Response to Intervention: Implementation Considerations - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Response to Intervention: Implementation Considerations PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 93ef3-NDQxY



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Response to Intervention: Implementation Considerations

Description:

... assistance to needy children in timely fashion. It is NOT a wait-to ... Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success. Academic Systems. Behavioral Systems ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:38
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 33
Provided by: jenniferd5
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Response to Intervention: Implementation Considerations


1
Response to Intervention Implementation
Considerations
  • Jennifer Doolittle, Ph.D.
  • Office of Special Education Programs
  • December 17, 2007

2
(No Transcript)
3
  • general overview, integration of RtI and PBS and
    any federal guidelines for states that you think
    may help us align the two.
  • 2 hours

4
Overview
  • Advantages of RTI
  • Relationship between PBS and RTI
  • IDEA Regulations
  • 5 Dimensions of RTI
  • Four Parts of RTI Sequence
  • Implementation Issues
  • Implementation Assistance

5
Potential Advantages of RTI Approach
  • Emphasizes use of research-validated instruction.
  • Provides assistance to needy children in timely
    fashion. It is NOT a wait-to-fail model.
  • Helps ensure that a students poor academic
    performance is not due to poor instruction.
  • Assessment data are collected to inform the
    teacher and improve instruction. Assessments and
    interventions are closely linked.
  • Provides for a more collaborative approach where
    all staff are responsible for all students

6
Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success
Academic Systems
Behavioral Systems
1-5
1-5
5-10
5-10
80-90
80-90
7
RTI A Continuum of Support for All
Few
Some
All
8
IDEA Regulations
  • A State must adopt, consistent with 34 CFR
    300.309, criteria for determining whether a child
    has a specific learning disability as defined in
    34 CFR 300.8(c)(10). In addition, the criteria
    adopted by the State
  • Must not require the use of a severe discrepancy
    between intellectual ability and achievement for
    determining whether a child has a specific
    learning disability, as defined in 34 CFR
    300.8(c)(10)
  • Must permit the use of a process based on the
    childs response to scientific, research-based
    intervention and
  • May permit the use of other alternative
    research-based procedures for determining whether
    a child has a specific learning disability, as
    defined in 34 CFR 300.8(c)(10).

9
IDEA Regs cont.
  • To ensure that underachievement in a child
    suspected of having a specific learning
    disability is not due to lack of appropriate
    instruction in reading or math, the group must
    consider, as part of the evaluation described in
    34 CFR 300.304 through 300.306
  • Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as a part
    of, the referral process, the child was provided
    appropriate instruction in regular education
    settings, delivered by qualified personnel and
  • Data-based documentation of repeated assessments
    of achievement at reasonable intervals,
    reflecting formal assessment of student progress
    during instruction, which was provided to the
    childs parents.

10
IDEA Regs cont.
  • The public agency must promptly request parental
    consent to evaluate the child to determine if the
    child needs special education and related
    services, and must adhere to the timeframes
    described in 34 CFR 300.301 and 300.303, unless
    extended by mutual written agreement of the
    childs parents and a group of qualified
    professionals, as described in 34 CFR
    300.306(a)(1)

11
Implications
  • Determination of the additional variety of
    assessment tools that will be considered in
    addition to RTI- if RTI is part of the criteria
    for determining LD eligibility- to complete a
    comprehensive evaluation to determine eligibility
    for special education
  • LEAs need to be able to demonstrate the
    strategies used for increasing the childs rate
    of learning and

12
Implications
  • OSEP does not take a position on
  • a specific number of tiers within an RTI model
  • the slope of progress or absolute level of
    achievement that determines movement between
    tiers
  • whether or not an RTI process includes special
    education as a component of the tier system

13
Implementing an RTI Approach 5 Dimensions
  • Number of tiers (2-5)
  • Nature of preventive intervention
  • Individualized (e.g., problem solving)
  • Standardized scientific research-based protocol
  • How at-risk students are identified
  • Percentile cut on norm-referenced test
    (screening)
  • Cut-point on curriculum-based measurement (CBM)
    with 5 weeks of CBM progress monitoring

14
Implementing an RTI Approach 5 Dimensions
(continued)
  • How response is defined
  • Final status on norm-referenced test or using a
    benchmark
  • Improvement from pretest to posttest
  • CBM slope and final status
  • What happens to nonresponders
  • Comprehensive multidisciplinary evaluation to
    distinguish
  • specific learning disability (SLD)
  • behavioral disability (BD)
  • mental retardation (MR)
  • speech-language impairment (SLI)

15
Simplified RTI Procedure Four Parts
  • All children in a class, school, or district are
    tested once in the fall to identify those
    students at risk for long-term difficulties
  • The responsiveness of at-risk students to general
    education instruction (Tier 1) is monitored to
    determine those whose needs are not being met and
    therefore require a more intensive intervention
    (Tier 2 Small Group)

16
Simplified RTI Procedure Four Parts (continued)
  • For at-risk students, a research-validated Tier 2
    intervention is implemented student progress is
    monitored throughout and students are re-tested
    after the intervention
  • Those students who do not respond to validated
    intervention are identified for
    multi-disciplinary team evaluation for possible
    disability determination and special education
    placement

17
What Works
  • Effective intervention practices
  • Effective implementation practices
  • Good outcomes for consumers

18
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities
(NRCLD) Model Sites
  • Model sites distinguishing features
  • Core reading program
  • Use of universal academic screening
  • Conducted progress monitoring on the
    interventions in Tier 2 and more intensive
  • Schools were characterized as good schools you
    felt good about what you saw happening in the
    schools

19
NRCLD Sites Issues Across All Sites
  • None of the schools conducted fidelity measures
    on the Tier 2 interventions
  • Schools didnt have explicit cut scores for
    decision making (Is the student responsive?)
  • Lack of specification and implementation of the
    Tier 2 and more intensive interventions
  • Lack of documentation of superior reading outcomes

20
Implementation Research (Fixsen et al., 2005)
  • Policy is
  • allocation of limited resources for unlimited
    needs
  • Opportunity, not guarantee, for good action
  • Training does not predict action

21
Stages of Implementation
  • Exploration
  • Installation
  • Initial Implementation
  • Full Implementation
  • Innovation
  • Sustainability

22
Implementation Logic
  • Outcome-based
  • Data-based decision making
  • Evidence-based practices
  • Systems support for accurate sustained
    implementation
  • Coaching and consultation
  • Administrative support

23
Emphasize data-based decision making
  • Self-assessment action planning
  • Continuous self-improvement
  • Strengths needs
  • Strategic dissemination

24
Consultation Coaching
  • Critical for States to consider for LEAs
  • Sources of funding and professional development
    (State Improvement Grants)
  • New role of State staff
  • Utilize resources currently in place (homegrown)
  • Recruit effective personnel from exemplar schools
    as coaches for developing districts
  • Ongoing training for coaches
  • FTE allocated to school appropriate to schools
    need
  • Direct observation, behavior rehearsal, data
    review
  • Collect data on coaching frequency, duration, and
    helpfulness

25
Coaches
  • Establish a network of highly skilled personnel
    who have
  • Fluency with RTI systems and practices
  • Capacity to deliver technical assistance
  • Capacity to sustain team efforts
  • Follow-up training throughout the year
  • Specialized topics
  • Communication and problem-solving

26
Active Administrative Participation
  • Active member of leadership team
  • Gives initiative priority
  • Invests in 2-3 year implementation

27
NRCLD Model Sites Advice to Schools Implementing
RTI
  • Provide training on specific interventions
  • Use benchmarking to help to identify goals
  • Train a variety of staff, not just teachers
  • Make sure administrators are really on board
  • Partner with a local resource center
  • Take it slow the process works, but it is a slow
    process
  • Address the students scoring in the 0-20th ile

28
Assisting SEAs with Implementation
  • Center on State Implementation and Scaling-up of
    Evidence-based Practices (SISEP)
  • SISEP will provide the critical content and
    foundation for establishing a technology of
    large-scale, sustainable, high-fidelity
    implementation of effective educational
    practices.
  • SISEP will work with 6 states to improve their
    capacity to carry out implementation,
    organizational change, and systems transformation
    strategies to maximize achievement outcomes

29
National Center on Response to Intervention (RTI
Center)
  • www.RTI4Success.org
  • Provide technical assistance and dissemination
    about RTI models
  • Target audience SEAs
  • Four focus areas
  • Knowledge production
  • Implementation supports/TA
  • Information dissemination
  • Evaluation

30
Final Comments
  • Building a plane while flying not unlike other
    areas in the past (assessment, behavior)
  • Blending the state of science with the state of
    practice (standard treatment problem solving)
  • Where does sped fit into the new multi-tiered
    model of prevention and intervention?

31
Web Resources
  • National Research Center for Learning
    Disabilities
  • http//www.nrcld.org/
  • IRIS Center for Faculty Enhancement
  • http//iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/
  • Department of Education IDEA Web site
  • http//idea.ed.gov
  • RTI Summit Information
  • www.RTISummit.org
  • Click on Resources

32
Resources
  • RTI IDEA Partnership www.ideapartnership.org/page
    .cfm?pageid17
  • Progress Monitoring Technical Assistance Center
  • www.studentprogressmonitoring.org
About PowerShow.com