Response to Intervention - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Response to Intervention PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 780641-N2Q0M



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

Description:

Response to Intervention – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:144
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 59
Provided by: oais
Learn more at: http://www.oaisd.org
Category:

less

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

Title: Response to Intervention


1
Response to Intervention
2
RtI is . . .
  • . . .the practice of providing high-quality
    instruction and interventions matched to student
    need, monitoring progress frequently to make
    decisions about changes in instruction or goals
    and applying child response data to important
    educational decisions.
  • NASDSE, RtI Policy Considerations and
    Implementation, 2005 (emphasis added).

3
RtI is not. . .
  • one-size fits all program
  • kit that you can buy
  • system to evaluate teachers
  • pre-referral system

4
Themes of RtI
  • Create systems, not just programs, to support
    each and all students
  • Earlier rather than later
  • Evidence, not opinion

5
Continuum of Services (traditional)
Special Education
Title
Recovery
Sea of Ineligibility
General Education
Remedial
6
Continuum of Services (w/RtI)
Special Education
Interventions
General Education
7
Categorizing assessments
  • Outcome - Provides a bottom-line evaluation of
    the effectiveness of the reading program in
    relation to established performance levels
  • Screening - Designed as a first step in
    identifying children who may be at high risk for
    delayed development or academic failure and in
    need of further diagnosis of their need for
    special services or additional reading
    instruction
  • Diagnosis - Helps teachers plan instruction by
    providing in-depth information about students'
    skills and instructional needs.
  • Progress Monitoring - Determines through frequent
    measurement if students are making adequate
    progress or need more intervention to achieve
    grade-level reading outcomes.

8
RTI is a Well-Child Program for Education
  • Health Care
  • Infant screenings
  • Annual check-ups
  • Comparison to developmental standards
  • Immunizations
  • Use of research-based standard protocol
    treatments for common problems
  • Hypothesis testing as part of evaluation
  • Referral for specialist care if needed
  • Education
  • Standardized Kindergarten screening
  • Three yearly check-ups
  • Comparison to local and national benchmarks
  • Use of research-based instruction for general
    education instruction
  • Hypothesis testing as part of curriculum and
    assessment practices
  • Referral to special education only if progress in
    other instruction is not made

9
Three-Tier Prevention/Intervention
10
Why care about RtI?
  • Need to find a more efficient way to provide
    students with what they need
  • NCLB students must demonstrate proficiency in
    math and ELA by end of 2013-2014 school year

11
Why care about RtI?
  • Research is indicating that most students can
    meet grade level benchmarks when provided with
    appropriate general education instruction and/or
    interventions
  • IDEA 2004 allows use of RtI as an alternative to
    severe discrepancy model
  • Less time in evaluation, more time in intervention

12
Why care about RtI?
  • We serve a diverse student body and we are
    charged with teaching all students basic skills
  • Need a system that will help students
  • Need a system that will help us meet AYP
  • Need a system that will be cost effective

13
RTI Research
  • Majority of data are related to reading.
  • Data indicate that using RTI procedures optimizes
    outcomes for all students.
  • Studies show that not all students will be
    successful from RTI alone those students who
    still struggle need to receive special education
    services.
  • Learning disabilities do exist and will not be
    eradicated with RTI policies.

14
Where did this come from???
  • Changes in special education law from 1970s to
    present which shift focus from access to outcomes
  • Currently support for RtI in federal law
  • Converging scientific evidence, especially in the
    area of reading

15
Where did this come from???
  • We have been using components of RtI for a long
    time e.g. progress monitoring measures,
    differentiated instruction, etc.
  • Flipping systems from everyone is assumed to be
    ok until they arent to screening and
    intervening right away

16
RtI around the nation and in Michigan
  • Statewide Iowa
  • Pockets of implementation in AR, CA, CO, FL, ID,
    IL, KS, LA, MI, MN, MO, NC, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC,
    TN, UT, WA, WI, also New Zealand and Singapore
  • Michigan
  • MiBLSi one vehicle focusing on reading and
    behavior
  • Many other districts using model outside of MiBLSi

17
Core principles of RtI
1. We can effectively teach all children.
2. Intervene early.
3. Use a multi-tier model of service delivery.
4. Use a problem-solving method to make decisions within a multi-tier model.
5. Use research-based, scientifically validated interventions/instruction to the extent possible.
18
Core principles of RtI, contd . . .
6. Monitor student progress to inform instruction.
7. Use data to make decisions.
8. Use assessment for different purposes.
19
Stop and reflect . . .
  • RtI is . . .
  • Write your own definition in the box at the top
    of your RtI cheat sheet.

20
Where do we start?
  • RtI in 6 easy steps . . .
  • Implement scientifically based general education
    instructional methods
  • Collect benchmarks of all student performance 3
    times a year (school-wide or universal
    screening)
  • Identify students below benchmark
  • Provide scientifically based small-group
    instruction to students below benchmark (tiered
    model of instruction)
  • Monitor student progress (progress monitoring)
  • Review, revise or discontinue small group
    instruction based on progress (data-based
    decision making)

21
Essential tools usedto implement RtI
  • School-wide screening
  • Tiered levels of instruction
  • Progress monitoring
  • Data-based decision making

22
School-wide or universal screening
  • What is it?
  • Assessment measure in academic area used to look
    at group and individual performance on a specific
    skill (e.g. reading).
  • Should answer
  • Is our core curriculum working?
  • What students need further intervention?

23
Essential components of school-wide screening
measure
  • Accurate
  • Efficient
  • Based on mastery of skills vs performance of
    peers
  • Provide cut point or goal

24
School-wide screening example DIBELS
25
Percent of kindergarten students at Benchmark,
Strategic and Intensive levels in spring,
2000-2006
26
Stop and reflect . . .
  • Why do this?
  • What would I need to do?
  • What additional skills/tools would I need?
  • What challenges do I anticipate?

27
Tiered levels of instruction
  • What is it?
  • Set of evidence-based supplemental interventions
    designed for group of students who need more
  • Should answer
  • What do we do, right away, with the students who
    are not succeeding in a skill area

28
Tiered levels of instruction
  • Scientifically based supplemental instruction
  • Targeted to student need
  • Decision making rules in place

29
Tiered Layers of Instruction Example
30
Tiered Layers of Instruction Whats in your
triangle?
31
Stop and reflect . . .
  • Why do this?
  • What do I need to do?
  • What additional skills/tools would I need?
  • What challenges do I anticipate?

32
Progress monitoring
  • What is it?
  • Efficient assessment designed to give feedback
    on student progress in achieving skill
  • e.g. GPS for educators
  • Should answer
  • How is the individual student doing? Is the
    intervention working?

33
Progress monitoring
  • Need to be frequent
  • Assessments need to
  • Match same skills as being taught in the
    intervention
  • Have alternate forms (e.g. at least 20 forms)

34
Progress monitoring DIBELS
  • Tier II or strategic Progress monitor in the
    deficit area approximately every 2 weeks (some
    sources say every 4 weeks)
  • Tier III or intensive Progress monitor every
    week

35
Progress Monitoring Graph
Aimline
36
Stop and reflect . . .
  • Why do this?
  • What do I need to do?
  • What additional skills/tools would I need?
  • What challenges do I anticipate?

37
Are we having fun yet?!
38
Data-based decision making
  • What is it?
  • Use of student performance information to make
    instructional decisions
  • Should answer
  • How is our core curriculum doing? Are the
    interventions working? What else do we know?
    Etc.

39
Data-based decision making exampleGrade level
meetings
  • Questions
  • Is our curriculum meeting the needs of most
    students?
  • Are the interventions effective?
  • What needs to be changed?

40
GRADE LEVEL MEETING example
Task Question Action
Benchmark meeting Analyze data for grade and classroom How is our reading program meeting the needs of all students? Discuss research-based supplemental curriculums to beef up core Plan for implementation
Progress monitoring meeting Analyze data for individual students receiving interventions How is our intervention meeting the needs of these students? Discuss and plan for any changes that may be needed e.g. materials, time, group, motivation (see instructional adjustment matrix)
41
Data-Based Decision Making GRADE LEVEL MEETINGS
Task Question Action
Student assistance team meeting Analyze data for Tier III or intensive students How is the intervention plan meeting the needs of these students? Change intervention, content, grouping (see instructional adjustment matrix) Possible special education referral.
42
Stop and reflect . . .
  • Why do this?
  • What do I need to do?
  • What additional skills/tools would I need?
  • What challenges do I anticipate?

43
Three Examples
  • Emma Reading difficulties in grade 2
  • Molly Reading difficulties in grades 1-2
  • Laura Math difficulties in grade 4

44
Example 1 Emma
  • Emma transferred from a different school to a new
    elementary. She had satisfactory grades in K-1st
    at her old school. Emmas 2nd grade teacher
    reported that she needed directions read aloud,
    lots of reassurance, even for routine tasks. She
    was getting good grades, but an extremely slow
    worker.
  • By the winter of second grade, Emmas scores on
    the DIBELS showed that she was at risk for
    reading problems.

45
Emma in Grade 2
  • At the beginning of grade 2, Emma scored 19
    correct words per minute on Oral Reading Fluency
    (ORF) task. Typical peers score about 48 correct
    words per minute
  • Through additional informal assessment, the team
    determined that Emma was accurate, but slow
  • Emma received small-group Tier 2 instruction 5
    days a week for 30 minutes each day on Read
    Naturally, an intervention targeting fluency

46
Emmas Progress
47
Progress Review
  • In winter of 2nd grade, Emmas progress was
    reviewed it seemed she was making good progress,
    so her Tier 2 services were scaled back to 3 days
    per week and eventually dropped
  • In winter of 3rd grade her progress was reviewed
    again and her rate of progress had slowed.
  • Morgan resumed Read Naturally sessions and
    progress monitoring to get her back on track.

48
Example 2 Molly
  • Second grade student
  • Primary concern falling behind her peers in
    reading
  • Poor decoding skills, trouble w/vowel sounds
  • Interventions 30 min. Read Naturally, 5 days a
    wk, 30 min. Saxon Phonics, 5 days a wk

49
Laura
  • At the beginning of grade 4 Laura scored below
    the target on CBM math benchmarks for computation
    fluency.
  • Laura received small-group Tier 2 instruction 3
    days a week for 30 minutes each day.
  • The Tier 2 intervention was Great Leaps Math and
    included practicing math facts.

50
Lauras Progress
3 days/week
5 days/week
51
Progress Review
  • On October 18, Lauras progress was reviewed it
    seemed she might not make the winter benchmark,
    so her Tier 2 services were increased to 5 days
    per week.
  • On November 15 her progress was reviewed again
    and her rate of progress had improved.
  • Is Laura making effective progress?

52
Conclusions
  • Effective RTI interventions require time and
    consistent implementation.
  • Team-based approaches work best
  • Accountability will not go away the more we plan
    ahead, the better we can help kids.

53
Making RTI Happen
  • RTI requires coordinated, data-driven, and
    systematic integration of instruction and
    assessment.
  • It cannot be implemented over night it can take
    35 years for the steps to be learned and used
    accurately and with desired outcomes.
  • When used consistently, data has shown that RTI
    helps all students.

54
RTI Summary
  • RTI appears to offer a robust and technically
    sound set of methods that enhance student
    achievement while reducing special education
    placements.
  • RTI appears to be a viable way to improve access
    to effective instruction for all students.
  • RTI is not a replacement for all other assessment
    procedures, but a set of procedures which make
    educational planning easier.

55
Challenges for leadership in an RtI school or the
work ahead . ..
  • The greatest difficulty lies not in persuading
    people to accept new ideas, but in persuading
    them to abandon old ones. John Maynard
    Keynes
  • Ensuring high-quality instruction/interventions
  • Staffing multi-tier models of service delivery
  • Establishing decision-making rules
  • Using decision-making rules
  • Ensuring fidelity of implementation for
    instruction and interventions

56
Additional Resources
  • www.nrcld.org/html/symposium2003/summary
  • www.aimsweb.com
  • dibels.uoregon.edu
  • www.interventioncentral.org
  • idea.uoregon.edu
  • www.whatworks.ed.gov

57
References
  • Brown-Chidsey, R., Steege, M. W. (2005).
    Response to Intervention Principles and
    Strategies for Effective Practice. New York
    Guilford Press.
  • Marston, D., Muyskens, P., Lau, M., Canter, A.
    (2003). Problem-solving model for decision-making
    with high incidence disabilities The Minneapolis
    experience. Learning Disabilities Research and
    Practice, 18, 187-200.
  • OConnor, R. (2003, December). Tiers of
    intervention in kindergarten through third grade.
    Paper presented at the Response-to-Intervention
    Symposium, Kansas City, MO. Available online at
    www.nrcld.org/html/symposium2003
  • Speece, D. L., Case, L. P., Molloy, D. E.
    (2003). Responsiveness to general education
    instruction as the first gate to learning
    disabilities identification. Learning
    Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 147-156.

58
Questions/discussion . . .
About PowerShow.com