PI 11.36 (6) (d) 2. a. Reading comprehension.
b. Writing.
c. Vocabulary development.
d. Speaking.
e. Listening.
f. Reading foundational skills, including phonemic awareness and phonics through explicit, systematic instruction.
g. Reading fluency, including oral reading skills.
SECTION 14. PI 11.36 (6) (d) 3. b. is amended to read:
PI 11.36 (6) (d) 3. b. At least one licensed person who has implemented scientific, research-based or evidence-based,an intensive interventions, evidence-based intervention with the referred pupilchild.
SECTION 15. PI 11.36 (6) (d) 3. e. to g.. are created to read:
PI 11.36 (6) (d) 3. e. A speech-language pathologist licensed under ch. PI 34 if inadequate classroom achievement in the areas of oral expression or listening comprehension are being considered. f. A reading teacher or reading specialist licensed under ch. PI 34 if inadequate classroom achievement in the areas of reading comprehension, basic reading or reading fluency are being considered. g. An educator with foundational knowledge in first and second language instruction and second language acquisition if the student is identified as an English Learner under 20 USC 7801 (20). SECTION 16. PI 11.36 (6) (e) is repealed and recreated to read:
11.36 (6) (e) 1. Prior to determining whether or not a student has a specific learning disability, the LEA shall conduct at least two systematic observations to document the child's access to and engagement in and behavior during general education instruction and during an intensive, evidence-based intervention. At least one observation shall be conducted in the regular classroom setting and one observation shall be conducted during an intensive, evidence-based intervention. An additional observation is required if the child is an English Learner under 20 USC 7801 (20). 2. Systematic observations shall be conducted by the following individuals:
a. A member of the IEP team other than the individual providing the instruction or intervention.
b. A member of the IEP team with knowledge in first and second language instruction and second language acquisition, if the child is an English Learner under 20 USC 7801 (20). 3. The systematic observation during general education instruction may be conducted before the child was referred for evaluation. The systematic observation during intensive, evidence-based intervention shall be conducted after the child has been referred for an evaluation and parental consent is obtained.
4. If the child is less than school age or out of school, at least one member of the IEP team shall conduct a systematic observation of the child in an environment appropriate for a child of that age.
SECTION 17. PI 11.36 (6) (f) 3., 4., 6., 7., and 8. (intro.) are amended to read:
PI 11.36 (6) (f) 3. The relevant behavior, if any, noted during the observationobservations of the child and the relationship of that behavior to the child's academic functioning in the area of potential learning disability in par. (c) 1under par. (e) 1. to 4.
4. Documentation that the intensive, evidence-based intervention was applied in a manner highly consistent with its design, was closely alignedmatched to pupilchild need, and was culturally appropriate, and was applied in accordance with the identified evidence base that supports effective results and that the interventions implemented were at the highest level of evidence base available for the area of potential specific learning disability being assessed under par. (c) 1.
6. Whether the child does not achieve adequately for the child's age or to meet state-approved grade-level standards consistent with par. (c) 1.; and the child does not make sufficient progress to meet age or state-approved grade-level standards consistent with par. (c) 2. a.; or until three years after December 1, 2010, the child exhibits a significant discrepancy between the child's academic achievement in any of the eight areas of potential specific learning disabilities under par. (c) 1. and intellectual ability consistent with par. (c) 2. b.
7. The determination of the IEP team concerning the effects of a visual, hearing, or motor disability; cognitive disability; emotional disturbanceother impairment areas under this chapter; cultural, linguistic factors;, environmental, or economic disadvantagefactors; or limited English proficiency on the child's achievement level.
8. If the child has participated prior to referral in a process that assesses the child's response to scientific, research-based or evidence-based intervention, documentation that the child's parents were notified about all of the following:
SECTION 18. PI 11.36 (6) (f) 9. is created to read:
PI 11.36 (6) (f) 9. Each IEP team member shall certify in writing whether the evaluation report reflects the member's conclusion. If the evaluation report does not reflect the member's conclusion, the group member shall submit a separate statement presenting the member's conclusion.
SECTION 19. PI 11.36 (6) (g) is amended to read:
PI 11.36 (6) (g) In addition to all other determinations, the IEP team shall base its decision of whether a child has a specific learning disability on a comprehensive evaluation using formal and informal assessment data regarding academic achievement and learning behavior from sources such as standardized tests, error analysis, criterion referenced measures, curriculum-based assessments, pupilchild’s work samples, interviews, systematic observations, analysis of the child's response to previous interventions, and analysis of classroom expectations, and curriculum in accordance with s. 115.782, Stats. SECTION 20. EFFECTIVE DATE:
The proposed rules contained in this order shall take effect on the first day of the month commencing after the date of publication in the Wisconsin Administrative Register, as provided in s. 227.22 (2) (intro.), Stats. Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2021
__________________________________________
Carolyn Stanford Taylor
State Superintendent
