Using Response to Intervention for Washington Students - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Using Response to Intervention for Washington Students PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: b2a2e-OWVlO


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Using Response to Intervention for Washington Students


School Psychologist, East Valley School District. Mike Jacobsen ... Recommendations on using RTI data to identify specific learning disabilities (SLD) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:59
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 47
Provided by: Admini175


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

Title: Using Response to Intervention for Washington Students

Using Response to Intervention for Washington
  • Ken Howell, Ph.D.
  • Department of Special Education
  • Western Washington University
  • Steve Hirsch, Ph.D.
  • School Psychology Program, Washington State
  • School Psychologist, East Valley School District
  • Mike Jacobsen
  • Assessment and Curriculum Director, White River
  • Paul Alig
  • OSPI, Special Education, Program Supervisor
  • Tonya Middling
  • OSPI, Special Education, Learning Improvement

RTI Manual Overview
  • Outlines principle components of RTI
  • Guidance on RTI decision making
  • Recommendations on using RTI data to identify
    specific learning disabilities (SLD)
  • Answers common questions
  • Includes additional resources and practical

How this manual came about
  • Early Intervening Services and RTI committee
  • SLD committee
  • Other sources (in and outside OSPI)

How to use this manual
  • Recommendations NOT regulations
  • Readiness checklist
  • Each district and school design their own RTI
    system depending on curriculum decisions and
  • NOTE An RTI system is a combined general
    education and special education approach

Response to Intervention What are the big ideas?
  • RTI is the practice of providing high-quality
    instruction and/or intervention matched to
    student needs and using learning rate over time
    and level of performance to make important
    educational decisions
  • National Association of State Directors of
    Special Education Inc, 2005

Response to Intervention What are the big ideas?
  • High quality instruction/intervention
    Instruction or intervention matched to student
    need that has been demonstrated empirically and
    by practice to demonstrate high learning rates
    for most students
  • Learning rate and level of performance Learning
    rate refers to students growth in academic or
    behavioral skills over time in comparison to
    prior levels and peer growth rates. Level of
    performance refers to a students relative
    standing (growth) on some critical dimension of
    academic or behavioral skills compared to
    expected/predicted growth.
  • Important educational decisions Decisions about
    intensity and duration of interventions are based
    upon data across multiple tiers of intervention.

Response to Intervention Core Principles
  • We can effectively teach all children
  • Intervene early
  • Use mult-tier model of service delivery
  • Use a problem solving model to make decisions

Response to Intervention Core Principles
  • Monitor student progress to inform instruction
  • Use data to make decisions
  • Assessment is used for multiple purposes
  • Screening
  • Diagnosing
  • Progress monitoring

Response to Intervention Background and Research
  • Stan Denos data-based decision program
    modification model
  • (Deno, 1985 Deno Mirkin, 1977)
  • Bergans behavioral consultation model
  • (Bergan, 1977)
  • Problems in the traditional system
  • Integration between general and special education
  • Undocumented benefits of special education
  • Variability and accuracy of eligibility
  • Integration of eligibility determination with

Response to Intervention Background and Research
  • Policy and research supports
  • National Institutes for Child Health and
    Development Studies
  • National Reading Panel www.nationalreadingpanel.o
  • National Research Council Panel on Minority
  • National Summit on Learning Disabilities
  • Presidents Commission on Excellence in Special

Why Universal Academic Screening?
  • -Analogous to vision screening
  • -Identifies those who are not on track
  • -On track for what?
  • to be a successful reader?
  • to pass the WASL?

How to use benchmarks in RTI
  • Following the universal screening
  • Those At-Risk are targeted for Tier 1
    interventions (below benchmarks with no current
    services e.g. IEP)
  • Classroom teacher tries an intervention
  • Progress monitored while intervention being
  • 3 or 4 other students (not At-Risk) monitored as
    well to provide comparison

Continued use of Benchmarks
  • Universal screening typically occurs three
    times/year (fall/winter/spring)
  • We have benchmarks to document whether a child is
    on track three times/year
  • The students data at benchmark testing periods
    can be utilized to validate the effectiveness of
    intervention. Is the gap closing?

Characteristics of scientific, research-based
  • Offer as soon as it is clear the student is
    lagging behind
  • Increase intensity of instruction and practice
  • Opportunity for explicit and systematic
    instruction/practice and cumulative review
  • Provide skillful instruction with good error
    correction, immediate feedback
  • Guided by and in response to progress monitoring
  • Must provide a supportive atmosphere for learning

Reviewing Classroom Performance
5 of your students should be here
15 of your students should be here
80 of your students should be here
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
Words Read Correct
Words Read Correct
Designing Instruction to Meet Student Needs
Standardized Assessments
Benchmarking or Screening

Instructional Problem Solving
Requires taking multiple sources of evidence and
selecting appropriate instructional interventions
based on identified student needs
Progress Monitoring
Performance or Criterion Assessments
Targeted Assessment
  • Targeted assessment means shifting to evaluations
    that are designed around the specific targeted
    concerns of the student.
  • In other words, we select assessments that
    measure the area of concern rather than
    administering an assessment and then trying to
    determine what it means.

Targeted Assessment
Non-targeted Assessment
The Problem is that we end up with data that we
dont need and we havent even confirmed the
actual problem! (data rich and analysis poor
A Problem Solving Process
Domains of Influence
Evaluation Planning
RTI and Child Find
  • Anyone, including parents and teachers, can make
    a referral at any time in a RTI system.
  • A student cannot be required to go all the way
    through Tier III before being evaluated if
    evidence exists to suspect a disability.

When should a student be suspected of having a
disability due to a lack of responsiveness?
  • Students who are performing significantly less
    than their peers and have been provided two or
    more Tier III interventions that did not
    significantly decrease the gap in achievement
    should be suspected as having SLD and evaluated
    absent other evidence.

Parent Involvement in RTI
  • In a RTI system parents must be provided progress
    monitoring data. 34 CFR Sec. 300.309(b)(2).
  • Parents must also be informed of
  • State policies regarding the amount and nature of
    student performance data that is collected and
    the general education services that are provided
  • The strategies for increasing the students rate
    of learning and
  • Their right to request an evaluation.
  • 34 CFR Sec. 300.311(a)(7).

Is consent required before conducting screenings
or CBMs?
  • Teachers or specialists do not need to obtain
    consent to evaluate when administering universal
    screening, CBMs, or targeted assessments to a
    student in order to determine appropriate
    instructional strategies for curriculum
  • 20 USC Sec. 1414(a)(1)(E).

Same players new roles I
  • The New Psychologist Role
  • Data Manager
  • Data Analyzer
  • Data Synthesizer
  • Detective Extraordinaire
  • Progress Monitoring?
  • The New Sped Teacher Role
  • Data Provider
  • Targeted Assessment
  • Progress Monitoring
  • Intervention opportunities

Same players new roles II
  • The New Parent Role
  • Data Provider (FAAB)
  • Interventionist
  • Progress Monitoring
  • The New General Ed.Teacher Role
  • Tier 1 Tier 2 interventions
  • Progress Monitoring
  • Data provider (FAAB) for Learning Env.
  • Be ready for intervention

Same players new roles III
  • The New Principal Role
  • As goes the principals attitude, so goes the
  • Providing for the assessment of intervention
  • The New Attitude
  • We are not looking at the child as broken
  • Focus is on Why isnt the general education
    curriculum working for this child?

Using RTI data to identify SLD
  • District procedures set out criteria for using
    RTI data to establish SLD.
  • District criteria must incorporate new federal
    regulations on SLD.
  • 34 CFR Sections 300.309 through 300.311

Adopt an established approach for using RTI data
to identify SLD
  • Districts are strongly encouraged to use
    established approaches for using RTI data to
    identify SLD.
  • Criteria determines if a student is not making
    sufficient progress to meet age or State-approved
    grade-level standards in one or more of the SLD
    areas. 34 CFR Sec. 300.309(a)(2)(i).

Recommended criteria for identifying SLD using
RTI Question 1
  • Where at least two phases of intensive
    interventions implemented in the general
    education curriculum with fidelity, which did not
    affect the students achievement and does
    evidence of the students non-responsiveness at
    Tier III reflect that he or she is learning at a
    rate significantly less that her or his peers?

Recommended criteria for identifying SLD using
RTI Question 2
  • Do RTI and other existing data (including
    observation) meet at least two of the following
    four criteria
  • 1)CBM scores showing the student is performing at
    or below the 7th percentile of current
    grade-level or at or below the 16th percentile of
    a previous grade-level
  • 2)A standardized assessment score that is 1.75
    standard deviations below the mean (within test
  • 3)CBM scores and other data demonstrate the
    students median performance is at or below his
    or her grade placement peers by a discrepancy
    ratio of at least 2
  • 4)The students instructional performance level
    is two or more grade levels below her or his
    current grade placement determined by CBM scores,
    classroom performance, observation and, if
    appropriate, standardized assessments?

Recommended criteria for identifying SLD using
RTI Question 3
  • Does the evaluation group (including the parent)
    believe the student requires resources that are
    not available in the general education setting,
    with or without accommodations, in order to
    participate or progress in the general education
    curriculum at a level equal to his or her peers?
  • Evidence of this criterion would show that the
    student requires specially designed instruction
    or Tier III interventions for an extended period
    of time that is not available in the general
    education curriculum.

Evaluation Report
  • To establish SLD, under recommended approach, the
    report must reflect a yes to all three
    questions (sample in Appendix H).
  • Also need to rule out (1) visual, hearing , or
    motor disability (2) mental retardation (3)
    emotional disturbance (4) cultural factors and
    (5) limited English proficiency. 34 CFR Sec.

For All Evaluation Reports Even When Severe
Discrepancy Tables Are Used
  • Appropriate Math and Reading Instruction 34 CFR
    300.309(b) requires an evaluation group ensure
    underachievement shown by a student suspected of
    having SLD is not due to a lack of appropriate
    instruction in math and reading and must
  • Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as part
    of, the referral process the student was provided
    appropriate instruction in general 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.

Special Education Eligibility
  • To be eligible for special education, the
    evaluation group for students with SLD must find
    an adverse educational impact and the need for
    specially designed instruction (SDI).
  • The evaluation report for eligible students
    should include recommendations about the SDI and
    any related services, program modifications,
    accommodations and other supports the student
    needs with enough specificity to develop an IEP.
  • In a RTI system, the SDI provided should
    supplement the scientific-based interventions and
    high quality instruction the student was already
    receiving in general education.

  • Early Intervening Services are
  • Activities that support students that have not
    been determined eligible for special education,
    but that need
  • additional academic and behavioral supports to
    be successful in the
  • general education curriculum
  • 34 CFR 300.226

EIS Allowable Activities
  • EIS activities may include
  • Professional development on scientific, research
    based interventions
  • Behavioral evaluations and services
  • Instruction on use of assistive technology
  • Setting up financial infrastructures with other
    funds used under ESEA (i.e., Reading First, Title

Disproportionate Representation
  • States must require LEAs to reserve maximum
    amount of EIS funds to address any issues of
    disproportionate representation of minority
    students in special education
  • Currently, LEAs are identified through the state
    monitoring system (routine, focused, targeted)
    looking at both numerical data and policies and
    procedures (may change with final federal
    regulations which allow states to require EIS set
    aside based on disproportionate numerical data
  • 34 CFR 300.

Alignment of District Resources and RTI
  • Basic Education
  • LAP/Title
  • Reading First (NCLB, 2001)
  • School Improvement Plan
  • Student Learning Plans (H.S. Level)
  • Special Education (IDEA 2004)
  • Other resources available to the

Next Steps
  • Further technical assistance (SLD Committee)
  • Website resources regularly updated
  • ESD Pilot sites
  • Professional Development
  • Conferences
  • Higher Education
  • Initiatives
  • Development of state regulations