of NYS Learning Standards, grade-level curriculum content, curriculum maps, and grade level and subject area skill sets including recognized hierarchal and sequential order of skill acquisition.
•  The CSE uses knowledge of the continuum of appropriate academic and behavior intervention strategies for subject areas and age/developmental levels.
• The CSE understands, discusses, and uses information about “hidden curriculum”  (social interaction) issues and considerations specific to grade, classroom or building in determining need for accommodations and supports of skill acquisition.
• CSE considers issues of access, participation and progress in relation to each individual student's needs including but not limited to consideration of:
  • curriculum content
  • modifications to instructional materials
  • rate of learning
  • physical environments
  • demonstration of learning
  • instructional approaches
  • instructional supports
  • behavioral supports

Dimension:    Resource Allocation

Outcome:  The district uses data on the needs of current and future students to determine the procurement, allocation and/or reallocations of resources required to support the CSE process and implement IEP services and supports for students.
Driving Questions:

• Are the resources readily available to support implementation of the recommendations?
• Have the BOE and administration ensured availability of resources to support the CSE process?

Quality Indicators

Look for

Comments/Evidence

Professional development is provided to CSE members to ensure their understanding of their roles and responsibilities on the CSE.

• The district has documented a procedure for ensuring that members of the committee have access to professional development (PD) addressing their roles and responsibilities.
• The district has documentation of provision of PD in an accessible format and time frame.
• The district has documentation of participation in PD  for all who may participate as members of the CSE/CPSE including
  • Chairperson
  • Special education teachers
  • Related service providers
  • General education teachers
  • Parent members

The district understands its child find responsibilities to identify students whose needs may need to be addressed by the CSE

• The district has equitable procedures and practices for child find, including procedures for students who are homeless, wards of the State, migrant, limited English proficient, home schooled and parentally placed in private schools located in the school district.
• The district sends the CSE chairperson or representative to planning meetings for students transitioning from Early Intervention to preschool.
• The district ensures data used to determine student’s need for referral for special education are collected through valid and reliable screening tools, including assessment of the effectiveness of general education instruction and supports (e.g., Response-to-Intervention). 
• The district plans strategically (e.g., longitudinal data on increases or decreases of students in certain disability categories, such as autism, that may result in the need to reallocate resources)
• The district has procedures in place to complete individual evaluations of students suspected of having a disability.

Students’ needs determine the allocation of personnel and material resources

• A full continuum of special education services is available to each student.
• All members of the CSE team understand the purpose, and LRE implications of each service along the continuum.
• Students' needs for special education programs drive how the school district configures its special education services/resources to meet those needs (e.g., staff are assigned as special class teachers, resource room teachers or consultant teachers depending on the number of students requiring such services as determined at initial and annual review meetings).
• The district has a procedure in place to ensure students needing instructional materials in alternative formats receive them at the same time that other students receive their instructional materials.
• District has procedures in place to ensure equipment and materials are provided to support student access of the general education curriculum (e.g., Assistive Technology, needed furniture such as tilt tables, bathroom lift, auditory enhancers) as recommended in the IEP.

Dimension:  IEP Implementation

Desired Outcome:  IEPS are implemented with fidelity and adjusted based on student response to instruction.
Driving Questions: 

• Has the chairperson identified a professional staff person(s) to inform staff of their IEP implementation responsibilities for each student?
• Do all staff responsible for implementation of a student's IEP have a copy of (or, as appropriate access to a copy of) the IEP?
• Has the necessary follow-up occurred to ensure that implementation of the IEP and monitoring of progress toward the annual goals are occurring according to the method and schedule in the IEP?
• Are instruction and/or related services adjusted to meet changing needs of the student?
• Are services prioritized to ensure that the services are implemented in such a way as to address the student’s needs with the greatest impact and least disruption of instruction?
• What process/procedures are in place for parents and school personnel to inform the CSE if the student is not likely to meet his/her annual goals by the end of the year to consider changes to the student's IEP recommendations?

Quality Indicators

Look for

Comments/Evidence

On-going progress monitoring and formative assessment of student progress, goals and objectives is consistently implemented

• PLP establish a measurable baseline of student’s abilities and needs for determining progress
• Instructional staff uses a broad range of objective data collection methods to monitor student progress.
• Impact achieved from implementation of recommended strategies is documented.   
• Instructional staff use data from progress monitoring to inform instruction.
• Periodic reports to parents and others provide specific data, in measurable terms, on the extent to which the student has progressed toward meeting annual goals. 
• Progress is reported to parents in a manner that is understandable to them (measurable, jargon free, objective not subjective).

Revisions to the IEP are made based on data indicating changes in student needs or abilities

• Data from progress monitoring drives decisions made to modify the IEP.
• Staff use student progress data as evidence to assess the effectiveness of each special education instructional service and strategy that has been implemented to determine if the instructional approach is effective with the student.
• Documentation verifies that interventions have been implemented with fidelity (training, observations) prior to request for change.
• Evidence exists that when progress monitoring shows the student is not likely to reach his/her annual goals, the district schedules IEP reviews in a timely manner to review, and if appropriate revise the IEP.

Alignment between written document and actual practice is evident

• Classroom instruction and activities are aligned with the IEP goals and objectives.
• Special education teachers and related service providers are providing specially designed instruction individualized to the student’s needs and designed to support acquisition, generalization, and maintenance of  knowledge, skill and learning strategies.