Response to Intervention in General, Remedial, and Special Education

1
Response to Intervention in General, Remedial,
and Special Education
Daniel J. Reschly dan.reschly_at_vanderbilt.edu 615-
708-7910 Delaware Department of Education May 7,
2007
2
What To Do With Egbert??

• 1st Grade, falling behind in reading
• Slow progress compared to peers
• Likely to miss benchmarks related to passing 3rd
  Grade reading test
• Distractible, inattentive, disruptive,
  non-compliant
• Sound Familiar
• WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? Driven by Federal Legislation
• Consider NCLB and IDEIA

3
What To Do With Egbert??

• 9th Grade, failing 3 of 5 classes at first 9
  weeks
• Attendance is declining
• Homework non completion
• Poor performance on weekly or unit tests
• Defiant, distractible, inattentive, disruptive,
  non-compliant
• Sound Familiar
• WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? Driven by Federal Legislation
• Consider NCLB and IDEIA

4
Egbert in the Traditional System

• Refer Egbert
• Preferral intervention (check a box)
• Comprehensive Evaluation-Battery of Tests,
  common battery?
• Assessment largely outside of the natural context
• Dubious generalizations from test behavior to
  classroom
• Eligibility assessment unrelated to intervention
• Team decision-making
• SLD diagnoses often inaccurate

5
PROBLEM SOLVING CHART
Does the thing work?
Yes
No
Dont mess with it!
Did you mess with it?
You Idiot!
Yes
No
No
Will you catch hell?
Hide it!
Yes
Does anyone else know?
No
Yes
You poor slob!
Ignore it
Can you blame somebody else?
No
Yes
NO PROBLEM
6
What Is Response to Intervention (RTI)?

• Scientifically-based instruction/interventions
  matched to student needs
• Formative evaluation including frequent progress
  monitoring in relation to benchmarks, with
  decision rules applied
• Decisions driven by student RTI, including genl
  ed instruction/intervention, remedial
  services/individual interventions, sp ed
  eligibility, placement, annual review and exit
• Implementation requires Allocating (aligning)
  resources to deliver effective interventions that
  produce improved child outcomes

7
RTI Model Differences

• Restricted vs Comprehensive System Wide
• LD Identification
• Do Tiers I and II, then traditional evaluation
• Or Use RTI in eligibility determination and in
  the design, implementation, and evaluation of
  IEPs
• Academic only or Academic and Behavior
• False dichotomies Standard Protocol vs Problem
  Solving vs Recognition of Both
• Choices determined by nature of problem
• Use of both in many situations

8
RESPONSE TO Intervention POLICY
CONSIDERATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION
Order at www.nasdse.org
Cost 15 with discounts for large orders
9
Purpose of the RTI Process

• Improve results in academic, behavioral, and
  emotional regulation domains, through
• High quality interventions
• Formative evaluation
• Student results drive decisions about needs and
  intensity of interventions
• Improve, eliminate disproportionate
  representation
• Identification of disabilities through procedures
  that are valid and connected to effective special
  ed interventions
• Improve special education results and increase
  exit from sp ed
• Prevention and early identification-intervention

10
Why RTI?

• Dissatisfaction with ach. results
• Expensive programs with undocumented benefits,
  General Ed. Title I and Sp Ed
• Poor overall outcomes re benchmark tests,
  graduate rates, early adult outcomes
• Overrepresentation in sp ed
• Disjointed programs across general, remedial and
  special ed.-compromised outcomes and wasted
  resources

11
13
16
18
41
42
29
30
30
35
31
58
54
52
27
24
12
Special Education Placement Effects High
Incidence Disabilities

• Treatment/Intervention aEffect Size
• EMR/Special Classes (IQ 60-75) -.14
• Special Classes (IQ 75-90) -.34
• Resource for SLD and E/BD .29
• Traditional Placement Practices Have Weak
  Relationships to Outcomes
• Special Education as a Solution?
• Note Effect size is expressed in SD units,
  analogous to a z-score

13
Old Assumptions re High Incidence Disabilities
(SLD, MMR, E/BD)

• Disabilities Inherent in Individual?-BUT, Context
  and prevention are crucial
• Identify and Treat Underlying Causes-BUT, Failure
  of process training
• Prescribe Methods that Capitalize on Strengths
  and Avoid Weaknesses-BUT, Failure of Aptitude by
  Treatment Interaction in Research and Practice

14
Old Assumptions, cont.

• Unique Treatment Methods and Teacher Training by
  Disability But, Same methods work for virtually
  all High Incidence I SWD, LD, ED, EMR
• IQ Essential to Accurate Classification-BUT Same
  kids found with problem solving processes and
  measures
• Identifying Disability and Sp Ed Placement Solves
  Problem
• Dubious Effects of Special Education

15
Meaningfulness of Special Education High
Incidence Categories (www.ideadata.org) Table
1-13, retrieved 1-16-07

• Category Prevalence Range Factor
  of Notes
• MR 0.4 (NJ) to 3.0 (WV) 7Xs
  (9 at 0.4)
• ED 0.2 (AR) to 2.4 (DC) 12Xs
  (VT2.0)
• LD 2.2 (KY) to 7.7 (OK) 3Xs
• Sp/L 0.5 (HI) to 4.3 (WV) 8Xs
• OHI 0.5 (CA) to 2.4 (RI) 5Xs
• All 8.9 (CO) to 15.9 (RI) 1.8Xs
• Notes Child disability count as a percentage of
  the 6-17 population.

16
Some things do not make sense
17
Progression of Research, Policy, and Legal
Requirements

• RESEARCH Scientific research with practice
  demonstrations leading to
• POLICY Multiple policy analyses in presented in
  prestigious reports leading to
• FEDERAL LAW Multiple layers of Federal legal
  requirements leading to
• STATE LAW Changes in state rules leading to
• SCALING UP Scaling up efforts in states

18
What Works? See Kavale (2005), Learning
Disabilities, 13, 127-138 and other sources

• Treatment Effect Size
• Applied Behavior Analysis. 1.00
• CBMGraphingFormative
• Evaluation reinforcement 1.00
• Explicit Instruction and Problem
• Solving .70 to 1.50
• Comprehension Strategies 1.00
• Math Interventions .60 to 1.10
• Writing Interventions .50 to .85

19
Policy and Legal Influences

• NICHD LD Studies
• Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S. Griffin, P. (Eds.)
  (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young
  children. Washington DC National Academy Press.
• Teaching children to read An evidence-based
  assessment of the scientific research literature
  on reading and its implications for reading
  instruction http//www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/
  nrp/smallbook.pdf
• National Academy of Sciences/National Research
  Council Panel Report http//www.nap.edu/catalog/10
  128.html
• LD Summit Researchers Recommendations (Bradley et
  al., 2002)
• Presidents Commission on Excellence in Special
  Education (2002) report, http//www.ed.gov/inits/c
  ommissionsboards/whspecialeducation/reports.html

20
Commonalties in Policy Recommendations

• Accountability-Improved results for all students
  and better results are possible!! (Gloeckler)
• Integration of general, remedial, and sp ed
  through multiple tiers of intervention
• Scientifically-based interventions with problem
  solving
• Progress monitoring with formative evaluation
• Decisions at all levels driven by child response
  to intervention
• Abandon IQ-Achievement discrepancy in LD
  Identification

21
Progression of Federal General and Special
Education Legislation

• 1960-70s To 2000s
• Assistance Results
• __________________________________________
• ESEA EHA NCLB/
• Rdg 1st IDEA 2004
• Procedures Outcomes
• Number Served Improvement

22
Major Legal Themes (NCLB, IDEA)

• Scientifically-based instruction
• More frequent assessment, progress monitoring,
  formative evaluation
• Well integrated multiple tiers of Intervention
• Decisions driven by child responses to
  instruction-intervention in general, remedial,
  and special education
• Alignment of resources to enhance positive
  outcomes

23
Changes in Legal RequirementsIDEA (2004)

• (A) IN GENERAL.Notwithstanding section 607(b),
  when determining whether a child has a specific
  learning disability as defined in section 602, a
  local educational agency shall not be required to
  take into consideration whether a child has a
  severe discrepancy between achievement and
  intellectual ability in oral expression,
  listening comprehension, written expression,
  basic reading skill, reading comprehension,
  mathematical calculation, or mathematical
  reasoning.

24
Response to Intervention (IDEA, 2004)

• (B) ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY.In deter- mining
  whether a child has a specific learning
  disability, a local educational agency may use a
  process that determines if the child responds to
  scientific, research-based intervention as a part
  of the evaluation procedures described in
  paragraphs (2) and (3).
• Does response to intervention appear in the law?

25
Final Regulation

• NEW AND SIGNIFICANT
• (b must consider, as part of the evaluation
  described data that demonstrates that
• (1) Prior to, or as a part of the referral
  process, the child was provided appropriate
  high-quality, research-based instruction in
  regular education settings, consistent with
  section 1111(b)(8)(D) and (E) of the ESEA,
  including that the instruction was delivered by
  qualified personnel and
• (2) Data-based documentation of repeated
  assessments of achievement at reasonable
  intervals, reflecting formal assessment of
  student progress during instruction, was provided
  to the child's parents.

26
Prevention-Early Intervention

• LEA can use 15 of federal IDEA funds to support
  prevention and early identification-treatment
• Purpose minimize over-identification and
  unnecessary sp ed referrals
• Provide academic and behavioral supports and
  professional development re early literacy and
  behavior
• MUST use the 15 if LEA has significant
  disproportionality

27
Multiple Tiers Implemented Through Progress
Monitoring and Formative Evaluation (Sugai,
Horner, Gresham, 2002)
Enter a School-Wide Systems for Student Success

• Intensive, Individual Interventions
• Individual and Small Groups
• Intense, Prolonged Interventions

5-10
5-10
10-15
10-15
28
Multi-Tiered Academic Interventions of Increasing
Intensity and Measurement Precision

• Tier I General Education All students
  Effective instruction, 80-85 at benchmarks
• Tier II Standard Protocol and Problem Solving
  (about 10 to 20 weeks) Small group and
  individualized interventions
• Decision Making Continue Program, Modifications,
  Comprehensive Evaluation??
• Tier III More Intensive, Sustained Instruction
  in General and/or Special education
• Key Mechanism Formative Evaluation

29
Multi-Tiered Behavior Interventions of Increasing
Intensity and Measurement Precision

• Level I General Education School wide positive
  discipline, effective classroom organization and
  management, teacher assistance teams
• Level II Individualized Problem Solving re
  Behavior Targeted, intense individual
  interventions in general education
• Decision Making? Continue Program, Modifications,
  Comprehensive Evaluation
• Level III More Intensive, Sustained Instruction
  in General or Special education
• Key Mechanism Formative Evaluation

30
Formative Evaluation

• Frequent assessment of progress
• Referenced to goals based on benchmarks toward
  passing state tests
• Decision rules regarding modification of goals or
  instructional programs
• All decisions about student needs and
  instructional intensity are based on child RTI

31
Characteristics of Effective Formative Evaluation
Measures

• Direct measures of skills
• Natural settings
• Efficient re costs and time required
• Sensitive to small increments of growth in
  relevant skills
• Results can be graphed in relation to goals
• Reliable in terms of stability
• Valid re relationship to broad indicators of
  competence
• Example CBM oral reading fluency and reading
  comprehension

32
Tier I General Education, Universal Stage,
Primary Prevention

• Academics and Behavior
• Scientifically-based
• Explicit instruction
• Systematic intervention
• Inter-related, reciprocal relationships, mutually
  supported
• Discuss separately here, but acknowledge the
  essential inter-relationship of academics and
  behavior

33
Tier I Academic Interventions

• Scientifically-based instruction in reading
• Curricula-content-Big ideas, e.g., reading
• Phonemic Awareness
• Alphabetic principles
• Fluency
• Vocabulary
• Comprehension
• Study of IHEs pre-service preparation in rdg
• 14 of 72 taught all 5 components and many taught
  none, see http//www.nctq.org/nctq/

34
IHEs and SBRR Five Components
Source http//www.nctq.org/nctq
Sample N72

• 5 Components
• Phonemic
• Alphabetic
• Fluency
• Vocabulary
• Compre-hension

43
N31
13
15
7
11
11
N11
N8
N8
N9
N5
Components
5 4 3 2 1 0

35
Tier I Academic Interventions

• Teaching Methodology Explicit Instruction
• Modeling, guided practice, practice to
  automaticity, integration You do it with
  feedback, You do it independently, You do it
  automatically
• Frequent responding with feedback, Brisk pace
• Systematic Instruction
• Sequential, Hierarchical
• Include all reading components each day
• Beat the odds teachers http//rea.mpls.k12.mn.us/
  BEAT_THE_ODDS_-_Kindergarten_Teachers.html

36
Tier I Assessment Academics

• Routine Assessment of Progress
• Screen all students, begin in kindergarten 3
  times per year with appropriate early literacy
  measures
• More intense instruction and monitoring within
  classroom for students below trajectories toward
  passing state benchmark tests
• Grouping, instructional materials, time,
  paraprofessionals Pat Vadasy at U of WA
• Increase assessment to 2 Xs per month

37
Reading Benchmarks (DIBELS)
38
KTG Initial Sound Fluency Fall to January 05-06
Yr.
Benchmark Winter KTG 25 sounds correct/min.
New KTG Teacher and Traditional Instruction

39
KTG Initial Sound Fluency Fall to January 05-06
Yr.
Benchmark Winter KTG 25 sounds correct/min.
Experienced Teacher Direct Instruction

40
Phoneme Seg. Fluency Jan to May 05-06 Yr.
Benchmark 35 correct
New KTG Teacher and Traditional Instruction

41
Phoneme Seg. Fluency Jan to May 05-06 Yr.
Benchmark May 35 per minute
Experienced Teacher Direct Instruction

42
Nonsense Word Fluency Jan to May 05-06 Yr.
Benchmark 25 correct per minute
New KTG Teacher and Traditional Instruction

43
Nonsense Word Fluency Jan to May 05-06 Yr.
Benchmark 25 correct per minute
Experienced Teacher Direct Instruction

44
KTG Initial Sound Fluency Fall to January 05-06
Yr.
Benchmark Winter KTG 25 sounds correct/min.
Students needing greater Genl Ed
monitoring and Interventions
45
1st Gr. Nonsense Word Fluency
Benchmark Winter First Grade 50 Words Per Minute
??
46
Second Grade Oral Reading Fluency Benchmark End
of 1st42 WCM Winter71 WCM
End of 2nd100 WCM
??
47
Behavioral Assessment and CBM Measures

• Focused on determination of change
• Formative evaluation critical
• Tied to effective practices and better outcomes
• Applications in general, remedial, and special
  education
• Identification of disabilities-integrates
  identification with treatment

48
Why Behavior Assessment (including CBM)

• Determine current levels in academics and
  behavior degree of need
• Monitor progress, assess change
• Foundation for formative evaluation-improving
  interventions
• Determine success of interventions
• Decisions based in child response to interventions

49
Foundations of CBM

• Deno Mirkin (1977) Breakthrough
• Brief samples of behavior
• Use of oral reading fluency samples
• Production per unit of time
• Fluency and accuracy combined
• Words read correct per minute
• Math-digits correct
• Spelling-letters correct

50
Prior Barriers to CBM Use

• Cumbersome for practitioners, developing own
  passages
• Conceptual issues Passages from curriculum or
  generic passages?
• Teachers concerns about comprehension Word
  calling??
• Inertia satisfaction with current practices
• IDEA assessment of change not required

51
Reading CBM

• Combines fluency (speed) and accuracy
• Broad range of competencies including
• Letter naming (Ktg)
• Sound identification (Ktg)
• Nonsense words or real word identification (Ktg
  to first grade)
• Oral reading fluency (mid first to high school
• Comprehension (maze, other methods)

52
Importance of Standardized CBM Procedures

• Standardized meaning uniformity in
  administration, scoring, interpretation
• Prerequisite to use of data in
• Determining risk status within classroom or
  school
• Measuring change for individuals or groups
• Predicting later performance

53
Oral Reading Fluency

• What is it?
• Reading aloud fluently and accurately from text.
• Why do it?
• Indicator of proficiency in reading that is
  sensitive to growth
• Highly correlated with performance on
  standardized tests and tests of comprehension
• Provides information that may be used to evaluate
  effects of instruction
• Word Calling Myth

54
Administering Oral Reading Passages

• Essential Items
• -One student copy
• -One administration copy
• -Timer or stopwatch (make sure to time exactly 1
  min)
• -Administration script

55
Instructions to Child

• When I say please begin start reading aloud at
  the top of this page. Read across the page.
  Demonstrate by pointing Try to read each word.
  If you come to a word you dont know, Ill tell
  it to you. If you get to the end of the page,
  start over. Be sure to do your best reading. Are
  there any questions? Pause Please begin.

56
Examiners Administration Rules

• After reading instructions to students,
• Start timer. If the student fails to say the
  first word of the passage after 3 sec., tell
  him/her the word and mark it incorrect. If the
  student stops or struggles with a word for 3
  seconds, tell the student the word and mark it
  incorrect. If the student reaches the end of the
  page and does not continue, point to the first
  word and ask the student to start over. At the
  end of 1 minute, place a bracket after the last
  word and say, please stop.

57
Scoring Rules

• Words must be pronounced correctly to be counted
  as correct
• (disregard if mispronunciations due to speech
  problems or dialect)
• Ignore inserted or repeated words

58
ORF Passage Making Friends(from Deno and Amy
Reschly)

• There once was a little girl named Ann who
  9
• was very shy. She was too shy to make friends.
  19
• Ann lived in an apartment building with her
  mother 28
• and brother. Ann liked to play at the playground
  37
• near her apartment building. 41
• One day Ann was playing on the swings when 50
• Total words read 49
• Words read incorrectly 3
• Words read correctly 46

59
What is recorded?

• Give 3 Passages
• Record the Median Score
• Example
• If a students scores on the 3 passages were
• 24 words read correctly
• 38 words read correctly
• 35 words read correctly
• GO TO VIDEO

60
Sample passage from DIBELS, http//dibels.uoregon.
edu/
The Ant Hill
Dad and I took a hike in the woods. We walked
for a long 14 time and stopped to take a
rest. We sat down on a log and had a 30 drink of
water. A big hill was nearby. 38 Dad
said, "Look, there's an ant hill."
45 I walked up to the hill and took a closer
peek. At first it 59 looked just like
a dirt hill. Then I noticed a few ants running
72 around. I looked closer.
61
Sample passage from DIBELS, http//dibels.uoregon.
edu/
The Rainy Day Picnic I was so sad. This was the
day we were going to the park for 15 a picnic.
I wanted to go to the playground. I wanted to
swing. I 29 wanted to lay on the grass and look
up at the fluffy clouds. But 43 that morning it
was raining. There were puddles
everywhere. 52 And we could hear thunder. I
started to cry. 61 My mother said, "Wait! We
will still have the picnic!" 71 I cried, "But
how? It won't be fun if it's wet!" 82
62
Sample passage from DIBELS, http//dibels.uoregon.
edu/
Visiting Aunt Rose My Aunt Rose invited me to
spend the weekend. Aunt Rose 11 doesn't have
kids. She said I could be her kid for two days.
She's 25 like my big sister. 29 I like to go
to visit my Aunt Rose's home. She likes to do
the 44 same things I like. I like to go swimming.
So does my Aunt 57 Rose. The pool where she goes
also has a hot tub. I like to sit in 73 the hot
tub. So does my Aunt Rose. I always bring my
swimming 86
63
Sample passage from DIBELS, http//dibels.uoregon.
edu/
The Robin's Nest There was a robin's nest
outside our kitchen window. 'I he 10 nest was in
a tall bush. The mother robin sat in the nest all
day 25 long. One day when I was watching, the
mother bird flew away. 37 I saw the eggs she was
sitting on. There were four blue eggs. 50 I
watched and watched. Pretty soon the eggs started
to move. 61 I watched some more until the eggs
started to crack. Finally-, the 73 eggs hatched.
I saw four baby birds. The baby birds opened
their 85 beaks wide. I heard them peeping. Soon
the mother bird came 96 back. Then the mother
robin put worms in their mouths. 106
64
Resources for Reading and Interventions

• Good Kaminski DIBELS http//dibels.uoregon.edu/
  http//www.dibelsassessment.com/
• Gary Germann and Mark Shinn AIMSWEB
• WWW.AIMSWEB.COM WWW.EDFORMATION.COM
• James Wright
• www.interventioncentral.org
• Vaughn-Gross Reading Center
• http//www.texasreading.org/utcrla/
• Florida Reading Center-Torgesen/Wagner
• http//www.fcrr.org/

65
Math CBM

• Scoring rule Count the number of correctly
  written digits in the problems
• 64
• x 722
• 128 Answer
• 128
• 448__
• 46208

66
Math CBM

• Scoring rule Count the number of correctly
  written digits in the problems
• 64
• x 722
• 128 3 pts Answer17
• 128 0 4 pts
• 44800 5 pts
• 46208 5 pts

67
Math CBM

• Scoring rule Count the number of correctly
  written digits in the problems
• 64
• x 722
• 126 2 pts Answer12
• 138 0 3 pts
• 54800 4 pts
• 56206 3 pts

68
Tier I Behavior

• Positive Behavior Supports (www.pbis.org)
• Universal screening for behavior in early grades
• Classroom organization and behavior management
• Teacher Assistance Teams (many names)

69
Tier I Prevention School-wide Positive Behavior
Supports

• National Technical Assistance Center at
  www.pbis.org
• PBS is a broad range of systemic individualized
  strategies for achieving important social
  learning outcomes while preventing problem
  behavior with all students.

70
PBIS Characteristics of Support
1. Common purpose approach to
discipline 2. Clear set of positive expectations
behaviors 3. Procedures for teaching expected
behavior 4. Continuum of procedures for
encouraging expected behavior 5. Continuum of
procedures for discouraging inappropriate
behavior 6. Procedures for on-going monitoring
evaluation
71
Tier I Behavior Early Screening

• Focus on classroom and individuals
• Screen all children for behavior
• Aggressive behaviors-identify and treat at young
  ages
• Treat through age 8 Manage after age 8
• Early intervention much more effective than later
  
• Social isolation
• Bullying
• Classroom related social skills (or academic
  enablers

72
Tier I Behavior Importance of Prevention and
Early Identification-Early Treatment

• Walker et al (1995)
• If antisocial behavior is not changed by the end
  of grade 3, it should be treated as a chronic
  condition much like diabetes. That is, it cannot
  be cured, but managed with the appropriate
  supports and continuing intervention (p. 6).

73
Multiple Gating Procedures (Walker Severson,
1995) Sopris West
Teacher Ranking of Children ( 3 highest ranked)
on Externalizing and Internalizing Behaviors
Teacher Rating (Exceeds Norms)
Direct Observations and Parental Questionnaire
Focused Interventions
74
Behavioral Earthquakes

• Critical Behavioral Events
• High impact-great intensity-low frequency
  behaviors Behavioral Earthquakes
• Fire setting, cruelty, extreme aggressiveness,
  suicide threats/attempts, physical confrontation,
  use of weapons, etc.
• Should provoke immediate referral
• School Archival Records Search (SARS)-Sopris

75
Tier I Behavior cont. Classroom Organization
and Behavior Management (

• http//www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ss/se/classroommgmt.asp
• Kellam, Baltimore Schools
• Students randomly assigned to 1st grade
  teachers, then classroom was the unit of analysis
• Classrooms observed during first 9 wks., high
  rates of disruptive behavior and aggression,
  large differences across classrooms
• Classrooms randomly assigned to,
• Experimental condition Good Behavior Game
  (Barrish, et al, 1969 Sulzer-Azaroff Mayer,
  1991) vs.
• Control condition of in-service on general
  curriculum issues

76
Kellam Research Classroom Organization and
Management

• Good Behavior Game (Barrish, et al., 1969)
• Group contingency
• Two groups formed into teams
• Define rules and positive behaviors
• Teams compete for positive consequences
• Team with highest rate of appropriate behaviors
  earn rewards
• Lining up first, Help teacher pick-up classroom,
  free time, etc.

77
Kellam Research Effects of Good Behavior Game
Were Statistically Significant

• Aggression and disruptive behavior continued in
  control classrooms
• Marked reduction in experimental condition
• Experimental classrooms had higher academic
  productivity and achievement
• Aggressive students in both conditions followed
  through 6th grade and first grade classroom
  effects persisted
• First grade experience sets academic and
  behavioral trajectory

78
Tier I Implications of Behavior

• Classroom organization and behavior management
  are crucial to student success
• Teachers skills at classroom management were
  then critical to childrens socialization,
  particularly in the face of family poverty.
  (Kellam, et al., 1998a, p. 182)
• Teacher training typically does not provide
  effective methods and experience in classroom
  behavior management. (Kellam, et al., 1998, p.
  182).
• Relatively simple, cost effective interventions
  can produce large and persistent effects

79
Teacher Support Teams

• For students who need additional support and
  intervention (1 to 5 of students)
• Classroom based, teacher and/or team develops
• One or two session problem solving
• Minimal data requirements
• Attempts over 3-4 weeks
• Produce changes, then must sustain
• Apply basic problem solving procedures

80
Basic Problem Solving (Teachers and School Teams)
(Heartland Area Education Agency, Johnston, IA)
Define the Problem (Screening and Diagnostic
Assessments)
What is the problem and why is it happening?
Develop a Plan (Goal Setting and Planning)
Evaluate (Progress Monitoring Assessment)
What are we going to do?
Did our plan work?
Implement Plan (Treatment Integrity)
Carry out the intervention
81
Tier I Teacher Support Team Analysis

• What is student doing and why is it a problem
• When is student successful and less likely to
  misbehave?
• When is student less successful and more likely
  to misbehave
• Why does behavior occur, what is student getting
  from the behavior
• What other factors contribute to the behavior
• Consider attention, escape, etc.

82
Principles Secondary Level (Sprick, R.S. (2006).
Discipline in the secondary classroom. San
Francisco Jossey-Bass.) (800-956-7739)

• Basic behavioral strategies, Key concepts
• Instructional design and evaluation systems
• Prepare for routines and procedures
• Expectations Teach students to be successful
• Rules and consequences, responding to misbehavior
• Motivation Enhancing desire to succeed
• Proactive planning for misbehavior

83
Middle and High School RTI Applications

• Same principles and goals Improve Results
• Evidence-based interventions matched to student
  needs implemented with good fidelity
• Data-based, progress monitoring with formative
  evaluation, that is, data on initial status,
  goals related to benchmarks, progress monitoring
  against goals, and changes in interventions based
  on progress
• Decisions based on student responses to
  interventions

84
Middle and High School RTI Applications Frequent
Goals at Middle and High School

• Academic skills deficits
• Teach skills in basic areas including reading and
  math
• See Florida web site for teaching reading to
  adolescents at www.fcrr.org/
• CBM used, progress at gt 1 word correct growth per
  week, goals, graphs, formative evaluation, etc.
• Significant needs for basic instruction

85
Middle and High School RTI Applications Course
Involvement and Completion

• Learning strategies Systematic teaching of
  methods to learn content http//www.ku-crl.org/
• Taught in context of general education classes,
  by general education teachers or special
  education teachers (resource program)
• Significant effect sizes related to completion of
  courses, improved grades, and improved content
  mastery
• Many students with these needs

86
Middle and High School RTI Applications Effort
and Work Completion

• Can Do But Wont Do
• Unintended reinforcement for poor effort and low
  productivity
• Interventions do improve both effort and
  productivity
• Data are critical!!!
• Data followed by interventions, etc.

87
Middle and High School RTI Applications School
Involvement and Drop Out

• Drop out not an event, but a process
• Encouragement to leave or to stay??
• Drop out prevention measures
• Find at risk kids
• Ensure teacher encouragement, someone who cares,
  monitors, encourages
• Formal programs like Check and Connect

88
Middle and High School RTI Applications Middle
and High School Problem Solving

• Define problem
• Determine data, several weeks, months, years
  depending on the problem
• Establish goals, Implement interventions, Monitor
  progress, Change interventions as necessary
• Evaluate results

89
Middle and High School RTI Applications Problem
Solving Example

• Drop Out
• Scientifically-based interventions
• Identify proxies for drop out to permit early
  intervention, e. g., school attendance,
  disciplinary referrals, failing courses, etc.
• Gather data on current conditions
• Establish goals
• Implement interventions
• Monitor progress and change intervention if
  results do not meet reasonable goals

90
Middle and High School RTI Applications Problem
Solving Example

• Failing courses
• Current status
• Causes of failure (effort vs skills or both)
• Goals for improvement (without lowering
  standards)
• Interventions (brainstorm)
• Monitor progress, change interventions as needed
• Evaluate results

91
Summary of Tier I

• Universal level, all students
• Scientifically-based, right content and direct
  instruction
• Greater intensity and increased measurement
  precision for students below benchmark
  trajectories
• Criterion for success? 80 to 85 are at or above
  benchmarks
• Assess classrooms, schools, districts
• Identify students needing additional assistance

92
Tier II Academic and Behavioral Interventions

• Individual behavior interventions in general
  education that meet all criteria for problem
  solving
• Individual or small group academic interventions,
  following
• Standard protocol interventions (reading)
• Individualized academic
• Evidence based practices.

93
Tier II Behavior Problem Solving Criteria

• Behavioral definition of the problem
• Collection of data reflecting current level of
  performance
• Comparison of current level of performance to
  expectations (peer comparisons, age or grade
  norms)
• Development of goals for change in performance
• Analysis of conditions (including prerequisite
  and current skills levels)

94
Tier II Behavior Problem Solving Criteria cont.

• Development of an intervention plan that is
  written, systematic, and based on
  scientifically-based instructional or behavioral
  intervention principles
• Development of an intervention plan that is
  written, systematic, and based on
  scientifically-based instructional or behavioral
  intervention principles
• Implementation of the plan with treatment
  fidelity checks

95
Tier II Behavior Problem Solving Criteria cont.

• Progress monitoring data collected frequently,
  represented graphically, and results compared to
  goals
• Changes are made in the intervention based on
  progress monitoring data
• Evaluation of results with decisions made to
  consider more intensive interventions which may
  be special education

96
Tier II Academic Interventions (Vaughn et al.,
2003 Exceptional Children)

• Goals Move performance to benchmark trajectories
  and, If needed, consider more intensive
  interventions
• Example of Tier II academic intervention
• Small group, N4-5, pull out, similar needs
• 30 to 35 minutes per day in addition to classroom
  instruction
• Progress monitoring weekly
• 10 to 20 weeks of instruction
• 5-component reading interventions, with emphasis
  on weak components

97
Tier II Academics and Behavior

• Targeted individual interventions in classrooms
  and in standard protocol academic settings
• Behavior (attention and on task) predict outcomes
  of academic interventions)
• Standard protocol interventions use a point
  system to prompt and reinforce task engagement
• Improved behavior often is crucial to persistence
  of academic interventions effects over time and
  generalization to classroom settings

98
Standard Protocol Reading Models for Tier II

• http//www.texasreading.org/utcrla/ U Texas,
  Vaughn
• http//www.fcrr.org/ Florida State Torgesen
• Reading five domains taught each day
• Direct instruction
• Weekly progress monitoring
• Individual graphs, progress against goals
  referenced to benchmarks
• Decisions determined by student response
• Fade Tier II and return to general education
• Consider Tier III based on insufficient response

99
Graph Current Status
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark24
Egbert11
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
100
Determine Goal Class1.5 wd growth per week
Egbert Goal 2 wd growth per week
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Class24
Egbert11
Egbert goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
101
Monitor Egberts Progress Relative to Goal
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Class24
Egbert11
Egbert goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
102
Formative Evaluation Change Intervention
Change Intervention
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Class24
Egbert11
Egbert goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
103
Continue Intervention and Monitor Progress
Change Intervention
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Class24
Egbert11
Egbert goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
104
Raise Goal to 2.5 WCM Growth
Change Intervention
Change Goal
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Class24
Egbert11
Egbert goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
105
Continue Intervention and Monitor Progress
Change Intervention
Change Goal
Fade Tier II
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Class24
Egbert11
Egbert goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
106
Decisions Re Egbert

• Fade Tier II academic intervention
• Reduce number of weekly sessions
• Monitor progress to ensure continued progress
• Evaluate behavioral intervention (not shown here)
• Depending on results, consider enhancing, fading,
  or discontinuing
• Do NOT consider more intensive interventions

107
Prevention of Special Education

• Presidents Commission (2002) Values and
  Outcomes
• Efficacy of special education is not universally
  documentedlowered expectations, reduced academic
  press
• Later educational opportunities typically are
  better if learning and behavior problems can be
  resolved in early grades
• Probable later career opportunities are better if
  students can complete general education programs
• Prevention and early intervention enhance
  positive outcomes and expand educational and
  career opportunities

108
Case II Egberta, Academic Intervention

• Egberta (Egberts twin sister)
• Similar performance in reading
• No behavioral issues, described as quiet,
  cooperative child who tries hard and does not
  disrupt the class
• Would not have been referred by teacher, but
  discovered through universal screening

109
Egberta Determine Goal Class1.5 wd growth per
week Egberta Goal 2 wd growth per week
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Class24
Egberta11
Egbert goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
110
Monitor Egbertas Progress Relative to Goal
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Class24
Egberta11
Egberta goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
111
Change Egbertas Intervention
Change Intervention
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Class24
Egberta11
Egberta goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
112
Implement Revised Intervention and Continue to
Monitor Progress
Change Intervention
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Egberta goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
113
Implement Second Intervention Revision
Change Intervention
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Egberta goal line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
114
Gap Not Closing Consider Eligibility and More
Intensive Interventions
Change Intervention
Class WCM54
Words Correct Per Minute
Benchmark
Egberta WCM32
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 14 16 18 20
Weeks
115
Egberta Consideration of Eligibility

• Levels Difference Large performance differences
  compared to peers and benchmark expectations in
  relevant domains of behavior
• Rate Difference Large differences in rate of
  learning compared to peers and trajectories
  toward benchmark standards when provided with
  high quality interventions implemented over a
  significant period
• Documented Adverse Impact on Education
• Documented Need for Special Education
• Exit Criteria
• Exclusion Factors Rule out MR etc.

116
What is a Comprehensive Evaluation

• Note Federal Regulation,
• (g) The child is assessed in all areas related
  to the suspected disability, including, if
  appropriate, health, vision, hearing, social and
  emotional status, general intelligence, academic
  performance, communicative status, and motor
  abilities. (34 C.F.R. 300.532
• Meaning? Note if appropriate

117
Federal Requirements

• Multiple domains must be considered
• Screening in multiple domains followed by, if
  appropriate,
• If potential educationally related deficits are
  suggested by screening, THEN
• In depth assessment in the domain
• Principle If screening suggests adequate
  functioning, then in depth assessment is wasteful
  and irrelevant

118
Comprehensive Evaluation After Tier II
119
Comprehensive Evaluation After Tier II
120
Comprehensive Evaluation Post Tier II
121
Special Education Eligibility Determination Using
RTI

• Recall problems with current system
• Integrate identificaton with treatment
• Level of skills
• Pattern of skills, deficits and strengths
• Evaluation of progress
• Evaluation of outcomes
• Enhance effectiveness of special education

122
Old Models of SLD Identification

• Problems with severe discrepancy criteria
• Unreliable (especially stability of discrepancy
  scores)
• Invalid (IQ discrepant poor readers do NOT
  respond better than IQ non-discrepant poor
  readers to reading instruction)
• Causes Harm (Wait to Fail)

123
Old Models of SLD continued

• Cognitive processing option ??
• Scatter is normal, virtually all children will
  show significant strengths and weaknesses
• Pattern of cognitive processes unrelated to
• More accurate SLD identification
• Improved instruction
• Improved child outcomes
• No scientifically-based studies showing benefits
  of designing instruction from cognitive profiles
• Vested interests? and Burden of proof

124
Cognitive Processing Strengths and Weaknesses

• ALL children have strengths and weaknesses
• Normal readers? Not referred despite cognitive
  strengths and weaknesses
• Poor readers? May be referred and, if so,
  cognitive strengths and weaknesses will be found
• So what??
• Improve accuracy of identification?
• Improve interventions?
• Cash validity is not sufficient

125
Cognitive Processing and Interventions ATI or
Matching Strengths Effects

• Treatment/Intervention Effect Size
• Modality Matched Instr. (Aud.) .03
• Modality Matched Instr. (Vis.) .04
• Simultaneous/Successive .??
• Right Brain/Left Brain .??
• Cultural Leaning Style .00
• NOTHING FOR KIDS
• FEEL GOOD ASSESSMENT

126
Results of ATI Research

• King of England describing his Danish
  brother-in-law There is nothing there.
• Cronbach, (1975). Once we attend to
  interactions, we enter a hall of mirrors that
  extends to infinity. (p. 119)
• Kavale (1999) No supportive data, but cannot kill
  Phoenix-like processing claims
• Vaughn and Linan-Thompson (2003), There is no
  empirical support for the use of modality-matched
  instruction or learning styles as a means to
  enhance outcomes for students with LD. (p. 142).

127
Challenge to Cognitive Processing Advocates in SLD

• Show the field one scientifically-based study
  confirming a statistically significant
  interaction between cognitive processing pattern
  and teaching methodology OR
• Document how cognitive processing can be used by
  practitioners to make reliable and valid SLD
  diagnoses, using the joint APA-AERA-NCME Test
  Standards?

128
Digression Neuropsychology and Neuroscience

• Distinguish between neuropsychology and
  neuroscience
• Neuropsychology is dependent on psychometric
  profiles
• Difference scores are less reliable
• Scatter is normal
• Base rates for profile variations
• Flat profiles are atypical
• Nearly all have profile variations

129
Neuroscience Findings

• Instruction in decoding changes brain functioning
  on fMRI
• Neuroscience findings generally refute
  traditional neuropsychology with learning
  problems
• Neurological functioning more dynamic, less
  static
• Little practical application of fMRI to current
  school psychology practice
• No unique LD markers!!

130
Digression fMRI Studies

• Science article fMRIs of boys and girls engaged
  in decoding-Girls used both hemispheres, boys one
• Implications??
• Do fMRI to find real LD?
• Abandon IQ and go to fMRIs
• Trade the hatchback for an 18 wheeler
• Cost issues 3m per machine, plus maintenance

131
More fMRI Implications

• Delay reading until both hemispheres work for
  males simultaneously
• So that is going to happen?
• Equity issue---restrict girls to one hemisphere
  hemispherectomy
• Hey, fair is fair
• Improve male-female communication if females
  could use only one hemisphere at a time
• Wait until I tell Krisann

132
Disproportionality Legal Requirements

• 300.173 Overidentification and
  disproportionality
• States must collect data on to determine if
  significant disproportionality by race exists re
• Identification of students with disabilities by
  category
• Placement options used, i.e., LRE profile
• Incidence and kind of disciplinary actions
  including suspensions and expulsions

133
Disproportionality Legal Requirements

• 300.173 Overidentification and
  disproportionality continued
• If significant disproportionality exists, the
  state must
• Review and, if appropriate, revise the policies,
  procedures, and practices used in identification
  or placement
• Allocate 15 of IDEA funds to EIS, especially
  focusing on children significantly overidentified
• Require the LEA to publicly report on the
  revision of policies, practices, and procedures
  described under paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

134
NRC Overrepresentation Panel Digression
Disproportionality

• What were the real issues?
• Was IQ the issue?
• Did an IQ test ban resolve disproportionality or
  improve outcomes
• Reschly (1980) Right problem-Wrong Solution

135
NRC Report Causes of Overrepresentation

• Biological factors
• Social factors
• General education experiences
• Special education system

136
Centrality of Outcomes in Disproportionality

• Judge Peckham commenting on the 1979 Trial
  Opinion ban on IQ tests,
• clearly limited to the use of IQ tests in the
  assessment and placement of African-American
  students in dead end programs such as MMR.
  (Crawford and Larry P., 1992, p. 15).

137
Centrality of Outcomes in Disproportionality,
cont.

• Despite the Defendants attempts to
  characterize the courts 1979 order as a
  referendum on the discriminatory nature of IQ
  testing, this courts review of the decision
  reveals that the decision was largely concerned
  with the harm to African-American children
  resulting from improper placement in dead-end
  educational programs. (Crawford and Larry P.,
  1992, p.23).

138
Overrepresentation PanelNRC Recommendations

• Universal early screening for academic and
  behavioral problems (Ktg-Grade2)
• Early identification-interventions
• Multi-tiered academic and behavioral
  interventions
• RtI for eligibility-eliminate IQ for LD
• Eligibility non-categorical for high incidence
  disabilities OR change current classification
  criteria for LD

139
Overall Conclusion
There is substantial evidence with regard to
both behavior and achievement that early
identification and intervention is more effective
than later identification and intervention.
Executive Summary, p. 5 Efficacy of special
education with reading problems after grade 3?
140
Solutions to Significant Disproportionality

• Prevention, especially improving reading
• 60 of 4th grade black students read below
  basic inexcusable!
• Eligibility determination procedures and decision
  making
• Focus on RTI and needs, consider alternatives to
  sp ed
• Intensive interventions and special education
  exit for 20 to 40
• Torgesen et al. studies

141
Overrepresentation PanelNRC Recommendations cont.

• . no IQ test would be required, and the results
  of an IQ test would not be a primary criterion on
  which eligibility rests. Because of the
  irreducible importance of context in the
  recognition and nurturance of achievement, the
  committee regards the effort to assess students
  decontextualized potential or ability as
  inappropriate and scientifically invalid. (p.
  313).

142
RTI in Special Education Programs

• Special education programs should be,
• Scientifically based
• Matched to student need
• Progress monitoring against goals (exit criteria)
• Formative evaluation
• Goal of passing benchmark tests, exiting
• Current special education programs????

143
Special Education for Students with High
Incidence Disabilities

• High Incidence Disabilities
• Mild Mental Retardation
• Emotional Disturbance
• Specific Learning Disability
• Other Health Impaired-Attention Deficit
  Hyperactivity Disorder
• Rate is 1 or more of the general student
  population

144
High Incidence Disabilities

• School age identification
• Usually not identified as adults
• Teacher referral due to poor achievement plus,
  for many, disruptive behavior
• No identifiable biological anomaly, normal
  appearance
• Reading is a major concern for most (70-80)

145
Improving IEPs

• Connect individual evaluation with IEP with
  Special Education Interventions
• Critical IEP Components (relevant to the
  intervention) (not an exhaustive list)
• Present Levels of Educational Performance
• Measurable Annual Goals
• Specifically designed instruction provided by
  qualified personnel
• Participation in the general education curriculum
  and state wide assessments

146
Present Levels of Educational Performance

• Must be related to the full and individual
  evaluation
• Desirable
• Stated in terms of the school curriculum
• Specification of gaps between current performance
  and trajectories toward reaching benchmarks
• Exit criteria for special education dismissal

147
Measurable Annual Goals

• Goals are described in objective, measurable
  terms
• Goals are stated in terms of the general
  education curriculum
• Rate of progress specified, graphed
• Skills specified
• Progress compared to goals
• Interventions changed or goals changed depending
  on progress

148
Specially Designed Instruction

• Uniqueness of special education is NOT in
  different methodologies BUT IS IN
• Intensity, frequency of progress monitoring and
  formative evaluation, precision of goals, and
  specificity of instruction
• Intensity involves time, group size
• Specificity of instruction, thoroughness of
  skills specification, intentional teaching,
  integration with other skills
• Application of explicit, systematic instructional
  methods

149
Special Education Final Remarks

• Special education can be effective
• Set of services brought to students, not a place
• Integrated with general education curriculum
• Strong accountability
• Implementation of scientifically based
  interventions with
• Specification of goals
• Frequent progress monitoring
• Formative evaluation
• Exit criteria

150
Critical Skills/Competencies

• Problem solving-interviewing skills
• Behavior assessment including CBM
• Powerful instructional interventions
• Powerful behavior change interventions
• Relationship skills
• Tailoring assessment to referral concerns

151
Continuing Education Problem solving and system
design

• Reschly, D. J., Tilly, W. D. III, Grimes, J. P.
  (Eds.). (1999). Special education in transition
  Functional assessment and noncategorical
  programming. Longmont, CO Sopris West.
• Bergan, J. R., Kratochwill, T. R. (1990).
  Behavioral consultation and therapy. New York
  Plenum.
• Shinn, M. R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based
  measurement Assessing special children. New
  York Guilford Press.

152
Continuing Education CBM, CBE, Behavioral
Assessment

• Shinn, M. R. (Ed.) (1998). Advanced applications
  of curriculum-based measurement New York
  Guilford Press.
• Shapiro, E. S. (Ed.) (1996). Academic skills
  problems Direct assessment and intervention (2nd
  Ed.). New York Guilford Press.
• Shapiro, E. S., Kratochwill, T. R. (Eds.).
  (2000). Behavioral assessment in schools