Chronic Absenteeism Chronic Absenteeism Defined Excused Absence +

Chronic Absenteeism Chronic Absenteeism Defined Excused Absence +

Chronic Absenteeism Chronic Absenteeism Defined Excused Absence + Unexcused Absence + Exclusionary Discipline = 2015-16 102,000 students were CA; 18.3% 2016-17 108,144 students were CA; 19.7% Chronic Absence =/<10% Chronic Absenteeism in

Oregon Extreme CA 30% (or more) High CA 20-29% Significant CA 10-19% Modest CA 5-9 % Low CA 0-4% Equity Decision Tool Stakeholders: Who are the different groups of people this work would affect? How have they been meaningfully engaged? Who has been missed? Purpose: What are we trying to achieve with this work? How would it reduce disparities and advance equity and inclusion? Are there better ways to do this? Inequities: Would this work affect different groups differently? If so, in what ways? If we dont know, how could we find out? Negative Effects: How would this work be bad for different groups? What could we do to prevent or reduce negative effects and unintended consequences? Positive Effects: How would this work be good for different groups? What could we change or add to increase positive effects on equity and inclusion? Root Causes: Why would this work affect some groups unequally? What could this work do to address these root causes? Sustainability: Is this work realistic and adequately funded? Does it have what it needs to be successful? Evaluation: How do we measure this works success? How can we share that information with people? Oregons Daily Absences

Oregons Students 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 l ta o T t e n n o d al te er es

nt n es v i a e ed i n is a d e e c c ti ti ti g h i i ti ft i i

i a n i l A ta ic W er La fic d G fic la Na ti-R bi n n / s o o a I m a c

a th v is k A c Pr Pr ul ni s E d an fi D a / n i h a h a M l

s d c s s a p s h li li is it te /A ce Di g g Pa ric H n a f n /

w n n R n E E s le ia l ly /A t a a d a d i d d k i n T ic In

a e ve ac ite ite r d w m n e u Bl rs no Ha St Lim r Lim ica e r o e e v e

Ec nd ti m U Ev a A N 2015-16 SY 2016-17 SY Oregon State Level % Chronically Absent 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 r de

n Ki g n te r a Gr e ad 1 Gr e ad 2 Gr e ad

3 Gr e ad 4 Gr e ad 5 Gr 1015-16 SY e ad 6 Gr e ad 2016-17 SY

7 Gr e ad 8 Gr e ad 9 Gr e ad 10 Gr e ad 11 Gr

e ad 12 Chronic Absenteeism & High School Success Why are Students CA? Barriers Cant Go Aversion Wont Go Myths Dont Go Disengagemen t Lack of access to health or dental care Bullying

Absences are only a problem if they are unexcused Lack of relevant and engaging instruction Poor transportation Ineffective discipline Sporadic versus consecutive absences are not a problem No meaningful relationships with adults No safe path to school

Unidentified or unsupported disability Attendance only matters in older grades Poor school climate Trauma Institutional Racism What is ODE doing? Technical Assistance Partnerships Professional Development Best Practice Guidelines Statewide & Local Awareness Campaign Accessible Chronic Absenteeism Data Local Messaging Tool Kit

Statewide Chronic Absenteeism Plan Use of a Consortia Model to support districts identify root causes, address systemic barriers, implement tiered intervention systems, acquire resources, and braid funding sources when necessary. Targeted support to districts with extreme & high levels of chronic absenteeism Attendance Coaches State and Local Messaging Increase awareness about the importance of missing school for any reason Dispel myths Increase audience: parents, caregivers, extended family, community members, etc. Create a sense of urgency Verb Marketing Every Day Matters Multi-Tiered Systems of

Support (MTSS) Oregons Model for Reducing CA Tier I: Prevent CA Data Positive Messaging Health Transportation School Climate and Culture Local Content Tier II: Support Students At Risk for CA

Home visits Success mentors Wrap around services Attendance success plan Goal setting & incentives Morning check-in Attendance supervisor Tier III: Support Students Who Are CA Functional Behavior Plan for Absences Comprehensive Wrap Around Services Strengths evaluation Provide payment pathways Care-coordination Family counseling Health & Social Services Family Support Teams Supports Success Mentors

Climate & Culture Student Impact Adult Volunteers Relationships Communication Best Practices EIIS/Data Multi Tiered System of Support Identify Drivers Cant go Dont Go Wont Go

Engagement Health Good Attendance Local Considerations Climate & Culture Transportation Culturally Responsiv e Teaching Effective Discipline Every Student Has a Relationshi p with a Caring Adult And

more MTSS brings the practices and promises of RtI and PLCs together into one system: a system designed to support and serve everyone involved in continuous school improvement through ongoing collaboration (Dulaney, Hallam, & Wall, 2013). The MTSS framework outlines supports to improve learning for all students based on their specific needs: including English language learners and advanced learners. Foundational to this structure is Tier 1 instruction, which serves 100% of the students in the system. Data are collected and examined during collaborative team processes inherent in the PLC structure. Subsequently decisions are made and actions carried out to increase student achievement by strengthening Tier 1 instruction; providing supplemental interventions for students at the Tier 2 level, usually 10-15%; and/or providing more intensive interventions at Tier 3 for 3- 5% of students, as promoted by the RtI literature (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006). Dulaney, S. K., Hallam, P. R., & Wall, G. (2013). Superintendent perceptions of multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS): Obstacles and opportunities for school system reform. AASA Journal of Scholarship & Practice, 10(2), 30-45. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93-99. An MTSS approach can be conceptualized as incorporating elements of Response to Intervention (RTI) and Positive Behavioral Interventions and

Supports (PBIS; Sugai & Horner, 2009). While RTI brings forth opportunities for preventative approaches and early intervention for students struggling with academic skills (Sandomierski, Kincaid, & Algozzine, 2007), MTSS incorporates a broader focus on both academic and social-emotional matters. Within the PBIS framework, the primary focus is on promoting consistent behavior expectations and systems of support to incentivize behaviors of all students within a school (Bohanon, Fenning, Eber, & Flannery, 2007). Both RTI and PBIS utilize MTSS, and specifically tiered intervention delivery, to accommodate the range of student needs. These frameworks are closely aligned in regards to their prevention foci, problem solving, implementation fidelity and data-based decision making (Sugai & Horner, 2009). A multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) is a systematic data-driven program designed to address academic concerns and problem behavior by utilizing both prevention and intervention strategies (Sugai & Horner, 2009). Specific to behavior-related concerns, MTSS programs offer a structured method for providing both universal and individual support for students and present datadriven alternatives to suspension and expulsion. Use of MTSS is the recommended process for assessing and potentially intervening with an array of academic, behavioral and social-emotional issues while promoting schoolwide systems change (Lane, Menzies, Ennis, & Bezdek, 2013). the primary tier refers to a universal intervention geared toward the general

student body, whose members may not be faced with distinct difficulty, thereby focusing on prevention to reduce potential problems (Horner, Sugai, & Anderson, 2010). The secondary tier refers to interventions for at-risk students, which typically involve more small group-based and individual interventions for those students still demonstrating difficulty after receiving primary intervention and support (Horner et al., 2010). The tertiary tier refers to working with students who are faced with identified difficulties and have not responded efficiently to primary or secondary levels and are subsequently in need of significant school- and community-based supports (Horner et al., 2010).

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Mass Labels While Mass Spectroscopy is not covered

    Mass Labels While Mass Spectroscopy is not covered

    Mass Labels While Mass Spectroscopy is not covered in our texts, other mass/density dependent technologies including X-ray Spectroscopy, Gamma Spectroscopy, & Ultrasound Analysis are covered in Guy & ffytche, An Introduction to The Principles of Medical Imaging, Imperial College Press,...
  • Chapter 1

    Chapter 1

    Criticisms of the Basel regulations. 7-Types of regulation. Regulations can be separated into 3 types: those that address. systemic risks —those that can create contagion, moral hazard and other negative externalities for those throughout the financial system and economy.
  • Evidence Tables -

    Evidence Tables -

    Allows for focus on quality writing rather than on any single, discrete criterion. Reinforces student preparation for prose to be written in college and careers, where quality is defined by addressing the demands of a task, rather than on an...
  • Legionnaires Disease - Why all the fuss? Thursday

    Legionnaires Disease - Why all the fuss? Thursday

    Hot & Cold Water Systems. Free Floating Biofilm/Bacteria. Foreseeable & Preventable. The Regulator. Dutyholder. As an employer, or a person in control of the premises, you . are responsible for. health and safety and need to take the right precautions...
  • Climate Risk Management and Sharing: Bringing insurance ...

    Climate Risk Management and Sharing: Bringing insurance ...

    Utilising insurance industry tools to underpin cost-effective adaptation ... Efficient weather-related food security risk management through risk pooling and sharing across regions Africa RiskView Software Platform: A financial management tool for decision makers Climate Change Stress Tests ...
  • Evaluate two models or theories of one cognitive process with ...

    Evaluate two models or theories of one cognitive process with ...

    Provides a morethoroughexplanation of the STM than the multi-store model of memory. Usefultounderstandcognitive tasks. Explains multi-tasking. Workingmemorycapacity has beenconnectedwithintelligence, mathematicalperformance (Eysenck 1988, Holmes et al 2008) Limitations. the nature and role of the central executive is still unclear
  • Multimodal Information Analysis for Emotion Recognition

    Multimodal Information Analysis for Emotion Recognition

    Multimodal Information Analysis for Emotion Recognition (Tele Health Care Application) Malika Meghjani Gregory Dudek and Frank P. Ferrie Database and Training Database: Visual only posed database Audio Visual posed database Training: Audio segmentation based on minimum window required for feature...
  • Headline goes here - Global Dimension

    Headline goes here - Global Dimension

    "Roger Hart built on Sherry Arnstein's model to develop a ladder of children participation, which is often referred to as the ladder of youth participation: A nation is democratic to the extent that its citizens are involved, particularly at the...