Bill Text: MN HF1490 | 2011-2012 | 87th Legislature | Introduced
Bill Title: Response to intervention model created, and rulemaking required.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 2-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2011-04-18 - Author added Kiel (chief author) [HF1490 Detail]
Download: Minnesota-2011-HF1490-Introduced.html
1.2relating to education; adopting a response to intervention model; requiring
1.3rulemaking; requiring a report; repealing Minnesota Rules, parts 3525.1329,
1.4subpart 3; 3525.1341, subpart 2, item B.
1.5BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
1.6 Section 1. RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION.
1.7 Subdivision 1. Definitions. As used in this section, the following terms have the
1.8meanings given.
1.9"Intervention" means the systematic use of a technique, program, or practice
1.10designed to improve learning or performance in specific areas of pupil need and selected,
1.11to the extent possible, based on their scientific validation.
1.12"Presenting problem" means a problem statement that describes the degree of
1.13discrepancy between the learning standards of the educational setting and a student's
1.14performance.
1.15 Subd. 2. Rulemaking. (a) The commissioner of education shall adopt and amend
1.16rules to establish a response to intervention method as the sole method for establishing
1.17eligibility standards for specific learning disabilities using insufficient student achievement
1.18and insufficient student progress as the criteria. These rules shall require:
1.19(1) scientific research-based instruction and behavioral supports in general education
1.20settings and the use of a collaborative approach by school staff for development,
1.21implementation, and evaluation of the intervention process as defined in section 125A.56,
1.22subdivision 2;
2.1(2) a description of the presenting problem in objective terms using data collection
2.2procedures including reviews of existing information, interviews, and informal testing that
2.3focus on alterable characteristics of the instructional environment;
2.4(3) data collection and problem analysis using a systematic, data-based process to
2.5develop a hypothesis about why the problem is occurring;
2.6(4) that data be used by the team to determine whether a pattern of strengths and
2.7weaknesses in performance exists that is relevant in designing an intervention;
2.8(5) data collection procedures that are individually tailored, valid, and reliable and
2.9allow for frequent and repeated measurements of intervention;
2.10(6) interventions that are designed based on the data collected, the defined problem,
2.11parent input, and professional judgments about the potential effectiveness of interventions;
2.12(7) an intervention plan that includes goals and strategies, a progress monitoring
2.13plan, a decision-making plan for summarizing and analyzing progress monitoring data,
2.14and designation of the parties responsible for implementation;
2.15(8) interventions implemented in a manner highly consistent with the intervention
2.16plan's design as verified through direct observation and interviews with responsible parties
2.17and provided to the pupil for at least 80 percent of the recommended number of weeks,
2.18sessions, and minutes per session; and
2.19(9) decisions regarding the effectiveness of interventions to focus on comparisons
2.20with initial levels of performance.
2.21Noncompliance with the length of instruction under clause (8) shall not be used to
2.22deny a parent's right to a special education evaluation for the student.
2.23(b) The commissioner of education shall amend rules to:
2.24(1) remove the severe discrepancy model of identifying specific learning disabilities;
2.25(2) remove the use of intelligence quotient testing in determining emotional and
2.26behavioral disorders; and
2.27(3) adopt rules using a positive behavior and intervention supports model for
2.28emotional and behavioral disorders.
2.29(c) The commissioner shall not adopt rules under this section implementing models
2.30similar to those removed under paragraph (b).
2.31(d) The rules adopted under this subdivision shall be effective July 1, 2014.
2.32 Subd. 3. Minnesota Response to Intervention Center. (a) The St. Croix River
2.33Education District shall reestablish the Minnesota Response to Intervention Center. The
2.34commissioner of education shall contract with the St. Croix River Education District
2.35to provide expert level consultation and assistance on response to intervention issues
2.36through the Minnesota Response to Intervention Center. The commissioner shall utilize
3.1federal revenue provided through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the
3.2Individuals with Disabilities Education Act for this contract. The contract shall begin not
3.3later than August 1, 2011, and shall end June 30, 2013. The amount of the contract shall
3.4be sufficient to enable the education district to perform the duties assigned in this section.
3.5(b) Through the contract with the Department of Education, the Minnesota Response
3.6to Intervention Center shall:
3.7(1) provide leadership for the state regarding the implementation of a response to
3.8intervention model;
3.9(2) provide training and assistance to school districts and charter schools to assist
3.10them in successfully planning and implementing a response to intervention model which
3.11results in:
3.12(i) students being provided assistance as soon as needed;
3.13(ii) improved student learning and closing the achievement gap;
3.14(iii) a reduction in the number of students in need of special education; and
3.15(iv) a more efficient use of personnel and financial resources;
3.16(3) assist the commissioner in drafting the rule revisions required under subdivision
3.172;
3.18(4) develop model response to intervention manuals;
3.19(5) provide training and consultation on the response to intervention framework,
3.20including the problem solving model, scientifically based instruction within a multitiered
3.21model of instructional supports, standards-aligned instruction, and the use of formative
3.22assessment to guide instructional decision making;
3.23(6) provide training, coaching, and consultation to school sites to meet the
3.24requirements of Minnesota Rules, parts 3525.1329 and 3525.1341, and applicable federal
3.25requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the Elementary
3.26and Secondary Education Act;
3.27(7) assist higher education institutions to incorporate the response to intervention
3.28research into applicable licensure programs; and
3.29(8) evaluate the learning and financial impact of the response to intervention model
3.30in Minnesota.
3.31 Subd. 4. Report. By February 1, 2012, the commissioner of education shall
3.32report the proposed rule changes required under subdivision 2 to the policy and finance
3.33legislative committees with jurisdiction over kindergarten through grade 12 education.
3.34 Sec. 2. REPEALER.
4.1Minnesota Rules, parts 3525.1329, subpart 3; and 3525.1341, subpart 2, item B, are
4.2repealed.
4.3EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective July 1, 2014.
1.3rulemaking; requiring a report; repealing Minnesota Rules, parts 3525.1329,
1.4subpart 3; 3525.1341, subpart 2, item B.
1.5BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
1.6 Section 1. RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION.
1.7 Subdivision 1. Definitions. As used in this section, the following terms have the
1.8meanings given.
1.9"Intervention" means the systematic use of a technique, program, or practice
1.10designed to improve learning or performance in specific areas of pupil need and selected,
1.11to the extent possible, based on their scientific validation.
1.12"Presenting problem" means a problem statement that describes the degree of
1.13discrepancy between the learning standards of the educational setting and a student's
1.14performance.
1.15 Subd. 2. Rulemaking. (a) The commissioner of education shall adopt and amend
1.16rules to establish a response to intervention method as the sole method for establishing
1.17eligibility standards for specific learning disabilities using insufficient student achievement
1.18and insufficient student progress as the criteria. These rules shall require:
1.19(1) scientific research-based instruction and behavioral supports in general education
1.20settings and the use of a collaborative approach by school staff for development,
1.21implementation, and evaluation of the intervention process as defined in section 125A.56,
1.22subdivision 2;
2.1(2) a description of the presenting problem in objective terms using data collection
2.2procedures including reviews of existing information, interviews, and informal testing that
2.3focus on alterable characteristics of the instructional environment;
2.4(3) data collection and problem analysis using a systematic, data-based process to
2.5develop a hypothesis about why the problem is occurring;
2.6(4) that data be used by the team to determine whether a pattern of strengths and
2.7weaknesses in performance exists that is relevant in designing an intervention;
2.8(5) data collection procedures that are individually tailored, valid, and reliable and
2.9allow for frequent and repeated measurements of intervention;
2.10(6) interventions that are designed based on the data collected, the defined problem,
2.11parent input, and professional judgments about the potential effectiveness of interventions;
2.12(7) an intervention plan that includes goals and strategies, a progress monitoring
2.13plan, a decision-making plan for summarizing and analyzing progress monitoring data,
2.14and designation of the parties responsible for implementation;
2.15(8) interventions implemented in a manner highly consistent with the intervention
2.16plan's design as verified through direct observation and interviews with responsible parties
2.17and provided to the pupil for at least 80 percent of the recommended number of weeks,
2.18sessions, and minutes per session; and
2.19(9) decisions regarding the effectiveness of interventions to focus on comparisons
2.20with initial levels of performance.
2.21Noncompliance with the length of instruction under clause (8) shall not be used to
2.22deny a parent's right to a special education evaluation for the student.
2.23(b) The commissioner of education shall amend rules to:
2.24(1) remove the severe discrepancy model of identifying specific learning disabilities;
2.25(2) remove the use of intelligence quotient testing in determining emotional and
2.26behavioral disorders; and
2.27(3) adopt rules using a positive behavior and intervention supports model for
2.28emotional and behavioral disorders.
2.29(c) The commissioner shall not adopt rules under this section implementing models
2.30similar to those removed under paragraph (b).
2.31(d) The rules adopted under this subdivision shall be effective July 1, 2014.
2.32 Subd. 3. Minnesota Response to Intervention Center. (a) The St. Croix River
2.33Education District shall reestablish the Minnesota Response to Intervention Center. The
2.34commissioner of education shall contract with the St. Croix River Education District
2.35to provide expert level consultation and assistance on response to intervention issues
2.36through the Minnesota Response to Intervention Center. The commissioner shall utilize
3.1federal revenue provided through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the
3.2Individuals with Disabilities Education Act for this contract. The contract shall begin not
3.3later than August 1, 2011, and shall end June 30, 2013. The amount of the contract shall
3.4be sufficient to enable the education district to perform the duties assigned in this section.
3.5(b) Through the contract with the Department of Education, the Minnesota Response
3.6to Intervention Center shall:
3.7(1) provide leadership for the state regarding the implementation of a response to
3.8intervention model;
3.9(2) provide training and assistance to school districts and charter schools to assist
3.10them in successfully planning and implementing a response to intervention model which
3.11results in:
3.12(i) students being provided assistance as soon as needed;
3.13(ii) improved student learning and closing the achievement gap;
3.14(iii) a reduction in the number of students in need of special education; and
3.15(iv) a more efficient use of personnel and financial resources;
3.16(3) assist the commissioner in drafting the rule revisions required under subdivision
3.172;
3.18(4) develop model response to intervention manuals;
3.19(5) provide training and consultation on the response to intervention framework,
3.20including the problem solving model, scientifically based instruction within a multitiered
3.21model of instructional supports, standards-aligned instruction, and the use of formative
3.22assessment to guide instructional decision making;
3.23(6) provide training, coaching, and consultation to school sites to meet the
3.24requirements of Minnesota Rules, parts 3525.1329 and 3525.1341, and applicable federal
3.25requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the Elementary
3.26and Secondary Education Act;
3.27(7) assist higher education institutions to incorporate the response to intervention
3.28research into applicable licensure programs; and
3.29(8) evaluate the learning and financial impact of the response to intervention model
3.30in Minnesota.
3.31 Subd. 4. Report. By February 1, 2012, the commissioner of education shall
3.32report the proposed rule changes required under subdivision 2 to the policy and finance
3.33legislative committees with jurisdiction over kindergarten through grade 12 education.
3.34 Sec. 2. REPEALER.
4.1Minnesota Rules, parts 3525.1329, subpart 3; and 3525.1341, subpart 2, item B, are
4.2repealed.
4.3EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective July 1, 2014.
