Susan Langendonk Susan Bradley Dawn Anderson Robert Wall
Emerson
Slide 2
2 Adapted from the Montgomery County, Pennsylvania model
beginning in 1995 Published and disseminated by the Michigan
Department of Education Special Education Services Michigan
Severity Rating Scales History and Development
Slide 3
3 Orientation and Mobility Severity Rating Scale (OMSRS)
Orientation and Mobility Severity Rating Scale for students with
Additional Needs (OMSRS+)
Slide 4
4 MDE-LIO Orientation and Mobility Task Force formed in
November 2007 Revising Michigan Orientation and Mobility Severity
Rating Scale-Task Forces first project
Slide 5
5 Web search indicated OMSRS was being used and referenced in
documents in several other states Referred to in O&M university
preparation programs MDE-LIO Task Force did an on-line survey in
March 2008
Slide 6
6 Field Tested in Michigan Article in AER Journal Research and
Practice in Visual Impairment and Blindness Winter 2009 Updated
OMSRS and added OMSRS+ to MDE-LIO and TSBVI websites November
2008
Slide 7
7 Internationally recognized Texas School for the Blind and
Visually Impaired (TSBVI) Colorado Department of Education
Guidelines for Caseload Formula Massachusetts Assoc. of Educators
of VI Students Calgary, Alberta, Canada Scholarly references
Slide 8
What they are: 8 A data collection tool A guide based on best
practices Guideline for IEP team service discussion
Slide 9
What they are not: 9 Not an assessment Not a severity of
disability but a severity of students need for services Not a
pre-determiner of service Not the only data source
Slide 10
10
Slide 11
11
Slide 12
12
Slide 13
13 When Do They Complete a Scale?
Slide 14
14 Factors Considered When Updating (n=53): Change in
vision/motor skill 25 To verify service time18 Change in
program/staff/campus14 Annual caseload analysis, IEP 14 Tri-annual
assessment 6 Assess current level, initial assessment 5 When asked
for 5 Student needs 4 Establish eligibility 4 Student not
progressing 2 Depends on situation
Slide 15
15 With Whom They Complete the Scale
Slide 16
16 Do External Factors Make a Difference?
Slide 17
17 What Are Those Factors (n=35)? Academic level, age 18
Parental involvement12 Paraprofessional, classroom support 6
Medical fragility, additional disabilities 6 Goals &
objectives, expectations 6 Appropriate travel skills, independent 5
Classroom placement, accommodations 4 Involvement of other
therapists 3 New environments 2 Service delivery model
Slide 18
18 Is It Used for Caseload Analysis?
Slide 19
19 How Important is it in Caseload Analysis?
Slide 20
20 Scenarios Several students were described for both the
O&MSRS and the O&MSRS+. Visual status, academic setting and
other characteristics that are crucial to determining the severity
of need for services were outlined. Respondents were asked to fill
out the Scales, then answer questions.
Slide 21
21 O&MSRS: How Well Are Areas Of Concern Covered?
Slide 22
22 O&MSRS: How Well do Contributing Factors Address +/- of
Service?
Slide 23
23 O&MSRS: Comparison of Frequency of Service Time on
Survey to Own Caseload
Slide 24
24 O&MSRS: How Well do Service Times Match Instructional
Needs?
Slide 25
25 O&MSRS: If Service Can't Happen
Slide 26
26 O&MSRS: Overall Usefulness & Validity
Slide 27
27 OMSRS Suggestions for Change: Severity of Need Profile No
changes; get more people to use it 9 Reword portions; correct
spacing2 Confusion on how to score Profound in level of vision2
Split OMSRS to OM SRS 1 Specific number for each category1
Distinguish between direct and indirect time1 Service times vary by
need1
Slide 28
28 No changes 9 Student opportunities & experiences3 Time
traveled to teach isnt adequately accounted for2 Split OMSRS to OM
SRS 1 Specific number for each category1 Distinguish between direct
and indirect time1 Service times vary by need1 Consider only adding
to score1 OMSRS Suggestions for Change: Contributing Factors
Slide 29
29 OMSRS Suggestions for Change: Recommendations for Services
Develop reasonable caseload size 2 Add section where discrepancy
between SRS rec.& actual rec. can be explained 2 Frequency
& time recs. should use same units1 Link lesson length to
lesson content area 1 Add option for 2-4 times / month1 Make
language more approachable1
Slide 30
30 OMSRS Suggestions for Change: Positive Impacts on Services
Showed the IEP team the rationale for services 12 Justified a new
hire / prevented layoff 8 Explained job to supervisor 4 Helps with
consistency 4 Gives parents timeline reference 1 Actually validated
a decrease in staff need 1 Gives parents a means of proving need
for O&M services 1 Caused dissention among professionals,
parents & administrators 1
Slide 31
31 O&MSRS+: How Well Are Areas Of Concern Covered?
Slide 32
32 O&MSRS+: How Well do Contributing Factors Address +/- of
Service?
Slide 33
33 O&MSRS+: Comparison of Frequency of Service on Survey to
Own Caseload
Slide 34
34 Scenarios: Usefulness of O&MSRS+ for service time
Slide 35
35 O&MSRS+: If Service Can't Happen
Slide 36
36 O&MSRS+: Overall Usefulness & Validity
Slide 37
37 OMSRS+ Suggestions for Change: Severity of Need Profile None
6 Wording can be misleading Add section for recommendations other
than from the SRS Add a CVI component Disagree about level of
supervision for safe travel discriminates against severe
disabilities
Slide 38
38 OMSRS+ Suggestions for Change: Contributing Factors None 5
Teamwork in deciding times in all areas Student experiences and
opportunities Add option to list medications that might impact
instruction
Slide 39
39 OMSRS+ Suggestions for Change: Recommendations for Services
None 6 Compliance with instruction seems to inflate service
time
Slide 40
40 OMSRS+: Positive Impact on Services Showed IEP team
rationale for service 6 Helps with consistency2 Justify new hire,
prevent layoffs2 Showed need for services for multi handicapped
child
Slide 41
Reliability (precision) Respondents overwhelmingly identified
the scales as measuring the significant factors to be considered in
O&M Validity O&M SRS above 90% accuracy O&M SRS+ showed
84% accuracy 41
Slide 42
42 Service information from the Michigan Severity Rating Scales
Additional hours per week needed for support Hours per week for
travel
John C. Austin President Casandra E. Ulbrich Vice President
Nancy Danhof Secretary Marianne Yared McGuire Treasurer Richard
Zeile NASBE Delegate Kathleen N. Straus Daniel Varner Eileen Lappin
Weiser Rick Snyder, Governor Michael P. Flanagan Superintendent of
Public Instruction 45
