Curriculum Based Measurements and Response to Intervention - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Curriculum Based Measurements and Response to Intervention PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 780648-Nzk0Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Curriculum Based Measurements and Response to Intervention

Description:

Curriculum Based Measurements and Response to Intervention Loretta Benenati WSU-Vancouver – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:60
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 16
Provided by: lbe77
Category:

less

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

Title: Curriculum Based Measurements and Response to Intervention


1
Curriculum Based Measurements and Response to
Intervention
  • Loretta Benenati
  • WSU-Vancouver

2
How did it happen?
  • A team, including our building administrator and
    Director of Special Education attended the
    Reading Summit at the University of Washington in
    Tacoma in 2005.
  • Wayne Callender spoke about RtI and CBM and
    everything he said made sense.
  • Because we are such a small district it was easy
    to implement.

3
What were the selling points?
  • Our team was most excited about the possibility
    of eliminating the discrepancy model when
    qualifying students for Special Education
    Services.
  • General Education Students would be able to
    receive instruction in the Special Education
    setting, when appropriate. Special Education
    became a service rather than a place.
  • There would be a system for effectively
    identifying and monitoring struggling students.
    No child would slip through the cracks.

4
How do we use CBM data?
  • CBM data dictates reading groups for our Walk to
    Read reading block.
  • CBM data determines who receives a second dose of
    reading.
  • CBM data tells us who will attend the Read
    Naturally Lab, as well as when they are able to
    graduate from Read Naturally.
  • CBM data is used in teacher evaluation.

5
What does progress monitoring look like for us?
  • All students who are in the bottom quartile are
    receiving interventions.
  • Students are assessed, using the Aimsweb Oral
    Reading Fluency CBM, every two weeks.
  • If a student reaches benchmark on three
    consecutive data points, they are graduated from
    interventions.

6
What was the timeline for implementation?
  • Our team attended the conference in October. In
    January, the entire district performed a
    benchmarking oral reading fluency CBM.
  • The first set of data was presented to the
    Administrative Team a week later.
  • The information provided on graphs, efficiently
    and effectively identifying the three tiers,
    resulted in complete buy-in from all
    administrators.
  • Within two weeks of the first benchmarking,
    interventions were being provided to all students
    below the 25th percentile.
  • The second data point showed a correlation
    supporting interventions, along with shrinking
    numbers of students in the red and yellow tiers.

7
What systems and programs are used?
  • Aimsweb materials are used for progress
    monitoring and benchmarking.
  • We use the Hasbrouck and Tindal table of fluency
    norms to determine whether or not our students
    are at benchmark.
  • Read Naturally and various SRA materials,
    including Reading Mastery, are used for
    interventions.

8
How do CBMs tie in with RtI for us?
  • Our RtI Team meets twice each month.
  • We look at CBM data from progress monitoring to
    identify students requiring additional or altered
    interventions.
  • After each of our three benchmarking dates we
    review the data for all areas in which we use CBM
    scores Reading, Writing and Math
  • The RtI Team problem solves on any student
    presenting in the lowest 10th percentile.
  • RtI team is able to help design and implement
    strategies to prevent a student from being
    unnecessarily referred to Special Education.

9
What do the experts say?
  • When teachers use systematic progress monitoring
    to track their students progress in reading,
    mathematics, or spelling, they are better able to
    identify students in need of additional or
    different forms of instruction, they design
    stronger instructional programs, and their
    students achieve better.
  • Fuchs and Fuchs (2002)

10
What does the research say to teachers?
  • Progress monitoring, using CBM scores, tracks the
    pace of learning for a student. If the rate of
    improvement is not adequate to meet the annual
    goal, instruction can be modified.
  • Previously, teachers were only assessing whether
    a student had acquired a specific set of skills.
    This allows us to actually predict a students
    ultimate success in a given period.

11
What does the research say about uses?
  • We can improve an individual students program,
    as in special education, where CBMs and progress
    monitoring got their start.
  • We can predict performance on high-stakes
    assessments.
  • We can identify students who are at risk for
    academic failure.
  • We can use the data to drive our instruction.
  • We can identify students for special education
    without the antiquated discrepancy model.

12
K W L
Know Want to Know Learned
We are doing an excellent job with Reading How to use the data effectively for Math and Writing Providing interventions increases Reading Fluency
Read Naturally and SRA materials work, when used with integrity Math and Writing Interventions and Strategies Reading fluency directly correlates to performance on the WASL
Using CBM scores to progress monitor allows us to always know if a child is struggling Buy-in by staff and administrators is critical.
Being a small district was invaluable in making the implementation seamless
13
What has the data told us?
  • IT WORKS!
  • By following student success through progress
    monitoring and implementing interventions where
    indicated, we have the following numbers to
    support our work

Spring 2008 62 Benchmark 6 Problem Solve
Fall 2009 64 Benchmark 8 Problem Solve
Winter 2010 73 Benchmark 6 Problem Solve
14
Now what?
  • Continue with our excellent work in Reading, with
    a goal of 85 of our students at or above
    benchmark.
  • Become as proficient in Math and Writing.
  • Expand our RtI process to more effectively deal
    with behaviors and evaluate the impact on
    academics, largely using the CBM data
  • PBIS is our ultimate goal, realizing that our
    academic scores will increase with improved
    discipline.

15
Sources
  • Deno, Stanley L. (2003). Curriculum-based
    measures Development and perspectives.
    Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28, 3-12.
  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D. (2002).
    Curriculum-based measurement Describing
    competence, enhancing outcomes, evaluating
    treatment effects, and identifying treatment
    nonresponders. Peabody Journal of Education, 77,
    6484.
  • Madelaine, A. Wheldall, K. (2004).
    Curriculumbased measurement of reading Recent
    advances. International Journal of Disability,
    Development and Education, 51, 5782.
  • Safer, N. Fleischman, S. (2005). Research
    matters How student progress monitoring improves
    instruction. Educational Leadership, 62, 81-83.
  • Much of the information came from an interview
    with Principal Todd Carper, who first brought
    CBMs, Progress Monitoring and RtI to our district.
About PowerShow.com