Response to Intervention: Georgia Student Achievement Pyramid of Intervention - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Response to Intervention: Georgia Student Achievement Pyramid of Intervention PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 815f4c-MGI0N


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Response to Intervention: Georgia Student Achievement Pyramid of Intervention


Response to Intervention: Georgia Student Achievement Pyramid of Intervention Georgia Department of Education Division for Special Education Services and Supports – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:170
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 37
Provided by: kristin359
Learn more at:


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

Title: Response to Intervention: Georgia Student Achievement Pyramid of Intervention


Georgia Department of Education Kathy Cox, State
Superintendent of Schools
One key question determines when, where, how
to intervene.
Is it the Fish or the Water?
Adapted from Beth Doll, University of Colorado
The Prevention/Intervention Triangle
80 able academic emotional learners
Intensive Intervention Evidence-based
interventions that are comprehensive,
coordinated, interagency supported, culturally
competent, family focused, of high quality, and
sustain help
Evaluate Effects
Early Intervention Provide proven structured
and targeted remedial academic mental/emotional
support to students placed at-risk
Primary Prevention(School-wide) Promote
academic mental/emotional wellness for all
students through family involvement, positive
school climate, social skills, teacher training,
individualized instruction, team consultation,
collaborative problem solving
Adapted from Dwyer, K. Osher, D. (2000)
Safeguarding Our Children An Action Guide.
Washington DC U.S. Departments of Education
and Justice, American Institutes for Research.
(page 3)
A New Era in Special Education
  • Of those with SLD, 80 are there simply because
    they have not learned how to read. Thus, many
    children identified for special education- up to
    40- are there because they were not taught to
    read. Few children placed in special education
    close the achievement gap to a point where they
    can read and learn like their peers.
  • Presidents Commission on Excellence in Special
    Educations Report A new Era Revitalizing
    Special Education for Children and Their
    Families. (July 1, 2002).

Embracing a More Proactive Model
  • Problem solving model and prereferral
    intervention is best practice for children with
    learning difficulties.
  • (Hale, Naglieri, Kaufman, Kavale, 2005)
  • It represents an opportunity to provide early
    intervention and/or pre-referral services to
  • Reduce inappropriate referral and identification
  • Establish a prevention model for all students
    no more wait to fail
  • Reduce the over identification of minority
  • Provide data that are relevant to instruction
  • Promote shared responsibility and collaboration
  • (NJCLD June 2005)
  • Represents a method for assessing the adequate
    opportunity for learning exclusion present in
    IDEA 2004

RtI in Georgia Student
Achievement Pyramid of Intervention
  • What is a Pyramid
  • of Intervention?

Georgia Department of Education Offices of
Curriculum and Instruction and Teacher/Student
Old Way
  • Student has difficulty we
  • Refer them to SST
  • Possibly have three SST meetings
  • Wait for the student To Fail without providing
    intense interventions
  • Refer On To Special Education evaluation

Pyramid of Interventions Way
  • Being Proactive
  • No More Wait to Fail- intense interventions
    provided earlier on to struggling students
  • General Education can Help All Students
  • No more Gray area- even students that Dont
    Qualify will have instructional supports
  • Making Intervention Really and Truly Work
  • Most Pre-referral interventions are based on a
    checklist- not based on student needs identified
    through data analysis
  • Reducing Disproportionality and
  • Students with intrinsic, lifelong disabilities
    will be served by special education placement
  • Looking at Instruction as a factor
  • Instructional Casualties are Not LD

Georgias model Student Achievement Pyramid of
  • Tiers of support for students who are struggling
  • Academics
  • Communication/language deficits
  • Appropriate school behavior/social skills
  • Provides assistance to any struggling student

Assumptions and beliefs to successfully implement
the Pyramid
  • All students can learn. When they are not
    learning, we must find out why.
  • Learning is a unique interaction between the
    student and the instructional environment.
  • We must focus on understanding resolving the
    causes of problems why learning is not
  • Passionately seeking authentic information about
    each child's unique skills and needs will result
    in academic/behavioral improvement.
  • Assessment activities must be multidimensional
    linked directly to intervention.
  • All students must be served early and often.
  • Time during the school day is needed for teachers
    to meet, engage in inquiry, and positively
    reflect on and facilitate student learning.
  • Family involvement is critical, desired, and

What makes the Pyramids possible?
  • These assumptions and beliefs are only possible
    when system wide progress monitoring is

What is Progress Monitoring?
  • Regularly and systematically using multiple
    indicators to assess and monitor childrens
  • Good assessment is essential to help teachers
    tailor appropriate instruction to children and to
    know when and how much intensive instruction on
    any particular skill or strategy might be needed
    (National Association for the Education of Young
    Children, 1998)

Progress Monitoring
  • Conducted frequently
  • Designed to
  • Estimate rates improvement
  • Identify students who are not demonstrating
    adequate progress
  • Compare the efficacy of different forms of
  • Thereby design more effective, individualized
    instructional programs for struggling learners
  • (National Center on Student Progress
    Monitoring, 2004)

What We Look For in CBM
  • Student is becoming a better reader
  • Student is not profiting from instruction and
    requires a change in the instructional program

Sarahs Progress on Words Read Correctly(National
Center on Student Progress Monitoring, 2004)
Sarah Smith
Reading 2
Words Read Correctly
Jessicas Progress on Words Read
Correctly(National Center on Student Progress
Monitoring, 2004)
Jessica Jones
Reading 2
Words Read Correctly
Progress Monitoring Is Used To
  • Identify at-risk students who may need additional
  • Help teachers plan more effective instruction by
    designing instructional programs for students
    with diverse needs

Progress Monitoring is Relevant to Special
Education Eligibility
  • Progress monitoring includes the data-based
    documentation of repeated assessments of
    achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting
    child progress during instruction. When reviewing
    progress monitoring data, those students that
    exhibit a positive response to the research
    validated instruction being provided by general
    education cannot be considered as having a
    disability even though they may show deficits on
    achievement tests in the specified areas
  • SBOE Rule 160-4-7-.05 ELIGIBILITY

Special Education Eligibility Determination
  • Data must be provided documenting that the
    exclusionary factors are not the primary reason
    for the students weakness
  • Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, to
    include the essential components of reading
    instruction (phonemic awareness, phonics,
    fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension)
  • Lack of appropriate instruction in math
  • Lack of appropriate instruction in writing

Continuation of Exclusionary Factors-Limited
English proficiency-Visual, hearing or motor
disability-Intellectual disabilities-Emotional
disturbances-Cultural factors-Environmental or
economic disadvantage-Atypical educational

The Role of Progress Monitoring in Documenting
Exclusionary Factors
  • A students classroom performance is not
    correctable without specialized techniques that
    are fundamentally different from those available
    in the general education classroom, basic
    remedial/tutorial approaches, or other
    compensatory programs. This is clearly documented
    by the childs response to instruction as
    demonstrated by a review of the progress
    monitoring available in general education and
    Student Support Team (SST) intervention plans as
    supported by work samples and classroom
    observations. The child's need for academic
    support alone is not sufficient for eligibility.
  • SBOE Rule 160-4-7-.05 ELIGIBILITY

Why is Progress Monitoring Needed for
Eligibility Determination?
  • We must come to grips with the realities that
    school districts serve different populations of
    children, have differing resources to address
    problem learners, and make eligibility decisions
    in light of these different circumstances.
  • Macmillan Siperstein, 2001

How do we operationalize Tier I and Tier II?
  • Key questions to answer are
  • - Do we have scientifically based curricula for
    all students in Reading, ELA, and math?
  • - Are school wide screenings used to group
    students for supplementary assistance?
  • - How are formative assessments analyzed to
    determine student needs?

Georgia Reading First Model
  • All children are assessed using the DIBELS
    instrument in fall, winter, spring.
  • Those at risk or some risk are given
    additional instruction.
  • Progress monitoring occurs on a regular basis.

Implementing a Staggered Reading Block
  • After the initial grade level instruction,
    students move during the reading block to
    homogenously grouped classrooms in order to
    better utilize all of their trained staff. A
    student would have a designated, highly qualified
    teacher in the area of reading who could be a
    general education teacher, a special education
    teacher, or an ESOL teacher depending on the
    students needs. The teachers with the high-risk
    children have smaller groups of children during
    the reading block.

How is your system implementing Tier I and Tier
  • Do you have a screening measure in place? If so,
    where is the data maintained?
  • What is the cut-point to determine those students
    that may be considered at-risk?
  • How are students targeted for preventative
  • How long are students provided preventative
    intervention? What determines success?
  • How has the role of general education teachers,
    specialists and support staff changed?

What is Tier 3
  • This should be the schools line of defense for
    reducing the number of students who are low
    performing or perhaps later referred for special
    education determination. Providing timely and
    evidence-based instructional strategies to at
    risk students can be the difference between those
    at-risk students successfully meeting standards.

What are the components of Tier 3?
  • It consists of general education instruction PLUS
    specialized intervention that contains
  • Small group instruction
  • Mastery requirements of content (relative to cut
    points identified on criterion screening measures
    and continued growth)
  • Frequency of progress monitoring
  • Duration of the intervention ( Nine to 12 weeks
  • Frequency with which the intervention is
    delivered (Three to four intervention session per
    week with 45-60 minutes per session)
  • Instructor qualifications

What is this Tier 3 or SST?
  • Current process for SST
  • Every child that fails or is difficult to teach
    has collaboratively developed individual plan
  • Problems
  • Limited evidence based interventions
  • Lack of baseline data in deficit area(s)
  • Teams are created without expertise provided
  • Limited accountability for fidelity of
  • Pyramid of Intervention Tier 3 Process
  • More Prescriptive based on results of on-going
  • Fewer Choices- Materials ReadiedPre-training
  • Progress monitoring embedded

  • Decision Making Along the Continuum of the
    Georgia Student Achievement Pyramid of

Tier 1
  • Universal screening or benchmarking is conducted
    at school level.
  • Evidence based curricula and strategies are in
    place for all students, and differentiation is
    documented by general education teachers through
    the general education environment.
  • At risk students are identified in an area of
    instructional delay (language, academics,
  • Any student identified as at risk is monitored
    for at least a grading period with progress
    monitoring tool or CBM in order to determine
    instructional effectiveness.
  • Data is included and analyzed by classroom
    general education teacher for decision making
    that indicates if Tier 1 universal interventions
    should be continued or if there is a need to
    proceed to the increased intensity of Tier 2

Tier 2
  • Hearing and vision screenings are completed for
    each student requiring Tier 2 interventions.
  • Parents are notified that additional small group
    instruction may be needed for their student.
  • The parent is contacted through a conference,
    phone call, or letter sent home that includes
    written documentation of the strategies that will
    be attempted.
  • Small group instruction in addition to core
    curriculum is provided to the student for at
    least one grading period.
  • Progress Monitoring is administered at least
    every 2-3 weeks to determine if a change in
    delivery or strategy is required.
  • If data after 3 progress monitoring checks
    indicates regression or no progress, the problem
    solving team of general education should meet to
    determine if more intensity in the delivery time
    or instruction is required.

Tier 3
  • When the student remains at the lowest 25 of
    performance in the area(s) of deficit and
    additional interventions are deemed necessary by
    teachers, parents, or others, the SST process is
    initiated with a referral to SST.
  • Baseline and progress monitoring data from Tier 2
    are analyzed to create specific goal(s) to
    increase student achievement in the area(s) of
  • The SST may determine the need for additional
    information on the student. This may include the
    use or administration of informal or formal
    measures to gather individual data on the area(s)
    of concern.
  • Members of SST collaborate to identify no more
    than 2 specific interventions to utilize with the
  • The plan for implementation includes a timeline
    detailing how long the intervention will be
    implemented and dates for progress monitoring.
  • If the child is making progress using the SST
    interventions, the interventions are continued
    for a minimum of 12 weeks. If progress toward the
    goal is minimal, SST members will revise or
    change the intervention.
  • The intervention plan should be implemented for
    at least 4 weeks before changes are made.
  • If the intervention plan is successful, the SST
    will create a plan for reducing the level of
    support needed by the child to the Tier 2 level.
    This plan should include a realistic timeframe
    for accomplishing this goal.
  • The SST may make a referral to special education
    if the intervention plan and the revisions are
    not successful in helping the child meet the
    goals identified by the SST.

Tier 4 Specialized Instruction, Monitoring per IEP
Tier 3 Progress Monitoring Data-weekly
Four Weeks, regression/no progress, revise
(repeat if not successful)
Four weeks, progress, continue for minimum 12
weeks total
Tier 2 Progress Monitoring Data-every 2 to 3 weeks
Three data checks, regression/no progress, lowest
Three data checks, progress
Tier 1 Universal or Benchmark Data monitoring for
at least a grading period
At-Risk Student Teacher analyzes benchmark data
and moves student to Tier 2.
On Target Student Teacher analyzes benchmark data
and keeps student in Tier 1.
  • It is not merely what is offered, but we must
    begin to evaluate how it is offered, who teaches
    it, and which students receive it.

For additional information, contact
Georgia Department of Education Kathy Cox, State
Superintendent of Schools