## Outcomes for Today - Learn about the Inclusion Collaborative - Learn about Georgia’s Quality Rated Inclusion Endorsement - Learn about: - Overview of the Inclusive Classroom Profile (ICP) - Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning ICP Activities --- # Welcoming All ! --- # Inclusion Collaborative **Mission:** The Inclusion Collaborative of SCCOE builds a culture that values all children by strengthening, sustaining, and ensuring inclusive practices. **Vision:** Our community embraces diversity and supports lifelong quality inclusion for everyone. --- # Inclusion Collaborative Services **Coaching** **Technical Assistance** – Site Meetings – Resource Materials **Professional Development** – Countywide (Make & Takes, Teaching Pyramid, etc.) – Annual Inclusion Collaborative State Conference – Available for districts & organizations for on-site training --- # Inclusion Collaborative Services ## 5th Annual Inclusion Collaborative State Conference ## October 24-26, 2018 ## San Jose, California --- # How Do We Know…. "Young children with disabilities can experience low quality in classes that are otherwise rated as being of high quality." --- # Inclusive Classroom Profile (ICP) ## Reliable Instrument to Rate Inclusive Settings for Preschoolers --- # Background of ICP ## National Professional Development Center on Inclusion [Read More](http://npdci.fpg.unc.edu/sites/npdci.fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/NPDCI-ResearchSynthesisPoints-10-2009_0.pdf) --- # Inclusive Classroom Profile --- # The ICP… - Measures inclusive, classroom-level practices that have strongest research support for meeting the individualized needs of children with disabilities - Is a structured observation measure that includes a review of documentation and interview - Uses a 1-7 point rating scale to assign scores for 12 items - Consists of a manual and packet of forms --- ## How is the ICP designed to be USED? - As a research tool - For program evaluation - To support continuous quality improvement Ratings indicate the extent to which adults adapt the classroom’s environment, activities and instructional support in ways that encourage access and active participation in the group, through adjustments that might differ from child to child. --- # Who is Being Observed? --- Understanding the structure of the ICP - 12 Items - Indicators - Examples - Criteria for rating indicators --- # What Do the ICP Items Measure? - Instructional strategies supporting individualized learning and engagement in activities and routines - Procedures for monitoring children’s learning and progress - Environmental adaptations to support access and participation in activities and routines --- # Who Can Use the ICP? --- # THE ICP ITEMS --- ICP Item Measures 12 Areas of Inclusive Practice 1. Adaptations of space and materials/equipment 2. Adult involvement in peer interactions 3. Adults’ guidance of children’s activities and play 5. Membership 6. Relationships between adults and children 7. Support for communication 8. Adaptation of group activities 9. Transitions between activities 10. Feedback 11. Family-professional partnerships --- # 1. Adaptations of space and materials/equipment - Can children reach materials (access) - Adults organize environmental setup promote ease of use - Adults help children to use materials in creative and purposeful ways --- # 2. Adult involvement in peer interactions - Adults notice and support peer interactions - Adults help children initiate and sustain relationships --- # 3. Adult guidance of children’s play - Children are given choices within their play - Adults encourage and scaffold individual play and social activities --- # 4. Conflict Resolution - Adults respond to conflict between children with disabilities and their classmates --- # 5. Membership - Promotes social climate that nurtures individual differences - Provides children with disabilities the opportunity for social responsibilities and choices --- # 6. Adult-child social interactions - Focuses on nature and frequency of interactions between adults and the children with disabilities --- # 7. Support for communication - Adult support for child communication - Strategies to facilitate language skills and communication with others --- # 8. Adaptation of group activities - Encourage engagement and participation of children with disabilities within group activities --- # 9. Transitions between activities - Nature, pace and individualized supports for children with disabilities when transitioning between activities --- 10. Feedback - Adults support positive behavior - Offer feedback to promote learning specific skills --- # 11. Family-Professional partnerships - Policies and practices for communicating with families of children with disabilities --- # 12. Monitoring children’s learning - Procedures and tools for monitoring children’s progress --- # Administration of ICP ## Includes the following: - Observation (O) - Interview (I) - Document Review (DR) - Approximately 3 hours required - 20 minutes needed for teacher review --- # Georgia’s Quality Rated Inclusion Endorsement ## Jennie Couture **Director of Practice and Support Services** **Pam Stevens** **Quality Rated Policies and Partnership Director** **Bright from the Start: Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning** --- ## The sky’s the limit! **1 out of 4** ## 3-5 year olds with an IEP are served in a segregated setting. --- ## Supporting inclusion at the Agency level. **10 regionally based Inclusion Specialists deliver on-site coaching and professional development.** --- # Georgia has a long history with the Inclusive Classroom Profile (ICP). --- # Looking more intentionally at the quality of inclusive practices. ### The Quality Rated Inclusion Endorsement was launched in --- ## The highest scoring applications are selected for participation. **36 unique programs.** --- ## Attrition is a challenge. **29 programs began participation.** --- ## Attrition is a challenge. **34% average attrition across the project.** --- **40% of programs served only one child with a disability.** --- **75% of the programs that participated in TA earned the endorsement!** --- ## A few programs earned the endorsement without TA. **3 earned in the baseline, without TA.** --- ## Most programs earned the endorsement after 6 months of TA. **11 earned in the regular TA cycle (6 months).** --- ## One program earned the endorsement after extended TA. **1 earned after completing the extended TA cycle (9 months).** --- | Coaching makes | | | | --- | --- | --- | | a difference. | | | | | Bright from the Start: Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning www.decal.ga.gov | 10 hours per month on average 15 | --- # 2016 ICP Pilot Project ## In Partnership with: **Inclusion Collaborative** --- 2016 ICP Pilot Design - Self-Review Only (SR) - Self-Review and Observation (SR + O) - Observation (O) - 12 classroom sites --- # 2016 ICP Pilot Timeline - June 2015- Reliability Training in San Jose – (Half Day Overview and 3 Reliable Raters trained) - January 2016 – ICP Pilot Project Overview - January 2016 – Initial ICP Observation/ Self-Review - February 2016 – ICP Professional Learning Community - February, March, April 2016 – ICP Support from Staff/Internal Coaches - April/May 2016 – Final ICP Observation and Self-Review - May 2016 – Final ICP Professional Learning Community - June 2016 – Final Recommendations --- # ICP 2016 Pilot Findings Overall Benefits: - Inclusion Policy Statement added after ICP Rating - ICP Scores increased (pre to post) - Self Rating ICP scores were reported higher - ICP Scores increased with training in Teaching Pyramid/CSEFEL Factors negatively impacting ICP Scores: - Substitute staff - “Pull Out” Services --- ICP 2016 Pilot Findings Additional Benefits: - All children benefit - Improved collaboration between teachers - Increased awareness of inclusive practices --- # Action Plan for Inclusive Classroom Profile --- # 2016 ICP Pilot Recommendations - Create crosswalk of complimentary global rating tools i.e.: ECERS, DRDP, Teaching Pyramid, GLAD, CLASS etc. - Train programs, coaches and raters on ICP and crosswalk - ICP overview training for all QRIS participants - Create video examples of exemplars of good practices - Create on-going PLC’s - Incorporate ICP rating into QRIS Rating System --- # 2018 ICP Pilot Project ## In Partnership with: **Inclusion Collaborative** --- # 2018 Pilot Timeline - November 13-17, 2017 – Reliability Training in San Jose - (Half day Overview – 6 Reliable Raters to be trained) - 18 QRIS Sites Selected (with a current QRIS Score of 4 or 5) - 6 Reliable Raters – assigned 3 sites each - Feb. 2018: Pre ICP Rating & ICP Action Plan – each site - March & April 2018 – Monthly ICP Trainings at First 5 - May 2018: Post ICP Rating Completed - Sites scoring 5 on Post ICP Rating: receive “Inclusion Endorsement” from ‘Quality Matters’ - May 2018: Final ICP Meeting & Follow up --- # 2018 ICP Reliable Raters - Allison Anderson (ARUSD) - Cathy Andrade (First 5) - Elley Ho (Inclusion Collaborative) - Marcela Ibarra (SCCOE Head Start) - Kate O’Malley (Inclusion Collaborative) - Christy Yom (FMSD) --- # 2018 ICP Pilot Project ## QRIS Participating Sites - Alum Rock Union SD - Hubbard Head Start (with Kidango) - Meyer Head Start (with Kidango) - Lyndale Head Start (with SCCOE Head Start) - Meyer Head Start (with Kidango) - Campbell Union School District - Blackford CDC - Lynhaven CDC - Rosemary CDC - California Young World - Fairwood CDC - Fairwood CDC - Franklin McKinley School District - Wool Creek (with SCCOE Head Start) - Educare (with SCCOE Head Start) - Milpitas Unified School District - Mountain View Whisman School District - Sunnyhills CDC - San Jose Unified School District - Castro CDC - Therakauf CDC - Almaden CDC - SCCOE Head Start - Anne Darling (with SCCOE SPED) - Chandler Tripp (with SCCOE SPED) - Rouleau Head Start - Sunnyvale Elementary School District - Lakewood CDC --- # ICP PLC Trainings ## Components - Three monthly after school meetings - Teams consisted of: - general ed. & special ed. teachers and assistants - Teams sat together with their Reliable Rater - Reviewed, discuss and updated next steps for ICP Action Plan - Teams received positive feedback from video depicting exemplar ICP Items - Video clips utilized to demonstrate specific items with team discussion after --- # Top Items selected to be included in ICP Action Plan - Membership - Support for Communication - Feedback --- | Target Indicator | Action Steps | By Whom | By When | Resources and Support Available/Needed | Potential Barriers or Resistance | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Indicator identified | What needs to be done, by what date? | Who will take actions? | By what date will the action be done? | Resources Available | Resources Needed(financial,human,and other) | What individuals might resist? How? | | | | | | | | --- # Example of Training Support ICP Practices in Action: Communication --- # 2018 ICP Pre & Post Rating Comparison by Item ## 2018 Results Average ICP Pre & Post Scores n = 18 sites On average, sites increased overall scores by 1.21 points. --- # Inclusion Endorsement ## 17/18 sites Rated 5 or higher on ICP Post Rating, receiving “Inclusion Endorsement”* *Sites who attended all 3 ICP PLC Trainings received “Inclusion Endorsement” --- # Next Steps - 2019 Pilot Project – 18 QRIS sites, training to support Inclusion Endorsement - Add Inclusion Endorsement as an additional QRIS rating in Santa Clara County --- # Your turn! **How can you use the ICP in your state? What could you use from Georgia and California’s work? What would you do differently?** --- # Thank you! ## We hope to see you at another training! **Inclusion Collaborative**