Response to Intervention RtI: A Framework for Improving the Performance of ALL Students - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Response to Intervention RtI: A Framework for Improving the Performance of ALL Students PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 177e8f-ZDc1Z



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 RtI: A Framework for Improving the Performance of ALL Students

Description:

A system of instruction and data-based decision making to maximize student ... Is Eddie Making Sufficient Progress? What should the next step be? No, ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:73
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 76
Provided by: Mat4203
Category:

less

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

Title: Response to Intervention RtI: A Framework for Improving the Performance of ALL Students


1
Response to Intervention (RtI) A Framework for
Improving the Performance of ALL Students
  • Janet Graden, University of Cincinnati
  • Barbara Murphy, OEC
  • Ohio Special Education Leadership Conference
  • January 17, 2008

2
Response to Intervention
  • A system of instruction and data-based decision
    making to maximize student learning and
    accelerate progress
  • An outcomes-driven, school and student
    improvement model
  • Not another way to sort students, determine
    eligibility
  • Even when find eligible for special education,
    still responsible for improving progress (AYP)
  • A framework, not a verb, an intervention, or a
    place

2
3
Response to Intervention Definition(NASDSE, 2005)
  • Response to Intervention (RtI) is the practice
    of providing high-quality instruction and
    interventions matched to student needs,
    monitoring progress frequently to make decisions
    about changes in instruction or goals and
    applying child response data to important
    educational decisions.

3
4
RtI Components and Practices
  • Continuum of scientifically-based, research-based
    instruction and interventions, within a
    multi-tiered approach
  • Core instruction
  • Supplemental intervention
  • Targeted, intensive intervention
  • Student performance data as indicator of
    effectiveness of instruction and intervention

5
RtI Components and Practices
  • Data-based decision making for
  • instruction and intervention within and
  • across tiers
  • Universal screening to catch early and examine
    effectiveness of practices
  • Continued progress monitoring to assess
    progress in closing achievement gaps

6
Key Idea
  • Best practices in a comprehensive approach to RtI
    (Response to Instruction and Intervention) align
    with what is known about effective school
    practices

6
7
Alignment with Effective Educational Practices
Schools that Close Achievement Gaps
  • Clear focus on student achievement and
    communication of these expectations
  • Staff embraces responsibility for achievement of
    each and all
  • Assessment of effectiveness is on student results
    (not intentions) examine all practices,
    policies, procedures with regard to impact on
    student learning
  • System of intervention systematic response
    based on data not wait to fail

7
8
Alignment with Effective Educational Practices
Schools that Close Achievement Gaps
  • Use of data for decisions
  • Effectiveness of programs
  • Identifying early and intervening early
  • Progress monitoring to determine effectiveness
  • Working together collaboratively and flexibly

8
9
Response to Intervention offers the best
opportunity of the past 3 decades to ensure that
every child, no matter how gifted or challenged,
will be equally valued in an education system
where the progress of every child is monitored
and individualized interventions with appropriate
levels of intensity are provided to students as
needed. Bill East (2007), Preface to RtI
Handbook
9
10
NEA (2006)
  • RtI focuses on early identification of learning
    and behavior needs and the provision of
    appropriate evidence-based interventions in order
    to address skill gaps early to keep them from
    becoming larger issues.
  • RtI is a school-wide process approach, the
    foundation of which is quality core instruction
    in the GE classroom.

10
11
What RtI Is and Is Not
  • Is
  • RtI is an overall integrated system of
    instruction, intervention, supports, and services
  • Is Not
  • RtI is not just an eligibility systema way of
    reducing the numbers of students placed into
    special education or a different way of sorting
    (still responsible for AYP!)

12
What RtI Is and Is Not
  • Is
  • RtI practices are effective for students who are
    at risk for school failure as well as students in
    other disability categories
  • Is Not
  • RtI practices are not limited to students with
    specific learning disabilities

13
What RtI Is and Is Not
  • Is
  • RtI is an excellent opportunity to more
    effectively align IDEA and NCLB principles and
    practices
  • Is Not
  • RtI is not just an special education approach

14
Research Support for Early Identification of
Reading Problems
  • More than two-thirds of 4th and 8th graders
    cannot read at proficiency (NCES, 2003)
  • 37 of 4th graders cannot read at basic level
  • 56 of poor 4th graders cannot read at basic
    level
  • 61 of African American 4th graders and 57 of
    Hispanic 4th graders cannot read at basic level
  • 80 of children identified as SLD have reading
    problems
  • Poor readers at end of 1st grade almost never
    acquire grade level reading

14
15
Research Support for Early Intervention
  • Use of discrepancy approach for SLD
    identification results in wait to fail not
    identified until 3rd grade or later
  • If not reading on grade level by 3rd grade, odds
    of ever reading on grade level are 1 in 17
  • In 4th grade, need 2 hours of instructional time
    to make same gains as make in 30 minutes of
    instructional time in Kindergarten
  • Downward spiral predictions from 3rd grade
    reading
  • Torgesen,
    2004, 2007

15
16
Research Support for Comprehensive Framework for
RtI Implementation
  • When tiered approach to instruction and
    intervention systematically used
  • Improved student outcomes (elementary and
    reading)
  • Only about 3-8 of students continued to need
    more intensive intervention after Tier 2
    interventions
  • Gains on performance on state tests
  • Proportional representation in disability
    categories
  • Parent, teacher preference for approach
  • Torgesen, 2007
    Vaughn, 2007

16
17
Demonstrated Benefits of Comprehensive
Implementation
  • Improved student outcomes All students receive
    something effective (keep intensifying
    instructional and intervention supports to
    improve outcomes
  • Focus on early intervention (versus waiting to
    fail) maximizing instruction and intervention,
    catch and intervene early
  • Data-driven decisions
  • Services and supports are needs-based a
    coherent, flexible system of support (based on
    student response data)

17
18
Demonstrated Benefits of Comprehensive
Implementation
  • Parent-friendly focus is on helping students to
    improve outcomes, on supports needed, data
    communicated relates directly in instruction and
    progress
  • Important point focus shifts from eligibility
    to providing effective instruction/intervention
    eligibility decisions derive naturally from
    systematic efforts at instruction and progress
    monitoring

18
19
Essential Component 1 Multi-tier Model
National Association of State Directors of
Special Education 2005
20
Integrated Systems Model for Academics and
Behavior
Academic Systems
Behavioral Systems
Decisions about tiers of support are data-based
Adapted from OSEP Effective School-Wide
Interventions
20
21
Practices Within and Across Tiers
  • Use of data for all decisions
  • Reliance on scientifically-based instruction and
    intervention
  • Use of progress monitoring data to judge reaction
    to instruction and intervention a
    scientifically-based, self-correcting
    decision-making model how do we know if we are
    effective, if students are learning?
  • Use of collaborative problem solving at all tiers
    (e.g., district- and school-wide, grade-level or
    teaching teams, individually with parents)

21
22
Tier 1 Core instruction - All Students
  • Effective, scientifically-based core instruction
    and curriculum, linked to state standards
    (required as part of determination for Student
    with Disabilities all categories)
  • On-going professional development to assure
    teachers have tools so each student receives high
    quality instruction

22
23
Tier 1 Decision Making
  • Using data to examine effectiveness of overall
    practices
  • Effective core practices
  • 80 of students reaching benchmark and
  • No achievement gaps for subgroups
  • Need to examine core practices
  • Less than 80 of students reaching benchmark
    and/or
  • Achievement gaps for subgroup(s)

23
24
Growing the green
  • Strengthen core instruction
  • Improves prevention efforts
  • Decreases the number of students needing
    targeted and intensive intervention
  • Allows for effective and efficient Response to
    Intervention process

25
Tier 2 Supplemental, Some Students
  • Supplemental, research-based intervention,
    delivered in a timely, automatic fashion to
    students who need it, approximately 5-10 (not
    referral-based or from IAT dont wait for
    referrals or wait to fail)
  • Use of universal screening data and decision
    rules (e.g., DIBELS, CBM) for early
    identification of who is in need of more
    intensive intervention
  • Usually involves small group intervention with
    flexible grouping based on progress data

25
26
Tier 2 Supplemental, Some Students
  • More focused supplemental (additional)
    instruction matched to needs
  • Research-based
  • Increased opportunity to respond, more direct and
    intensive instruction
  • School-based decision on resources,
    interventionists can be classroom teachers,
    remedial teachers, intervention specialists
    (highly qualified)

26
27
Tier 2 Supplemental, Some Students
  • Use of regularly scheduled (at least weekly)
    systematic progress monitoring to evaluate
    student progress and determine if more intensive
    intervention is needed
  • Reliability in data collection
  • Use of instructional teams (e.g., grade level
    teams, with data manager support) to make
    decisions on interventions, delivery of
    interventions, grouping, student progress

27
28
Tier 2 Decision Making
  • Apply decision rules (progress, closing gap
    toward meeting benchmark) to students receiving
    intervention
  • Move to more intensive intervention (Tier 3) as
    needed

28
29
Tier 2 Data-Based Decision Making Core Elements
  • Evidence of scientifically-based core
  • Evidence of research base for supplemental
    intervention
  • Matched to childs needs (good instructional
    decision making)
  • Progress monitoring data
  • Reliable and valid
  • Collected during intervention
  • Use of decision-making rules
  • Shared with parents (requirement of IDEA for all
    SLD, not only within RtI)

30
Tier 3 Intensive Intervention, Few Students
  • Intensive, individualized interventions (using
    problem-solving methods and research-based
    practices) for students who need it,
    approximately 1-5
  • Interventions are more explicit, specially
    designed to meet individual needs
  • Use of systematic progress monitoring data, at
    least weekly, and decision rules regarding
    progress

30
31
Tier 3 Intensive Intervention, Few Students
  • Additional research-based intervention, in small
    group or individualized (no more than 15), for
    students with insufficient progress to Tier 2
    interventions
  • Use of small problem-solving team, including
    parents, teacher, support teacher, others as
    needed
  • Use when need for support, demonstrated by data,
    is chronic and intensive
  • Interventionist is highly trained, may be
    intervention specialist, special reading or
    special education trained teacher

31
32
Tier 3 Data-based Decision Making
  • Weekly progress monitoring data, reviewed
    regularly by team, using decision rules
  • Consideration of
  • Level (discrepancy from benchmark, local
    standard, own baseline data)
  • Slope (rate of progress, considering rate of
    growth toward benchmark and what is needed to
    close achievement gap)
  • Intensity of instruction/intervention needed to
    close gap - change trajectory (rate of progress
    toward closing gap)

32
33
Tier 3 Intensive Intervention, Few Students
(cont.)
  • Tier 3 is not special education
  • Response to Tier 3 determines if suspect
    disability (consistent with Questions and
    Answers from Office of Special Education Programs
    clarification that do not suspect disability
    until track response to instruction and
    intervention)

33
34
Eddies Progress Monitoring - A
Interventions Began
Baseline
Follow-up
Yes, Consider increasing goal
Is Eddie Making Sufficient Progress? What
should the next step be?
35
Eddies Progress Monitoring - B
Interventions Began
Baseline
Follow-up
No, More intense intervention needed
Is Eddie Making Sufficient Progress? What
should the next step be?
36
Eligibility within RtI System
  • Basic premise is that students
  • who receive effective instruction and
    increasingly intensive, high quality
    intervention, carefully implemented and monitored
  • who still need intensive intervention to maximize
    progress
  • are in need of specialized instruction

36
37
Rethinking what Eligibility Means within RtI
Approach
  • Focus on demonstrated needs, intensity of
    services and supports required to make progress
  • Relies on data that naturally emerge from
    instruction, intervention, and decision making
    across tiers
  • Different from long-standing categorical approach
    to disability determination (more student need
    and outcome focused)
  • Can be done with data-based practices is
    supported by research matching interventions to
    needs

38
NCLB and IDEA 04 Requirements
  • Scientifically-based instruction requirements
  • Intervention requirements
  • Progress monitoring requirements
  • RtI language

39
Support in NCLB for a Comprehensive Approach to
RtI
  • Focus is on student progress accountability for
    Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for all students,
    including subgroups
  • Use of scientifically-based instruction and
    intervention, delivered by highly qualified
    teachers, aligned with state standards
  • Mandated intervention (think Tier 2)

39
40
Whats New in IDEA 04 Relative to RtI
  • Discontinued use of IQ/achievement discrepancy
    language
  • Use of multi-tiered intervention
  • Early screening and intervention to close
    achievement gaps
  • Systematic, on-going monitoring of progress to
    high quality, research-based instruction
  • Better integration between general and special
    education and more flexibility in resources

40
41
IDEA 2004 - Appropriate Instruction
  • Determination of Eligibility (300.306)
  • Pertains to all CWD, not just SLD
  • (b) A child must not be determined to be a CWD
    under this rule if the determinant factor for
    that determination is
  • lack of appropriate instruction in reading,
    including the essential components of reading
    instruction (as defined in section 1208(3) of the
    ESEA)
  • (ii) lack of appropriate instruction in math or
  • (iii) Limited English Proficiency)

42
SLD Determination (300.309)
  • (1) The child does not achieve adequately for the
    childs age or to meet State-approved grade-level
    standards in one or more of the following areas,
    when provided with learning experiences and
    instruction appropriate for the childs age or
    State-approved grade-level standards (lists 8
    areas).

42
43
SLD Determination (300.309 cont.)
  • (2)(i) The child does not make sufficient
    progress to meet age or State-approved
    grade-level standards in one or more of the areas
    identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section
    when using a process based on the childs
    response to scientific, research-based
    intervention or

43
44
SLD Determination (300.309)
  • (ii) The child exhibits a pattern of strengths
    and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or
    both, relative to age, State-approved grade-level
    standards, or intellectual development, that is
    determined by the group to be relevant to the
    identification of a SLD, using appropriate
    assessments, consistent with 300.304 and 300.305

44
45
SLD Determination (300.309)
  • Note 1 2 that follow refer to all SLD
    determination, not imbedded under RtI
  • (1) Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as
    part of, the referral process, the child was
    provided appropriate instruction in regular
    education settings, delivered by qualified
    personnel and

45
46
SLD Determination (300.309)
  • (2) 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.

46
47
Draft Operating Standards for SWD
  • 3301-51-06 Evaluation Intervention still
    required
  • Each school district shall use data from
    interventions
  • to determine
  • Eligibility for special education services
  • Appropriate instructional practices, and
  • Access to the general curriculum
  • In the case of a preschool-age child, data
    collection
  • through interventions is part of the
    differentiated referral
  • process

48
Draft Operating Standards - RtI
  • Additional Ohio Language - Process based on the
  • childs response to scientific, research-based
  • intervention or RtI
  • Begins when sufficient data have been gathered
    after the child has been provided with targeted
    and intensive interventions
  • Evidence of an inadequate response to
    intervention
  • Childs needs unlikely to be met without
    additional specialized instruction
  • Employs interventions that are
  • Scientifically-based
  • Provided at appropriate levels of intensity,
    frequency, duration and integrity

49
Draft Operating Standards - RtI
  • Additional Ohio Language - RtI (cont)
  • Based on results of scientifically-based
    technically adequate assessment procedures that
    assess ongoing progress
  • Includes the analysis of data to determine
    whether a discrepancy is present between actual
    and expected performance, in both the childs
  • Rate of progress and
  • Level of performance
  • May not be used to delay unnecessarily a childs
    being evaluated for special education services

50
Draft Operating Standards
  • Written Procedures SLD
  • The school district must develop written
    procedures for the implementation of any method
    used to determine the existence of a specific
    learning disability that, at a minimum,
    incorporate guidelines developed by ODE

51
Key Components of Effective Intervention
  • Measurable statement of the skill or behavior
    targeted for intervention
  • Baseline information on present performance
  • Parent involvement in the problem-solving process
  • Identified target goal
  • Identification of research-based intervention
  • Description of the setting for the intervention
    and the individuals responsible for implementation

52
Key Components of Effective Intervention
  • Identification of a method to measure progress
    and the frequency of measurement
  • Clear criteria, decision rules and timelines for
    determining an adequate response or a need for
    modification of the intervention
  • A plan to ensure that the intervention is
    implemented as designed
  • Adequate documentation of the intervention and
    the students progress

53
Effective intervention is NOT
  • A procedure that is necessary before we can get a
    real evaluation for a child
  • Placements in programs without a specific
    description of the intervention that will be
    provided
  • Strategies that do not address the specific area
    of concern

54
Effective intervention is NOT
  • General descriptions of modifications or
    accommodations
  • Vague methods to measure progress

55
SLD Determination Historical and RtI
National Association of State Directors of
Special Education 2005
56
Changes in Law and Practice
  • There are new requirements in law that have
    substantial implications for changes in previous
    practices
  • Yet, old practices, beliefs die hard
  • RtI requirements are in regulations, whether
    doing Rti or not
  • Regardless of how arrive at disability label,
    still are responsible for closing achievement
    gaps (and RtI practices are best way to do this)
  • Keep focus on improving outcomes, high quality
    intervention, and progress monitoring

57
Putting a Comprehensive, Tiered Model into
Practice Requires
  • Effective school practices
  • Flexible, needs-based system of supports across
    tiers (based on data not past practice,
    presumed rules, history)
  • Collaborative planning at district and building
    level with key stakeholders for wide ownership
    and decision making regarding structures,
    supports, use of resources, etc.

57
58
Putting Model in Place Requires
  • Data systems for decision making
  • Participation by parents across tiers
  • High quality staff development for skills
  • Systems for sustaining and supporting practices

58
59
Moving toward Implementation
59
  • Consensus Building
  • Developing an Infrastructure
  • Implementation
  • NASDSE Blueprint Tools available for guiding
    implementation for these 3 areas
  • A process that takes 3-5 years for full
    implementation!

Necessary at district and building levels
60
Typical Issues within Implementation
  • Changing views, long-held practices and beliefs
  • Need for professional development and skill
    building
  • Need for on-site support and coaching for deep
    and lasting implementation

60
61
Typical Issues within Implementation (cont.)
  • Need to examine instructional practices
  • Need for good data systems (using technology)
  • Need to look at use of resources (people,
    programs, time) differently, flexibly, based on
    student needs
  • Developing understanding among all constituencies
    (including parents)

61
62
  • One key aspect of successful implementation is
    effective leadership at all levels of the system
    regardless of role
  • Leadership development is the focus of the new
    State Professional Development Grant (SPDG)

63
Remember
  • Focus is on improving the system and results
    for all students, subgroups of students, and
    individual students (even when eligible for
    special education)

63
64
Remember
  • There is evidence that this approach results in
    identification of smaller percentages of students
    in need of specialized instruction (prevents
    problems for more students through early focused
    intervention)
  • This approach occurs within a comprehensive
    system with extensive collaborative planning and
    support

64
65
Remember
  • Merely replacing one method of determining
    eligibility with another does not address the
    real issue student improvement and closing
    achievement gaps
  • School change takes time, commitment, support,
    and collaboration

65
66
Resources for District and Building Planning
  • Implementation tools and models (e.g., Ohio
    www.iesystems.org
  • Blueprints (NASDSE and CASE, www.nasdse.org) at
    the district and building level for activities,
    resources, and wisdom from the field for
  • Consensus building
  • Infrastructure development
  • Implementation planning

66
67
Resources and References Reports
  • Presidents Commission on Excellence in Special
    Education (July, 2002) www.ed.gov/inits/commission
    sboards/whspecialeducation/
  • LD National Summit Panel (2002)
    www.air.org/ldsummit/
  • National Center on Learning Disabilities
    www.ncld.org

67
68
Resources and References Reports
  • National Academy of Sciences/National Research
    Council Panel Report (2002) www.nap.edu/catalog/10
    128.html
  • RtI Policy Implementation Paper (2005) for State
    Departments and other resources (myths,
    implementation tools, Blueprints)
  • www.nasdse.org

68
69
Resources Research-Based Instruction and
Intervention
  • Research-Based Instruction
  • US DOE What Works Website
  • www.w-w-c.org
  • Reading
  • http//reading.uoregon.edu.curricula
  • www.fcrr.org
  • www.texasreading/org
  • Targeted Interventions
  • www.interventioncentral.org
  • www.fcrr.org

69
70
Resources for Tiered Model
  • Overall Model Examples
  • Ohio Integrated Systems Model www.iesystems.org
  • Cincinnati Public Schools www.cps-k12.org
  • Resources and tools
  • NASDSE www.nasdse.org
  • NCLD www.ncld.org
  • National Center on RtI www.RTI4Success.org

70
71
Resources Data Systems
  • DIBELS
  • http//dibels.uoregon.edu
  • Curriculum Based Measurement
  • AIMSWEB www.aimsweb.com
  • Progress Monitoring
  • National Center on Student Progress Monitoring
  • www.studentprogress.org

71
72
References for RtI
  • Burns, Appleton, Stehower (2005). Meta-analytic
    review of RtI. Journal of Psychoeducational
    Assessment, 23, 381-394.
  • Burns Senesac (2005). Comparison of a dual
    discrepancy criteria to assess response to
    intervention. Journal of School Psychology, 43,
    393-406.

72
73
References for RtI
  • Burns, VanderHeyden, Jimerson (2007) Handbook
    for RtI. NY Springer
  • Denton, Vaughn, Fletcher (2003). Bringing
    research-based practice in reading intervention
    to scale. Learning Disabilities Research and
    Practice, 18, 201-211.
  • Haager, Klingner, Vaughn (2007). Evidence-based
    reading practices for RtI. Baltimore Paul Brookes

73
74
References for RtI
  • School Psychology Review (2006) Special Issue on
    Implementation of Tiered Models
  • Torgesen (2004). Preventing early reading failure
    (www.aft.org.pubs-reports/americaneducator/)
  • Zirkel (2007). The pluses and perils of RtI. The
    School Administrator, April, 2007 (www.aasa.org)

74
75
Presenter Contact Information
  • Janet Graden, PhD
  • University of Cincinnati
  • Janet.graden_at_uc.edu
  • Barbara Murphy
  • Office for Exceptional Children
  • barbara.murphy_at_ode.state.oh.us
About PowerShow.com