Problem Solving Model in Detail Preparation for Implementation

1
Problem Solving Model in Detail Preparation for
Implementation

• Dr. Tom Jenkins, Director Exceptional Children
  Division
• Educational Consultation Services NCDPI
• Wilmington, NC June-August 2007

2
What To Expect The Next Two Days

• Hello, thank you, and a little about me
• Energizer!
• Why change, why now?
• Legislation
• Research
• What is RTI?
• PSM
• CBM
• Prerequisites
• Conceptual
• Applied activities
• PSM in Detail
• Characteristics
• Procedures
• Forms
• Case Studies
• Final Thoughts and Conclusions
• Three Tier vs Four Level
• Universal Design

3
Energizer!

• Team Building

4
Shift Happens

• Why change, why now?
• Legislation is necessitating a change
• Research has shown that there is a better way

5
Current Legislation

• Response to Intervention
• Eligibility for special education is dependent
  upon three criteria
• Child does not achieve commensurate with his/her
  age or ability levels in the traditional seven
  areas and
• Child exhibits a pattern of strengths and
  weaknesses in performance and/or cognitive
  abilities that is determined to be relevant,
  using appropriate assessments and
• If RTI is used, child fails to make sufficient
  progress to meet SEA approved outcomes in one of
  the seven areas

6
IDEA

• Goes on to say
• the LEA shall not be required to take into
  consideration whether a child has a severe
  discrepancy between achievement and intellectual
  ability
• In determining whether a child has a specific
  learning disability, a LEA may use a process
  which determines if a child responds to a
  scientific, research based intervention

7
RTI

• What is a comprehensive evaluation?
• RTI advocates two principles
• Assessments should have a relationship to
  positive child outcomes, not just predictions of
  failure
• Assessments without this relationship do little
  to benefit children and waste precious time and
  resources

8
RTI

• Second principle advocated by RTI
• Brief screening measures of IQ can be used to
  rule out mental retardation if suspected
• If mental retardation is not suspected and given
  the rejection of the discrepancy model, measures
  of IQ have no role in LD diagnosis

9
RTI

• RTI operationalizes disability by documenting
• Slow rate of learning and
• Large differences from age or grade expectations
  despite high quality, scientifically based
  interventions provided to the child

10
RTI

• Thus, assessment in RTI focuses on achievement,
  behavior, and the instructional environment
• These things are measurable and changeable
• Related to child outcomes
• And allow for in depth analysis of performance
  relative to peers
• Thus, intervention is aimed at improving rate and
  level of skill development

11
RTI

• Focusing only on the child, as in the traditional
  methods, leads to missing extremely important
  factors
• Some studies that previously would have been
  identified as LD are merely instructional
  causalities
• Not exposed to early literacy skills
• Given marginally effective general education
• Exposed to instruction that had not been
  scientifically validated
• Instruction was implemented with poor integrity

12
RTI

• The core of RTI assessments includes measures all
  domains that may affect achievement
• Thus, a comprehensive assessment includes
  screening in all areas that may affect
  achievement (hearing, vision, etc) followed by in
  depth assessments in
• Current academic skills
• Instructional environment
• Behaviors
• Interventions

13
RTI

• Also, focuses on assessment of instructional
  principles
• Variables assessed and considered for
  intervention include
• Time allocated for instruction
• Academic learning time
• Pacing of instruction
• Number of opportunities to respond
• Sequencing of examples and non-examples of skills
• etc

14
RTI

• Assessment components also inform decision makers
  about what to teach
• Uses the principal of convergent validity and
  comparative data from multiply sources across
  multiple settings to inform decision making
• Also includes a measure of treatment integrity of
  interventions

15
RTI

• RTI focuses on
• Measurement of intervention effectiveness
• Early identification and early intervention
• A graduated series of increasingly intense
  interventions guided by data based decision making

16
RTI

• Disability is identified as (pilot sites)
• Low level of performance in relation to peers
• Slow growth rates compared to peers despite
  interventions
• Adverse impact on educational performance
• Documented need for EC (intensity of service)
• EC exit criteria defining goals for EC program

17
Shift Happens

• What the research has shown
• Discrepancy Model

18
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model

• Macmann et al. (1989) examined students with LD
  and students not identified as LD
• Using different discrepancy models they found
  classification agreement rates from .57 to .86

19
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model

• Clarizio and Bennett (1987) found that when
  various IQ and achievement tests are used the
  agreement rates drops to below .25
• This indicates that only one out of four students
  identified as having a LD would be identified as
  LD again when different IQ and achievement tests
  were used

20
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model

• Ysseldyke et al. (1979) used several standardized
  tests in an attempt to differentiate between
  students identified as LD and students identified
  as low achieving
• No practical statistically significant difference
  was found between the two groups

21
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model

• Additionally, they found that at least half of
  the sample received identical scores
• Finally, they found that 40 of the 99 students
  were misclassified
• No important psychometric differences between
  students with LD and low achieving students

22
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model

• Results similar to these can be found over and
  over again in the research
• White and Wigle (1986)
• Sinclair and Alexson (1986)
• Warner et al. (1980)
• Marston et al. (1983)
• Kavale and Forness (2001) (index of discrepancy)

23
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model (2)

• Kavale and Forness (2001) contended that the
  discrepancy model is ignored in actual practice

24
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model

• Gottlieb et al. (1994) found that their sample of
  students with LD had an IQ score that was one and
  a half standard deviations below the comparison
  group of students without LD
• They contended that students were being
  identified as LD despite not having the
  discrepancy

25
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model (4)

• Insensitive to the developmental stages of
  learning
• If elementary age student evidences difficulties
  with reading and secondary student evidences
  difficulties with reading, the root of those
  difficulties is likely to be different

26
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model

• Thus, only about 2 of first graders with
  difficulties in phonological awareness and word
  id will display necessary discrepancy to qualify
• About 25 of secondary students would be
  identified by the discrepancy model
• Leads to under identification of younger children
  with whom interventions would be more successful

27
The Fall of IQ and the Discrepancy Model

• This is commonly referred to as the Wait To Fail
  Model
• With discrepancy models the average age of
  identification for students with LD is 10
• This results is students having to struggle and
  fail to master academic skills until they finally
  obtain an achievement score that is low enough to
  produce a discrepancy (Fletcher et al., 1998)

28
Why Response to Intervention?

• RTI is the marriage of CBM and PSM
• What is so great about CBM and PSM?

29
What is this magic?

• Curriculum-based measurement
• Data collection tools derived directly from the
  curriculum that student is expected to learn

30
CBM

• CBM is believed to reduce the gap between
  assessment and instruction
• Aides teachers in generating superior student
  achievement
• Improved communication
• Higher level of sensitivity
• Enhancement of the database
• Administration time is shorter
• More cost effective

31
CBM

• Because CBM is directly tied to the curriculum,
  possesses higher level of sensitivity, and allows
  for graphic representation it allows for
  development of a higher quality IEP
• CBM allows teachers to identify specific
  curriculum deficiencies and instructional
  strategies

32
CBM

• Mirkin et al. (1982) in a study of 50 teachers
• 90 of the teachers stated that using CBM
  improved IEP objective and goal development,
  student progress monitoring, and instructional
  decision making
• Fuchs and Fuchs (1999) argued that CBM allows for
  IEPs focused on student outcomes instead of a
  laundry list of short-term objectives

33
CBM

• The simplicity of CBM allows for quick and easy
  peer referencing
• Normative data can be collected
• This allows for comparison of a students
  performance to his/her actual peer group
• More representative geographically, culturally,
  ethnically, and has been exposed to similar
  instructional environment

34
CBM

• CBM has been shown to posses high levels of
  reliability
• 42 one-minute CBM type assessments in reading,
  math, and written expression for grade K-5 were
  found to have reliability coefficients between
  .90-.99 with just three one-minute
  administrations (Jenkins, 2002)

35
CBM

• Discriminant Validity
• Several studies have demonstrated the ability of
  CBM to differentiate between students receiving
  special education services, students receiving
  Chapter 1 services, and students not receiving
  any of those services (Deno, Marston, Shinn, and
  Tindal, 1983 Marston and Deno, 1982 Shinn and
  Marston, 1985 and Shinn, Tindal, Spira, and
  Marston, 1987).

36
What is this magic?

• Problem-solving model (PSM)
• An approach to developing interventions and
  ensuring positive student outcomes, rather than
  determining failure or deviance (Deno, 1995).
• Seven step cyclical process that is inductive,
  empirical, and rooted in behavioral analysis
• See graphic

37
PSM

• From 1977 to 1994 the number of students with
  disabilities grew from 3.7 million to 5.3 million
  despite school enrollment remaining constant
• Collaborative problem-solving by a
  multidisciplinary team is believed to be a way to
  eliminate inappropriate referrals and increase
  the legitimacy of the referrals initiated

38
PSM

• 42 of the students that went through the PSM/CBM
  process were found to display significant
  progress as a result of the model
• Additionally, students were found to make
  significant progress regardless of gender, grade,
  SES, or race

39
PSM

• Regular education teachers indicated that they
  agreed that the PSM/CBM system benefited
  students, was effective, provided data that were
  helpful and good indicators of student
  performance, and provided helpful interventions
  for the students
• All 3s on a 4 point Likert scale

40
Impact of STRIDES on Special Education
Referrals, Eligibility, and Disproportionality in
Grades K, 1, and 3 at Pearl Sample
41
PSM

• Laut et al. (2001) implemented a PSM/CBM model in
  three elementary schools
• 77 of the students that went through the
  previous (TAT) pre-referral process were referred
  for testing and only 35 qualified for special
  education services
• With the PSM/CBM model 50 of the students that
  went through the process were sent for testing
  and 75 were found eligible for special education
  services

42
PSM

• 70 of K-5 initial placements first year are from
  K-2nd grade.
• 76
• 80
• After first year there has been an 81 reduction
  in Special Ed placements across 25 K-5 schools.
• An additional 6 reduction
• After first year there was a 45 reduction is
  special education placements for black males.
• An additional 22 reduction
• Parents satisfaction surveys indicate higher
  level of approval for the new process.

43
PSM

• More global results

44
What about the NC pilot sites?

• New Hanover County
• Two state pilot schools
• Two students entitled in 2005-2006, the rest
  either made significant progress and were
  discontinued or are making progress and do not
  need entitlement considering at the point
• Both students identified for entitlement were
  kindergarteners
• Mary C. Williams 15 retentions last year, six
  this year

45
What about the NC pilot sites?

• Harnett County
• Lillington-Shawtown Elementary (623 students)
• 3 students identified as entitled
• Gentry Primary (292 students)
• 2 students identified as entitled

46
What data was examined?

• Grades kindergarten through third
• Outcome variable reading scores as reported on
  nine week progress reports (4 per school year)
• Comparison between last year of the building
  assistance team and first year of problem solving
  team
• (Adrian Hurst, 2006)

47
Results

• All nine-week grades were higher for the PSM
  group compared to BAT group.
• Middle two periods differences were statistically
  significant (.05)
• Trend line slightly higher for PSM group
• (Adrian Hurst, 2006)

48
Impact on Student Learning

• Reading scores improved for kindergarten through
  third grades.
• Teachers feel that action is taken earlier to
  help struggling students

49
Other Implementation Sites

• Meta-analysis of RTI research (Burns, Appleton,
  and Stehouwer, 2006)
• Heartland Agency Model
• Ohios Intervention Based Assessment
• Minneapolis Public Schools PSM
• Penn Instructional Support Team

50
Other Implementation Sites

• Strong effects in improving student learning and
  systemic variables with mean effect sizes of .96
  and 1.53 respectively
• Lead to fewer students being identified as LD
• Less than 2 vs 5 (DSM-IV-TR) and 5.7 (U.S.
  Department of Ed)

51
Prerequisites

• Model oriented to meet the needs of diverse
  learners within school districts
• PSM attempts to identify and implement best
  educational strategies to meet the needs of all
  learners
• Thus, it requires significant changes in mind set
  and philosophy
• Step out of the box!

52
Prerequisites

• Changes in mind-set that are necessary for all of
  those involved
• Student problems can be defined and changed
• Questions drive assessments
• Enabled learning rather than discrepancy or
  diagnosis is the goal
• Intervention is derived from analysis of baseline
  data

53
Prerequisites

• Changes in philosophy that are necessary for all
  of those involved
• All children can learn
• Educators are responsible to meet the needs of
  all children
• Parents possess a wealth of knowledge about their
  children and should be partners in the
  educational system
• Solutions and strategies are best identified when
  educators, parents, and others involved work
  collaboratively

54
Prerequisites

• Philosophy continued
• Proactive instruction should be provided within
  general education setting, so children are
  assisted before concerns arise
• Prevention is more cost effective than
  remediation
• Childrens needs should be met in the general
  education setting whenever appropriate
• Teachers and parents deserve the resources
  necessary to meet the educational needs of all
  children

55
Prerequisites

• Philosophy continued
• Effectiveness of educational strategies must be
  evaluated frequently
• Accurate information about student progress
  should be communicated regularly
• Educational system must provide opportunities for
  all children to achieve their goals
• Best educational strategy is the one that works

56
Prerequisites

• Problem-solving involves both a conceptual and
  applied activity
• Activities that are necessary prior to a
  successful implementation include
• Training
• Local norming

57
Local Norming

• Local Norming Project (optional)
• Shinns Five tasks
• First, a representative set of curriculum probes
  must be compiled for each grade to be assessed
• Develop a norming plan
• Put together a norming team
• Conduct the norming project
• Summarize your data in a meaningful way

58
What Do You Assess?

• Marker variables, precursor skills, background
  skills, basic skills to are predictive or are
  the building blocks of higher order skills
• For example

59
Advantages of Local Norms

• Norms allow for comparison of a students
  performance to more appropriate normative sample
  than national norm
• Normative data is based on students actual peer
  group that is more typically representative of
  the students geographical region, culture,
  ethnicity, and instructional environment

60
Advantages of Local Norms

• Allow for educators to develop an understanding
  of a students competence in the local school
  curriculum that is being used for instruction
  relative to the students actual classmates
  (Deno, 1985, p230)
• Local norms have also been found to decrease bias
  (Oakland Matuszek, 1977)

61
Norming Procedures

• Quickly review each norming probe for each grade
  level
• Remember different modalities
• Given the nature of reading probes they must be
  administered individually
• Math and written expression may be administered
  in a group setting
• What might this look like?

62
Kindergarten Norming Probes

• Letter Identification (Hear to Write)
• Letter Identification (See to Say)
• Beginning and Ending Phoneme Identification (See
  to Say)
• Sight Word Identification (See to Say)
• Number Identification (Hear to Write)

63
First Grade Norming Probes

• Letter Identification (Hear to Write)
• Phoneme Identification (See to Say)
• Blend Identification (See to Say)
• Blend Identification (Hear to Write)

• Sight Word Identification (See to Say)
• Identify Words in Sentences (See to Say)
• Number Identification (Hear to Write)
• Subtraction Answers to 9
• Addition Sums 0-10

64
Second Grade Norming Probes

• Phoneme Identification (See to Say)
• Blend Identification (See to Say)
• Sight Word Identification (See to Say)
• Identify Words in Sentences (See to Say)
• Identify Words in Passage (See to Say)

• Double Digit Subtraction Without Regrouping
• Double and Single Digit Addition Without
  Regrouping

65
Third Grade Norming Probes

• Phoneme Identification (See to Say)
• Blend Identification (See to Say)
• Sight Word Identification (See to Say)
• Identify Words in Passage (See to Say)
• Spelling (Hear to Write)
• Written Expression

• Double Digit Addition with Regrouping
• Double Digit Subtraction with Regrouping
• Multiplication Multiply by 0-12
• Math Word Problems Addition and Subtraction,
  Sums 0-100 Without Regrouping)

66
Fourth Grade Norming Probes

• Sight Words Identification (See to Say)
• Identify Words in Passage (See to Say)
• Spelling (Hear to Write)
• Written Expression

• Mixed Math Division, Multiplication,
  Subtraction, and Addition
• Multiplication - Multiply by 0-12
• Math Word Problems Addition, Subtraction,
  Multiplication and Division

67
Fifth Grade Norming Probes

• Sight Words Identification (See to Say)
• Identify Words in Passage (See to Say)
• Spelling (Hear to Write)
• Written Expression

• Mixed Math Division, Multiplication,
  Subtraction, and Addition
• Multiplication - Multiply by 0-12
• Math Word Problems Addition, Subtraction,
  Multiplication and Division

68
Norming Procedures

• Norming Plan
• Identify a sample that is representative of your
  district population gender, SES, and ethnicity
• Need at least 100 students for each grade level
  to obtain adequate stability of data
• Dont need to use all schools, just compilation
  of schools that best match district population
• Pull randomly from school rosters BEST PRACTICE

69
Norming Procedures

• Norming Plan
• To obtain fall (August to November), winter
  (December to February), and spring (March to
  June) norms, norming should be conducted in
  October, January, and April
• Each probe should be administered three times,
  each season, to each student in the sample
• Days of administration is dependent on number of
  schools included plan on at least a week

70
Norming Procedures

• Norming Team
• Team composition is up to you, but will need
  about 8-12 people
• Each person must be trained in CBM administration
  and scoring procedures
• No certification necessary

71
The End Result

• Norms
• Intra and inter district results
• Growth rates

72
Training

• Important to at least have training on the two
  components of RTI
• PSM in detail
• CBM/formative evaluation (charting and progress
  monitoring)
• Dont forget peer reviewed research based
  interventions, team building, local norming, and
  case studies

73
Implementation of a RTI System

• Iowa Model
• PSM implemented in conjunction with CBM type
  assessments

74
Implementation of a RTI System

• All seven cyclical stages of problem-solving
  model occur on four different levels
• Movement through the levels is dependent upon the
  intensity of the problem and the intensity of the
  services needed to adequately meets the students
  needs
• See graphic

75
Implementation of a RTI System

• First three levels call for implementation of PSM
  and CBM in the general education setting
• Fourth level represents entitled individuals
  the highest level of service intensity

76
PSM Procedures

• Activities at Level I
• Parent and teacher working together to Define the
  Problem
• What is it?
• When does it occur?
• Why is this happening?
• Analyze baseline data or develop plan for
  collecting baseline data?

77
PSM Procedures

• Activities at Level I
• Based on baseline data develop an intervention
  plan
• Parent and teacher together brainstorm ideas for
  interventions
• Develop progress monitoring plan
• Set time table for reconvening to evaluate
  interventions

78
PSM Procedures

• Activities at Level I
• Intervention plan is implemented
• Evaluate
• Teacher and parent use progress monitoring data
  to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions

79
PSM Procedures

• Activities at Level II
• Steps of cyclical problem-solving model repeat,
  but more school personnel are involved as needed
• Parent
• Teacher
• Counselor, school psychologist, reading teacher,
  administrator, social worker, nurse, etc.

80
PSM Procedures

• Activities at Level III
• Steps of cyclical problem-solving model repeat
  but in a more formal and systematic way and with
  the school-based problem solving team
• Team consists of referring teacher, parent,
  administrator, psychologist, EC staff member,
  counselor, regular education representative,
  anyone else needed

81
PSM

• Implementation at the third level is guided by
  nine principles of the PSM

82
PSM

• Principle 1
• Should involve seven steps
• Develop behavioral definition of the problem
• Generate hypothesis and assessment questions
  related to problem
• Functional and multi-dimensional assessment to
  test hypothesis and respond to questions
• Generation of goal statement
• Develop and implement intervention
• Progress monitoring
• Decision-making about effectiveness of
  intervention

83
PSM

• Principle 2
• Collaborative consultation is the means by which
  PSM is conducted
• Team work
• No longer does one expert make determinations
• Each member of team provides their expertise from
  their perspective

84
PSM

• Principle 3
• Develop hypothesis as to why the problem is
  occurring
• The hypothesis is tested through assessment
  questions and baseline data collection
• Hypothesis is designed collaboratively

85
PSM

• Principle 4
• Functional assessment procedures are implemented
• Assessment is performed relevant to the
  identified problem, rather than determination of
  disability
• Data is collected to prove or disprove
  hypothesis, answer assessment questions, and
  provide basis for interventions
• Data serves as baseline, comparison to peers, and
  progress monitoring

86
PSM

• Principal 5
• Implementation of multi-dimensional assessment
  procedures RIOT
• Four domains are considered, environment,
  curriculum, instruction, and learner
• It is erroneous to conceptualize problems as
  always belonging to the learner
• Review, Interview, Observe, and Test in all four
  domains if relevant

87
PSM

• Principal 6
• Goals identified that should occur as result of
  intervention
• Performance described in concrete, measurable
  terms
• Period of time for intervention identified
• Exit criteria for intervention (if involving a
  program placement) identified

88
PSM

• Principle 7
• Development of prescriptive interventions
• Based on data collected and address changeable
  variables in the relevant domains
• Intervention is a team effort, direct service,
  progress monitoring, on-going consultation and
  technical assistance
• Effectiveness of intervention continuously tested
  and changes made when necessary

89
PSM

• Principle 8
• Progress monitoring
• Data collected regularly and frequently
• Data graphed and analyzed
• Effectiveness of intervention analyzed and
  changes made when needed

90
PSM

• Principle 9
• Decision making based on progress monitoring data
• Response to intervention evaluated based on
  progress monitoring data relative to goal
• Continue intervention, change intervention, new
  intervention,
• Evaluation of program, modify program, exit
  program

91
PSM Procedures

• Formalization of process
• Problem-solving model forms are completed to
  document each step of the process
• Baseline, goal setting, and progress monitoring
  data are systematically collected and charted to
  provide visual representation of skill
  acquisition
• Research based interventions are implemented
• In final step data is provided as evidence that
  student is in need or not in need of intervention
  with highest level of intensity special
  education services

92
Define the Problem

• In general - Identify initial concern
• General description of problem
• Prioritize and select target behavior
• Describe what is known about problem and generate
  questions
• Environment
• Instruction
• Curriculum
• Learner
• Observable and measurable terms stranger test?

93
Define the Problem

• The most difficulty step of the model
• Done collaboratively
• However, if done correctly, solution ideas easily
  follow
• Describe the problem precisely, then formulate
  hypothesis, predictions, and referral questions

94
Define the Problem

• Characteristics of a definition
• Concrete, observable terms (understanding long
  division accurate completion of long division
  problems) a stranger can determine if behavior
  has occurred
• Measurable difficult to count number of times
  student understood division easily to count
  digits completed correctly in a division problem
• Specific break things down into its smallest
  components appropriate classroom behavior
  attending to task, remaining in seat, etc
• Leads to interventions poor accuracy when
  applying phonological principles leads to
  assessment and intervention ideas

95
Define the Problem

• Procedures for defining the problem
• Select target behavior teacher may have several
  concerns, prioritize according to significance of
  impact
• Define in concrete, observable, and measurable
  terms, everyone should agree
• Hypothesize an explanation for the problem based
  on the definition consider modifiable factors
  John is off task because he is distracted by
  noises in the classroom
• Predict change in student behavior, use if/then
  wording If classroom is quiet then bill will
  not be distracted
• Develop assessment questions to be answered
  questions stem from hypothesis and predictions
  data collected supports or refutes hypothesis
  consider setting, current level of performance,
  frequency, intensity, and duration of problem

96
Define the Problem

• Procedures for defining the problem continued
• Hypothesis development
• Traditionally hypotheses have been circular
  student has problem because has disability,
  student has disability because has problem
• This is not useful when planning interventions
• Hypotheses should be stated in following manner
  Toms out of seat behavior in math because he
  lacks the computation skills necessary to
  complete the independent seatwork
• Hypotheses are generated in a type of
  brainstorming session

97
Define the Problem

• Procedures for defining the problem continued
• Hypothesis development
• Five types of hypotheses
• Curricular is curriculum appropriate for
  student? Consider sequence of objectives,
  teaching methods, and practice materials provided
• Instructional manner in which teacher uses
  curriculum consider instructional techniques,
  presentation style, questioning, feedback
  techniques
• Environment how environment effects learning
  arrangement of classroom, material, media
  equipment
• Student skill necessary prerequisite skills
• Student process capacity to learn and problem
  solving techniques

98
Case Study Number One

• Fifth grade female - Natasha
• Having difficulties with reading
• Changed schools twice this school year
• Good attendance

99
Natasha

• Receives regular classroom instruction
• Attended summer school between fourth and fifth
  grade
• Attends after school tutorial twice a week
• Has preferential seating and receives individual
  check-ins from teacher during class
• Receives speech/language services with language
  goals

100
Natasha

• Star level 3.1 has displayed slow progress
  since the beginning of school
• EOGs have been 2s and 3s - progress on
  speech/language IEP has helped her get promoted

101
Natasha

• A very hard worker, with great attitude
• Mother reads with her at home and is willing to
  do whatever to help
• Natasha has some difficulties with attention in
  the home and classroom environment
• Mom wonders if she has ADD

102
Natasha

• Define the problem
• Concrete, observable, measurable, specific
• Hypothesize 5 types
• Assessment questions to test hypotheses
• What does it look like?

103
Develop the Assessment Plan

• In general - develop assessment plan to answer
  questions generated validate target behavior
• Data across four domains should be gathered from
  multiple sources RIOT
• Reviews
• Interviews
• Observations
• Tests
• Roles, responsibilities, and timeline

104
Assessment Plan

• Assessments must be functional
• Direct link between assessment and intervention
• Data is collected regarding skill deficits and/or
  performance deficits, academic and/or
  non-academic behaviors
• Questions drive assessments
• Data leads to instructional decisions and goal
  setting

105
Assessment Plan

• Characteristics of functional assessments
• Relevance collect data directly related to
  problem, hypothesis, and questions no standard
  comprehensive test battery
• Direct assessments are derived from curriculum,
  behaviors and environment are observed in
  relevant settings
• Multi-dimensional data collected regarding
  environment, curriculum, instruction, and learner
  using RIOT
• Formative data is used to formulate
  interventions data pinpoints deficiencies and
  deficits data also identifies variables
  affecting student performance, environment,
  instruction, curriculum
• Individually focused assessments focus on
  identifying individuals strengths and weaknesses
  and establishing a baseline
• Technically adequate reliable and valid for
  their intended purpose

106
Assessment Plan

• Data is collected regarding
• Environmental variables class size, physical
  arrangement of classroom, equipment and
  materials, etc
• Instructional variables behaviors and
  techniques used by teacher questioning
  techniques, feedback, behavior management,
  prompts
• Curricular variables pacing, sequence, scope,
  opportunities for practice, leveling of students
• Student variables academic portfolio of student
  and consideration of a skill deficit or a
  performance deficit

107
Assessment Plan

• RIOT
• Review, Interview, Observe, Test
• Review records and work samples, interview staff
  and parents, testing involves CBM
• Proceed from general to specific
• Global vision, hearing, environmental factors
• Specific assessment aimed at answering assessment
  questions specific strengths and weaknesses in
  academic portfolio curricular, instructional,
  and environmental factors affecting performance

108
Natasha

• Develop an Assessment Plan
• Questions drive assessments
• Test hypotheses
• RIOT
• Four domains
• What does it look like?

109
Analysis of Assessment Plan

• In general
• Review data cant do or wont do?
• Calculate discrepancy between baseline and
  acceptable level of performance
• Baseline is median of three measures
• Indicate standard
• Make an informed statement as to why the problem
  is occurring
• Make a prediction regarding intervention
• Chart and set goal

110
Analysis of Assessment Plan

• Prediction and goal setting
• Without goal setting impossible to judge progress
  and determine effectiveness of intervention
• Goal statements are based on baseline data
• Written in specific and measurable terms

111
Analysis of Assessment Plan

• Definition
• Goal statement specific description of change you
  expect to see in students behavior as a result
  of the intervention
• Includes behavior to change
• Conditions that will bring about change
• Level of behavior that is expected
• Short-term goals describe progress student is
  expected to make in a short period of time
  during and intervention phase
• Long term goals describe progress student is
  expected to make in a year often associated
  with a program, sometimes with intervention
  phases
• Program modification or exit goal statements
  identify requirements necessary to student to
  have program adjusted or exit program - EC

112
Analysis of Assessment Plan

• Goal statement
• Behavior needs to be measurable, observable, and
  specific focus on increasing positive
  behaviors, rather than decreasing negative ones
• Conditions include timeline, measurement
  situation, and measurement materials used for
  behavioral issues conditions include timeline,
  setting, environmental stimuli to will elicit
  behavior
• Level of behavior that is expected several ways
  to establish this
• Norms/percentile cutoffs
• Expectations
• Realistic/ambitious growth
• Growth rates
• Minimum celeration

113
Computing Growth Rates

• Winter Norm minus Fall Norm, divided by number of
  weeks between norming projects
• Gives you a growth expectancy for each week of
  school year
• Allows for obtaining students baseline then
  monitoring progress while comparing to growth
  expectancy

114
Computing Growth Rates

• Example first grade, ID words in sentences
• Winter Norm minus Fall Norm, divided by number of
  weeks between norming projects
• 67.9119-35.2694 / 10 3.2643 words per week

115
Growth Rates based on research by Doug and Lynn
Fuchs

• Realistic Growth Rates
• Gr 1 2 words/week
• Gr 2 1.5 wrds/week
• Gr 3 1 words/week
• Gr 4 .9 words/week
• Gr 5 .5 words/week

• Ambitious Growth Rates
• Gr 1 3 words/week
• Gr 2 2 words/week
• Gr 3 1.5 wrds/week
• Gr 4 1.1 wrds/week
• Gr 5 .8 words/week

116
Analysis of Assessment Plan

• Examples of goal statements
• Long-term In 30 weeks, when presented with
  random reading passages from Basic Skill
  Builders, level 5, Sam will read aloud at a rate
  of 50 words correct per minute
• Short-term Each week, when presented with a
  reading passage from Basic Skill Builders, level
  5, Sam will increase his oral reading rate by two
  words correct per minute
• Non-academic In nine weeks during math class,
  Sam will complete all daily written assignment by
  the end of each math period

117
Natasha

• What are the significant findings?
• Conners revealed no significant ratings in home
  environment another way?
• Student interview revealed that Natasha realizes
  that she does not read as well as her peers
• She reported that she can not complete
  assignments as quickly as her peers and that her
  AR books are not on same grade level

118
Natasha

• She also does not score as high on her AR tests
• She likes it when her mother reads to her because
  she understands things better, she wishes the
  teacher would do that too
• She is scared because she has been told that if
  she does not pass the EOG, she can not go to
  middle school

119
Natasha

• She likes math, it makes sense
• She does not like reading, science, or social
  studies but if she is read to it is easier
• Grade level CBM assessments
• Sight words 36 words per minute (district norm
  is 90)
• Passage reading fluency 60 words per minute
  (district norm is 113)

120
Natasha

• Analysis of Assessment Plan
• Document baseline (median)
• Document discrepancy between baseline and
  acceptable level of performance
• Identify what hypothesis is supported
• Make a goal/prediction statement
• Specific change you expect to see
• What is the goal how was it established?
• Short-term
• Conditions to be met
• What does it look like?

121
Development of Intervention Plan

• In general, identify, based on data,
  interventions with highest likelihood of success
• Intervention involves explicit instruction and
  progress monitoring
• Intervention is not accommodations and
  modifications
• Decision making for progress monitoring data
  three below?
• Roles, responsibilities, and timeline

122
Development of Intervention Plan

• Accommodations
• Supports or services provided to help access
  curriculum and demonstrate learning - examples
• Modifications
• Changes made to content and performance
  expectations - examples

123
Development of Intervention Plan

• Characteristics
• Focus on modifying students environment to
  improve performance consider adjustments to
  time allocated to instruction, engagement time,
  questioning techniques, feedback, contingencies
• Intervention and monitoring is continuation of
  hypothesis testing there are no magic
  interventions, guaranteed to succeed implement,
  monitor, adjust
• Interventions need to be feasible implementors
  must agree, understand, be committed, and possess
  the necessary skills
• Team must share responsibility and accountability
  for outcome

124
Development of Intervention Plan

• Develop intervention plan then consider
• In what setting should the plan be implemented
• Would it be best for this plan to be implemented
  on an individual level, an entire classroom, an
  entire school building

125
Development of Intervention Plan

• Procedures
• Brainstorm interventions
• Evaluate ideas potential to succeed, ease of
  use, compatibility with existing programs, time,
  cost
• Select intervention focus on increasing
  positives, rather than decreasing negatives
• Write action plan identify roles and
  responsibilities, when, where, how, need for
  programs, progress monitoring, goals as a result
  of intervention
• Implement the intervention support
  interventionist, progress monitor, evaluate
  integrity of intervention, make adjustments

126
Natasha

• Develop intervention plan
• Continuation of hypothesis testing
• More assessments needed?
• Where do you intervene??????
• Consider screening level data and survey level
  data
• Explicit instruction and progress monitoring
• School and home components
• Decision-making plan 3-4
• What does it look like?

127
Analysis of Intervention Plan

• Review progress monitoring data
• Current level of performance is median of last
  three progress monitoring data points
• Calculate discrepancy between current level of
  performance and acceptable level of performance,
  post interventions
• Indicate standard
• Summarize the effectiveness of intervention plan
• Determine what further action will be taken

128
Natasha

• Median score of last three progress monitoring
  data points
• 77 for sight words
• 101 for passage fluency

129
Natasha

• Performance relative to goals (what goals), trend
  lines, decision making rules
• Calculate discrepancy
• Summarize effectiveness
• Decide next step

130
PSM Procedures

• Activities of Level IV
• Define the problem
• Team identifies areas to be covered on IEP,
  intervention plan becomes IEP
• Progress monitoring data becomes baseline data on
  IEP or additional data can be collected
• IEP (intervention) is developed based on data
  collected
• Progress monitoring occurs during implementation
• Program modification or exit criteria is
  established
• Short-term objectives, long-term objectives,

131
PSM Procedures

• Keys questions that are asked to determine
  eligibility (pilot sites)
• Is students educational progress less than what
  would be expected?
• Is students performance significantly less than
  that of his/her peers (local)?
• Does student demonstrate a need for instruction
  at the highest level of intensity?
• Is there an adverse impact on the educational
  performance?
• What is the exit criteria for level four?

132
Exit Criteria

• Three ways of identifying exit criteria
• Norms
• 25
• Score that correlates with meeting standard on
  the EOG
• Use with caution

133
Exit Criteria

• Decreasing intensity of services reverse the
  process
• Determine the minimal level of support necessary
  for the student to be successful in the general
  ed curriculum

134
Important Points to Consider and/or Remember

• School-based collaborative process
• Uses problem solving approach to identify
  academic/behavioral needs
• Involves data-based decision-making
• Primary purpose is to design
  useful interventions in the regular education
  environment

135
Important Points to Consider and/or Remember

• The focus is on Problem Solving
• Not a mechanism for referring
  students to special education
• It is Not a Pre-referral team
• Assessment is functional diagnostic
• Interventions based on data
• Not a guessing game

136
Important Points to Consider and/or Remember

• Interventionists
• School Volunteers
• Any available staff member
• Peer tutoring
• Parents
• Teachers Aides
• Intervention Specialist

137
Final Thoughts and Conclusions

• To successfully implement a PSM/CBM system on the
  district, school, and individual levels, everyone
  must buy in
• Top down implementation is very helpful and you
  have that

138
Final Thoughts and Conclusions

• Implementation requires a significant shift in
  philosophy and a massive training effort
• Areas for training
• Team Building
• PSM
• CBM
• Local Norming
• Research-Based Interventions for reading, math,
  written expression, and behavior
• Progress monitoring and charting
• etc

139
Final Thoughts and Conclusions

• Research has shown repeatedly that all of the
  time, effort, and money is worth it

140
Final Thoughts and Conclusions

• Laut et al. (2001) also analyzed the change in
  the role and function of the school psychologist
  in the Iowa Model versus the traditional
  standardized testing model

141
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

142
General education/special education changes

• Send us your tired, your hungry, your poor. Your
  kids who cant read.
• Shift from focus on placement in special
  education as the intervention TO high quality
  interventions in general education
• Progress of ALL students (tied with NCLB AYP)

143

• What is a high quality intervention?
• How do I do more in my class?
• How to collect and use data to make decisions?

144
Special Educators

• Skills in individualized, remedial interventions
• Share with general educators!
• Classroom, teacher, and individual student
  support

145
Roles of District and School LeadersBatsche
Curtis, 2005

• District
• Permission
• Provide vision for outcomes based service
  delivery
• Reinforce effective practices
• Expect accountability
• Provide support for systems change effort
• Training
• Coaching
• Technology
• Policies

146
Roles continuedBatsche Curtis, 2005

• Principal
• Vision of Problem-Solving Process
• Supports development of expectations
• Allocation of resources
• Facilitates priority setting
• Ensures follow-up
• Supports program evaluation
• Monitors staff support/climate

147
Questions and Conclusions

• Drowning in information?

148
Three Tiers vs Four Levels

• Same process and fundamental elements
• Three tiers requires mass screening as a gateway
  to enter
• Tier one implemented in the general ed setting
• Tier two still within general ed setting but
  usually involves different levels of intensity
  within the tier
• Tier three highest intensity of intervention or
  not

149
Tier 1 Benchmark/Schoolwide

• Definition Students who are making expected
  progress in the general education curriculum and
  who demonstrate social competence
• Benchmark also describes those schoolwide
  interventions that are available to all students
• Effective instruction
• Clear expectations
• Effective student support
• Periodic benchmark assessments
• Universal prevention

150
Tier 1 Functions

• Universal screening
• Data analysis teaming
• School-wide behavior supports
• Whole group teaching

151
Tier 1 Benchmark/Schoolwide
Universal Prevention, Screening, Monitoring

• Teachers implement a variety of scientifically
  research-based teaching strategies and approaches
  
• Students receive differentiated instruction based
  on data from ongoing assessments.

• High quality instructional and behavioral
  supports are provided for all students in general
  education
• School personnel conduct universal screening of
  literacy skills, academics, and behavior.

Adapted from Kovaleski (2005). Special
Education Decision Making ppt.
152
Results of Tier 1

• Continue effective practices for responders
• Non-responders begin tier 2 interventions

153
Tier 2 Strategic/Targeted

• Definition Academic and behavioral strategies,
  methodologies and practices designed for students
  not making expected progress in the general
  education curriculum and/or have mild to moderate
  difficulties demonstrating social competence.
  These students are at risk for academic failure.

154
Tier 2 Strategic Interventions

• Use of standard protocol interventions or not
• Scientifically research-based interventions
• Academic
• Behavior
• Core instruction with supplemental materials
• Differentiated instruction in general ed.
• Specialists assist with strategic instruction in
  regular classroom

155
A Standard Protocol Intervention

• is scientifically research-based.
• has a high probability of producing change for
  large numbers of students.
• is designed to be used in a standard manner
  across students.
• is usually delivered in small groups.
• is often scripted or very structured.
• can be orchestrated by a problem-solving team.

156
Tier 2 Strategic Interventions (cont.)

• Increased opportunity to learn
• Increased instructional time
• Increased assessment
• Data collection and analysis once per month
• Data-based decision-making

157
Res