|
-CONTENTS- |
|
|
|
Home |
|
|
Regents of the University |
|
|
Introduction |
|
|
Purpose of the QI Study |
|
|
Methodology |
|
|
Program Areas / Sub-Areas |
|
|
Part I: Program Quality |
|
|
Part 2: Link Between Program Quality & Student Outcomes |
|
|
Conclusions |
|
|
Endnotes |
|
|
Download/ Print: Full Research Bulletin: (pdf)* |
Special
Education Quality Indicator Study
RESEARCH
BULLETIN
August 2003
|
||||
The
quality of preschool special education programs is significantly
associated with the percentage of students declassified while in
preschool. (See Figure 3) |
||||
|
|
||||
Multiple regression analyses revealed a statistically significant relationship between program quality and declassification rates — the higher the quality, the greater the percentage of students declassified while in preschool.
|
Certain
quality components are more critical than others in contributing to higher
student declassification rates. |
The analyses identified several organizational, staffing and partnership features of programs that significantly correlated with a higher percentage of children being declassified while in preschool. These included the following:
|
In
addition to program quality, the severity of a child's disability and the
type of school district in which a child is served are also powerful
predictors of preschool declassification rates. |
|
|
Multiple regression analyses revealed a statistically significant negative association between the severity of a child's disability and declassification rates — the higher the severity, the lower the percentage of students declassified while in preschool.
The study analyses also revealed statistically significant differences in declassification rates among the types of school districts in which children are served.
|
Overall these findings suggest that a student with a disability is more likely to be declassified while in preschool if s/he attends
|
These
findings also suggest that program quality makes a difference even when
taking into account the strong influence of severity of disability and
district type. (See Figure 5) |
|
|
The
best indicator of school-age placement in a less restrictive environment
is the type of school district in which a child is served. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The study analyses revealed statistically significant differences in school-age placement rates among school districts, with New York City and rural districts having the lowest percentages of students declassified or moving to a less restrictive environment (LRE) upon reaching school-age programs. (See Table 2) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Program
quality was not found to be a statistically significant factor in
determining school-age placement of transitioning students. |
||
|