TIES Inclusive Education Roadmap
RISE Part 1: Focus Area Reflection
In this section, you will
- Learn about the purpose of the RISE Part 1
- Understand how to facilitate the RISE Part 1
- Complete the RISE Part 1
RISE Part 1 summarizes the evidence-based practices essential to creating systems change for inclusive education. As previously mentioned, the practices are grouped into four Focus Areas: (1) Placement and Settings, (2) General Education Curriculum and Access, (3) Instructional Practices, and (4) Student and System Outcomes. The description of each focus area reflects the Features of Inclusive Education for that area.
Facilitated discussion of the system’s strengths and needs within each Focus Areas allows the EILT to determine which Focus Area resonates most closely with the current needs within the system and opportunities for where to begin the change process. The EILT will also identify which area(s) they will delve more deeply into in the RISE Part 2. In addition, each Focus Area is connected to the concepts of T-I-E-S, the outcomes of effective inclusive systems of education.
Completing the RISE Part 1
Preparing for RISE Part 1 Meeting
Facilitating the Meeting
Below is an image of one Focus Area of the RISE Part 1, General Education Curriculum Content and Access. Take special note of the rating system and take time to read through it before starting to facilitate reflecting on the Focus Area. The rating system looks specifically at the type and number of students who are currently accessing the Focus Area under discussion. In order to score a 5, the system must be fully including all students, including all students with significant cognitive disabilities (SwSCD).
Focus Area 2: General Ed Curriculum Content and Access
A. To what extent does the mindset of each member of the school community reflect an unwavering belief that instruction in general education curriculum content inn general education settings improves outcomes for SwSCD?
B. To what extent does each member of the school community ensure SwSCD are engaged and make progress in the general education curriculum rather than an alternate curriculum or alternate standard?
C. To what extent does the school community facilitate individual student curriculum decisions that result in each SwSCD having the supports and services they need. To. Access and make progress in the general education curriculum and embedded essential skills in general education settings?
D. To what extent does the school provide technical assistance with coaching, time, and resources that support technology, communication, and collaborative practices that increase access to the general education curriculum in general education settings for SwSCD?
E. To what extent do school leaders annually evaluate and monitor the impact of its technical assistance with coaching on increasing access to and progress in general education curriculum in general education settings for SwSCD?
F. To what extend do all members of the school community share responsibility for SwSCD making progress in the general education curriculm connteent in ngeneral education settings?
- T: Time in general education
- I: Instructional effectiveness
- E: Engagement with general education curriculum and peers
- S: Support at the state and district level
Column 2: Positive Examples and Areas for Improvement
Column 3: Rating
1: Some features are in place for some students, but not yet for students with significant cognitive disabilities.
2: Most features are in place for most students, but not yet for students with significant cognitive disabilities.
3: Most features are in place for most students, including for some students with significant cognitive disabilities.
4: Most features are in place for most students, including most students with significant cognitive disabilities.
5: All features are in place for all students, including all students with significant cognitive disabilities.
- After the EILT rates the four Focus Areas, the final step of the RISE Part 1 is identifying a priority Focus Area. The Facilitator enters each of the Focus Area's rating into the Summary Table RISE Part 1 sheet (p. 9 for the RISE Part 1 document). The Summary Table allows the EILT to rank the Focus Areas based on their rating scores and identify a top priority for the system. Sometimes a top priority does not naturally emerge because of tied scores or the team's perceptions having changed through the RISE Part 1 discussion. These discussion questions are useful for building consensus in identifying the top priority when a choice does not naturally emerge:
- Which Focus Area speaks most directly to the changes you want to make in your system?
- Is there a Focus Area that may represent an easier place to start in your system?
- How does the Focus Area fit within your system's current culture and processes?
- Are there current initiatives or programs in the system that could be paired with this Focus Area
Meeting Logistics and Process Options
In determining the logistics of the meeting, a first step is deciding if the RISE will be conducted in-person, virtually, or in a hybrid meeting. While the same RISE Part 1 process is implemented regardless of which option is chosen, there are different decisions regarding how the meeting is organized including the format of the materials (paper, electronic, both); the rating process and tools; and how the meeting will be facilitated to engage all voices. These components are described in the table below.
Hybrid Meeting (some members are in-person and some are virtual)
- EILT members will likely come to the table with differing points of view about a variety of topics. It is important to allow everyone to share their views. It is also important that no one person or point of view dominates the discussion. Sharing or creating meeting norms at the start of the meeting can help the group navigate challenging interactions, should any arise (the EILT will likely have developed team norms that could be used in Step 2).
- The primary purpose of the RISE is to engage the team in thoughtful and reflective conversations about the current state of inclusive education in the system. The ratings the team gives itself are not as important as is developing the common understanding that is gained through the discussions. It is important to remind the team that it is very common for systems to have ratings of 1 or 2 as they start their journey towards inclusive education for all students. As systems build the capacity to effectively include all students, including those with significant cognitive disabilities, the ratings will rise over time.
- When teams are struggling to determine a rating, they often ask if they can score a 1.5 or 2.5 instead of a whole number. It is helpful to remind them that the rating represents the whole system, not just the pockets of excellence that may exist within the system. Sticking with whole numbers also allows the team to think more deeply about where they are, especially in reference to students with significant cognitive disabilities.
- Does your team represent stakeholders from across your system?
- How will you encourage all stakeholders to contribute during the RISE process?
- Has the team included students with the most significant disabilities in all aspects of your discussion during the RISE Part 1?
- After the RISE Part 1 is complete and a priority Focus Area has been identified, the team is ready to schedule and prep for the RISE Part 2.