SEAC reviews Part B SPP/APR data; staff flag slippage on several assessment indicators

Kansas State Department of Education staff presented the state’s Part B State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR), summarizing indicator results, areas of slippage and planned follow-up work.

Assistant director Brian Dempsey briefed members that data submissions are underway and that SEAC will incorporate updated assessment uploads as they are finalized in eMaps. “Our indicator 3 data, our assessment data will be uploaded into eMaps, we hope next week,” he said.

Why it matters: the Part B SPP/APR reports K–12 special education performance under IDEA and identifies districts or indicators requiring state action. Slippage can trigger required improvement activities and monitoring.

Highlights from the presentation

- Indicators 1 and 2 (graduation and dropout): Kansas met targets and reported no slippage.

- Indicator 3 (student assessment and alternate assessment outcomes): Dempsey reported slippage for the alternate assessment (DLM) proficiency in fourth grade reading and math. He said the team performed a cohort analysis and linked part of the decline to pandemic-era disruptions in foundational learning: “When you look at their outcomes, there's a great difference when they hit third grade and took those assessments. There's a huge gap in the performance of those two cohorts.”

- Indicator 3D (achievement gap between students with disabilities and all students): slippage appeared most pronounced in eighth-grade reading. State staff linked part of the shortfall to chronic absenteeism among students with disabilities in the impacted cohort.

- Indicator 4A (expulsions/suspensions significant discrepancy): staff reported an increase in the number of districts flagged as potentially above the three‑times threshold; the change is partly due to a methodological change that makes the metric more sensitive in small districts.

- Early childhood outcomes (comparable to Part C’s Indicator 3): SEAC heard there is slippage in some outcome subcomponents in ages 3–5; staff attributed potential causes to pandemic-related disruption, staffing shortages, and variability in observation and scoring practices.

State actions and next steps

Dempsey described ongoing data reviews with federal technical assistance and district-level follow-up with identified schools. The state has initiated deeper cohort and chronic absenteeism analyses to inform local supports and technical assistance.

Sources and evidence

Summaries and quotations in this article come from Brian Dempsey’s SPP/APR presentation and the recorded discussion in the meeting transcript.