Problem Solving: An essential component of RtI

1
Problem SolvingAn essential component of RtI

• Ann Casey, Ph.D.
• Director
• MN Response to Intervention Center
• St. Croix River Ed. District
• acasey_at_scred.k12.mn.us. 651-303-5806

2
What are the Big Ideas?

• What is Response to Intervention?
• What are the foundations of RtI?
• What is Problem Solving in a Response to
  Intervention model?
• How do we begin to implement a Problem Solving
  process in my school?

3
Fundamental Assumptions

• All the students are all our responsibility
• All students can make progress when given the
  amount and kind of support needed
• Teaching to the middle doesnt meet all students
  needs.
• Therefore, we must use our resources in new,
  different and collaborative ways to ensure each
  student is as successful as possible!

4
One final assumption

• Schools and teachers have not been given all the
  tools and/or training needed to implement such a
  model where all resources are organized around
  ensuring each student is as successful as possible

5
RtI and Problem Solving

• School Improvement is the outcome of using
  Problem Solving to implement a Response to
  Intervention model.

6
What is RtI?

• Response to Intervention is a 3 tiered model of
  instructional support for all students
• RtI is a process comprised of 3 main components
• Evidenced Based Instructional practices
• System of Universal Screening and Progress
  Monitoring
• Problem Solving as a decision making system to
  determine who gets what interventions, when and
  by whom

7
Whats a 3-tiered system?
8
(No Transcript)
9
Why a pyramid?
Another way to view the model - an aerial
view The main point is - that all students
deserve a strong instructional foundation
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
10
Why does my school need a 3 tiered system?

• Many schools have had few options for struggling
  students - Title I services or special education
• Those have not been ideal methods in preventing
  failure
• In fact, special education has really been a
  wait to fail model, and Title I is a funding
  source and whether those resources resulted in
  student improvement varies greatly from school to
  school

11
What is Problem Solving in a Response to
Intervention Model?                               
               

• One necessary but not sufficient component - must
  have Evidenced Based instructional practices as
  well as a frequent measurement system in place

12
Problem Solving
RtI an Integrated System
Measurement
Instruction
13
Building PS team IEP consideration
Grade Level teams
Resources for Problem Solving
Teacher Parent
Intensity of the problem
Adapted from Tilly, 2002
14
Origins of Problem Solving

• Bergan (1977) Kratochwill Bergan (1990)
  Behavioral Consultation
• Heartland AEA (IA) started training teams in
  Problem Solving in the late 80s
• SCRED started training teams in a problem solving
  process in the early 90s
• MPS Problem Solving Model - mid 90s as an
  alternative process to identify students with
  mild academic disabilities

15
Problem Solving is used in each part of the
pyramid

• Grade level teams problem-solve regarding core
  instruction as well as deciding who are
  candidates for tier 2 interventions
• A building problem solving team may decide who
  needs more intensive, tier 3 support, including
  special education.

16
Old Problem Solving compared to RtI Problem
Solving

• Old
• Student referred
• One student at a time
• Decisions not necessarily data-based

• RtI
• Teaching teams review data of all students in the
  team
• Students not at benchmark are targeted for Tier 2
  support in addition to strong core instruction

17
Collaborative Problem Solving

• Grade level teaching teams meet together on a
  regular basis to review student data and student
  progress toward important goals
• Students not making adequate progress receive
  additional targeted or intensive support

18
Problem Solving A 5 step process

• Problem Identification
• Problem Analysis
• Plan Development
• Plan Implementation
• Plan Evaluation

19
Problem Identification

• This step is about clearly defining the problem
  in terms of alterable variables
• Lets start with student data.
• Cant wait until 3rd grade to see who is not
  successful
• We need a measure that is easy to use and highly
  predictive
• Something we can use much earlier when
  intervention can change the trajectory

20
Problem Identification

• An example The second grade team has identified
  10 students out of 75 students who are not at
  benchmark.

21
What is the problem?

• If the benchmark in fall for 2nd graders is 32
  cwpm, the problem is that we have 10 students
  below benchmark.
• What other data might you need to determine more
  specifically why these students are not reading
  at benchmark?

22
(No Transcript)
23
Problem Analysis

• Why is the problem happening?
• This step helps us look at data to make
  hypotheses about why students arent being
  successful
• Those hypotheses then help us choose
  interventions that best fit the identified
  problem

24
Problem Analysis - is about the why

• Is the problem due to
• Curriculum - what is taught
• Instruction - how its taught
• Educational Environment - where the instruction
  takes place
• variables unique to the Learner - who is being
  taught prior knowledge
• caution - try not to focus on fixed or
  unalterable variables.

25
Use RIOT procedures to analyze those 4 areas

• Review - existing data, records
• Interview - teachers, student, parents
• Observe - student engagement, other relevant
  variables
• Test - pattern of errors, prosody, fluency,
  comprehension

26
Problem Analysis 2nd grade example

• Curriculum is HM the Nations Choice - found to
  be a core program that is evidenced based
• The teacher was interviewed and also observed by
  a coach and it was determined that the curriculum
  was being implemented with fidelity

27
P.A. continued

• Lets say we did running records (test/observe)
  on the 10 students below benchmark
• We find that 7 of the 10 students did not have
  strong sound/symbol relationships
• 3 students read with 3 or fewer errors, but were
  word-by-word readers
• If 1 student read considerably well when tested
  one/one - what hypothesis would you make?
• What kind of instruction will they need?

28
Plan Development

• What should we do about the problem?
• What do we know that will help with developing a
  plan?
• What other information might we need?

29
Plan Implementation

• We need at least 2 groups - tier 2 supports.
  Does a student who does not demonstrate a skill
  deficit need a tier 2 intervention?
• What measurable goals could you write for these 2
  groups

30
Sample Goal statements

• Given 44 sounds, the students will demonstrate 95
  accuracy within 3 weeks on isolated letter
  sound probes
• Given 1st grade decodable text, the students will
  read 30 cwpm with 5 or fewer errors in 6 weeks.
• Given late 1st grade text, students will read 50
  cwpm with fluency and expression and 3 or fewer
  errors.

31
Maria S. Goal read 55 cwpm in late 1st grade
decodable text
70
60
50
Goal line
Words Read Correctly/min.
40
30
20
10
0
9/14
9/21
9/28
10/5
10/12
32
What interventions shall we use?

• Write down some ideas you have for each of the 2
  groups.

33
How do we find targeted curriculum/instruction
that is evidenced based?

• What Works Clearing House - www.whatworks.ed.gov
• Oregon Reading First-oregonreadingfirst.uoregon.ed
  u/
• curriculum_review.php
• Promising Practices - www.promisingpractices.net

34
Plan continued

• Teaching team generates some ideas, and then
  selects one for each group that is matched to
  student needs
• Then the team must identify who is going to
  provide the interventions and when it will
  happen.
• This should not supplant the core instruction

35
Instructional Plan
T Sharon G M-F 1015-1045 WCPM weekly on
F Review Date 10-12-07 Intervention RM Fast
Cycle Students Joan Brandon H Ava Quentin Jorge J
ackson Maria E
T Joyce M-F 1045 - 1115 WCPM weekly on
F. Review Date 10-12-07 Intervention Read
Naturally Students John Samantha Maria S
36
Intervention Integrity

• Interventions may not be successful for 3 general
  reasons
• (1) not a good match (fit) to student needs or
• (2) it might be a good fit but not of sufficient
  strength (amount/dosage)
• (3) the intervention design was not followed as
  it was designed (integrity)

37
Potential Implementation Issues

• Consider time efficiency
• Complexity - interventions need to be easily
  understood
• Resources needed
• Teacher motivation - efficacy data are the best
  motivators

38
Key Features of accuracy of implementation

• Adhere to established procedures/protocols
• Implement for the intended length of time
  (dosage)
• Can use intervention scripts this helps the
  intervener as well as the person observing for
  adherence

39
Plan Evaluation

• Did our plan work?
• Which students met the goal? What should we do to
  maintain that progress?
• Which students did not meet the goal?
• Decide whether students need to continue longer
  in the intervention to show progress
• Or whether to alter the intervention
• Or to discontinue and try a different evidenced
  based practice

40
Maria S. Goal read 55 cwpm in late 1st grade
decodable text
70
60
50
Goal line
Words Read Correctly/min.
40
30
20
10
0
9/14
9/21
9/28
10/5
10/12
41
Cycle back to Problem Analysis

• Further analysis of the concerns is warranted
  when students are not making the expected
  progress
• When a more intensive intervention is recommended
  (more time, smaller group) and considered a Tier
  3 support, more individualized problem-solving
  records should be kept

42
Tier 3

• Some students will respond to more intensive
  interventions, and return to Tier 2 or 1 support
  levels.
• Other students will demonstrate a need for
  ongoing intensive intervention, and may be
  considered for special education services.
• The problem solving records will become integral
  components of the referral and special education
  evaluation process in an RtI Model

43
Tier 3 planning form
1. Define behavior (providing specifics from Tier
2) - data, intervention, what worked, what didnt
work
2. Current vs. expected performance - frequency,
level, rate, accuracy
3. State specific goal
4. List possible interventions and rate the
likelihood of success- create hypotheses about
why the student is not progressing and try to
address those
5. Write the intervention plan with integrity
check indicating who is responsible, when it
will occur, for how long, and date of follow-up
44
Tier 3 continued concern

• For those students who continue to be far from
  the goal, and the data indicate that the student
  may need ongoing, intensive instruction, then
  staff may consider referring for special
  education services
• Intensive services are generally defined as those
  that can not be maintained over time by the
  general ed. teacher

45
RtI and Special Education

• In MN, districts have a choice between using a
  Response to Intervention approach or the
  traditional Ability-Achievement discrepancy
  formula for identifying students with learning
  problems.

46
Selected References

• Jimerson, S., Burns, M., VanDerHeyden. A.
  2007. Handbook of Response to Intervention