Upload
sydney-mcdaniel
View
214
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Elementary Models
• How does RtI look and feel at the elementary level?• It doesn’t need to look the same - what makes a
system RtI is that it includes the 3 components: measurement (universal screening & progress monitoring, tiered instruction, and problem solving process
• These are must haves but how it is carried out in one school may look different than another
System Supports
• RtI team - Strong leadership
• GLT - every 4 to 6 weeks
• Master Schedule that includes time for tiered instruction
• Culture of shared decision making
• Data warehouse
Master Schedule
• Creation of a schedule that includes time for tiered instruction may be one of the most supportive things a school can do for it’s staff and students.
123456789
101112131415161718192021222324
252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778
79808182838485
A B C D E F G H I J K
Kinder 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th RtI Teacher
#1RtI Teacher
#2RtI Teacher
#3
8:05 8:05
8:10 8:10
8:15 8:15
8:20 8:20
8:25 8:25
8:30 8:30
8:35 8:35
8:40 8:40
8:45 8:45
8:50 8:50
8:55 8:55
9:00 9:00
9:05 9:05
9:10 9:10
9:15 9:15
9:20 9:20
9:25 9:25
9:30 9:30
9:35 9:35
9:40 9:40
9:45 9:45
9:50 9:50
9:55 9:55
10:00 10:00
10:05 10:05
10:10 10:10
10:15 10:15
10:20 10:20
10:25 10:25
10:30 10:30
10:35 10:35
10:40 10:40
10:45 10:45
10:50 10:50
10:55 10:55
11:00 11:00
11:05 11:05
11:10 11:10
11:15 11:15
11:20 11:20
11:25 11:25
11:30 11:30
11:35 11:35
11:40 11:40
11:45 11:45
11:50 11:50
11:55 11:55
12:00 12:00
12:05 12:05
12:10 12:10
12:15 12:15
12:20 12:20
12:25 12:25
12:30 12:30
12:35 12:35
12:40 12:40
12:45 12:45
12:50 12:50
12:55 12:55
1:00 1:00
1:05 1:05
1:10 1:10
1:15 1:15
1:20 1:20
1:25 1:25
1:30 1:30
1:35 1:35
1:40 1:40
1:45 1:45
1:50 1:50
1:55 1:55
2:00 2:00
2:05 2:05
2:10 2:10
2:15 2:15
2:20 2:20
2:25 2:25
2:30 2:30
2:35 2:35
2:40 2:40
2:45 2:45
2:50 2:50
2:55 2:55
3:00 3:00
LUNCH 11:40-12:10
LUNCH 11:40-12:10
Kindergarten 12:10-12:35
Kindergarten 12:10-12:35
1st Grade Math12:35-
1:05
1st Grade Math12:35-
1:05
5th Grade Reading 1:05-
1:35
Special 1:15-2:05
3rd Math 12:35-1:55
4th Math 12:50-2:10
Special 2:05-2:55
Special 11:55-12:45
Lunch 12:05-12:25
2nd Grade Reading 1:35-
2:00
Kdg Math 1:10-2:10
3rd Grade Reading 9:40-
10:55
1st Grade Math 10:00-
11:00
2nd Grade Math10:30-
11:30
Playground
Playground
Playground
Kindergarten Reading 8:30-
10:00
1st Grade Reading 8:30-
10:00
2nd Grade Reading 8:30-
10:00
Kindergarten 12:10-12:35
Lunch 11:45-12:05Lunch 11:50-
12:10
Lunch 11:15-11:35 Lunch 11:20-
11:40
3rd Grade Reading 8:10-
8:40
4th Grade Reading 8:40-
9:10
2nd Grade Math 10:00-
10:30
LUNCH 11:40-12:10
PREP
5th Grade Math11:15-
11:40
Kindergarten 10:50-11:15
Interventions
Lunch 11:05-11:25
Special 10:00-10:50
5th Grade Math 11:15-
11:40
1st Grade Reading 2:30-
3:00
3rd Grade Math 2:00-2:30
2nd Grade Reading 1:35-
2:00
PREP
3rd Grade Reading 8:10-
8:40
Early Childhood 9:10-
10:20
4th Grade Reading 8:40-
9:10
Interventions 10:20-10:50
3rd Grade Reading 8:10-
8:40
Interventions 10:30-10:50
PREP
2nd Grade Math 10:00-
10:30
4th Grade Reading 8:40-
9:10
4th Grade Math 9:10-9:40
4th Grade Math 9:10-9:40
5th Math 1:35-2:55
PREP
1st Grade Math12:35-
1:05
5th Grade Reading 1:05-
1:35
Kindergarten 10:50-11:15
1st Grade Reading 2:30-
3:00
1st Grade Reading 2:30-
3:00
PREP
3rd Grade Math 2:00-2:30
Special
Playground
Playground
Playground
4th Grade Reading 9:40-
10:55
5th Grade Reading 9:40-
10:55
Special 10:55-11:45
Data Warehouse
• Purpose - we can’t expect teachers to be shuffling among a bunch of paper with different data on each sheet. We need everything on one sheet if possible to make data analysis easier.
• Excel is your basic tool for summarizing data • But there is an array of products for purchase
that make data analysis a breeze.
Fall Winter Spring
IntensiveIntensiveIntensiveIntensive IntensiveIntensive
StrategicStrategic
BenchmarkBenchmark BenchmarkBenchmark BenchmarkBenchmark
StrategicStrategic StrategicStrategic
Target:
Total ____ Enrollment:
Grade:
Goal:
Barb Scierka, SCRED
Fall Winter Spring
Bobby 21-6
7
Woody 1
6-63
Edward 1
5-58
Trum
an 2
4-57
James 1
0-53
Intensive <26
17 students25%
Intensive <26
17 students25%
Intensive10 students
15%
Intensive10 students
15%
IntensiveIntensive
StrategicStrategic
Isis 3
0-86
Johan
na 35-8
5
A.S. M
arie 3
1-76
Peggy D
33-7
3
Benchmark45 students05-06 66%04-05 61%03-04 56%
Benchmark45 students05-06 66%04-05 61%03-04 56%
Benchmark47 students05-06 70%04-05 69%03-04 61%
Benchmark47 students05-06 70%04-05 69%03-04 61%
Benchmark05-06 04-05 68%03-04 54%
Benchmark05-06 04-05 68%03-04 54%
Strategic <43, >=26
6 students9%
Strategic <43, >=26
6 students9%
Strategic10 students
15%
Strategic10 students
15%
Target: 43 72 90
Total 68 67 Enrollment:
2nd grade
42
Peggy N 43-71Tom T 65-70
Goal 70%
2
10
Bollman, SilberglittScierka, SCRED
Tiered Instructional Model
• Remember - interventions rest on the presumption of a strong core curriculum.
• Your data tell you if your core is strong.
5 2
1 7
3 1
0 %
2 0 %
4 0 %
6 0 %
8 0 %
1 0 0 %
P e r c e n t
R o o m 2 4 3 D a t a b y T i e r
M e e t s o r E x c e e d s t h e
S t a n d a r d
P a r t i a l l y M e e t s t h e
S t a n d a r d
D i d N o t M e e t t h e
S t a n d a r d
High Quality Instruction
• This goes back to the evidence base• Are we using known effective practices?• If we aren’t, is there a way to make them better -
especially in the core, if can’t purchase a new curriculum, can we beef up the core so that it is better?
• When students receive interventions, it’s no longer OK to overlook the quality of the intervention or delivery of the intervention - these are the most important variables!
Integrity of Implementation
• Schools psychs can push for the development of fidelity checklists
• Can help develop them - but best done as a collaborative effort someone who has expert knowledge of the interention working with someone with expert knowledge of strong instructional principles (you!)
What are Evidence-Based Literacy Practices?• National Reading Panel [2000], Put
Reading First [1998], Adams [1990] - a convergence of evidence that these 5 elements must be present- Phonemic awareness- Phonics/word study- Fluency- Vocabulary- Comprehension
Traditional Reading Curricula
• Designed for average students
• Intervene late by modifying curricula after students fail
• Underestimate the specificity of instruction and repetition needed by diverse learners
Redesigned Reading Curricula
• Designed to meet students’ needs at the 10 - 40th percentile
• Specificity and repetition are built in• It’s easier for teachers to remove
elements built into a curriculum [for more able students], than to add them later for struggling students.
Tier 2 compared to Tier 3• Tier 2 is designed for small groups of
students who have similar needs• Often this is delivered in a ‘standard protocol’
approach - in this approach student needs are predictable, and because most schools have limited resources, they select from a menu of research based intervention curricula to meet a particular need
• Tier 3, however, becomes more individualized- this doesn’t mean that schools can not use a standard approach, but they may add to it
National Math Panel • Executive Summary -some findings:
– preK-8 curricula should be streamlined and emphasize well-defined critical topics
– A combination of teacher directed vs. student directed instruction - not one way or the other way
– Must have conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and automatic and effortless recall of facts.
– Research does not support that instruction should be either student centered or teacher directed. Some of each can have a positive impact.
– Assessment should be improved in quality and emphasize the most critical knowledge and skills leading to Algebra
Math
• What Works Clearinghouse rated just one elementary math curricula as having potentially positive effects (Everyday Math)
• The Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education rated 5 curricula, computer assisted instruction &/or instructional strategies as having strong effectiveness
They are:
• Classwide peer tutoring
• Missouri Mathematics Program
• Peer Assisted Learning Strategies
• Student Teams-Achievement Divisions
• TAI math
Middle School Math• What Works Clearinghouse rated
– I Can Learn Algebra & Prealgebra
– Saxon Middle School Math
Both as having positive effects, and rated– Cognitive Tutor Algebra 1
– The Expert Mathematician
– Univ. of Chicago School Mathematics Project
As having potentially positive effects
When students are not being successful
1. Look at the core curriculum - is it evidence based, does it meet the majority of students’ needs, is it being implemented as intended
2. Only then do we try Tier 2 - is it evidenced based? Matched to student needs? Implemented with fidelity?
How long should we implement intervention?
• Cautions from George Batsche:– Different skills/content require different time frames for
acquisition. – Assessments are more/less sensitive and timelines place
artificial expectations on assessment sensitivity and usefulness.
– A student response to instruction/intervention (rate) should inform time (and intensity) in instruction/intervention.
– Timelines assume all instruction can be delivered with the same impact in the same time, that all assessments can assess change at a uniform rate, and that student data and professional judgment are less important than “how long” a student should get an intervention.
– Timelines have the potential to increase the risk that a student remains in an intervention for that particular timeline, even if no evidence exists that the instruction/intervention is working.
One last system support
• Professional development for staff should be directly linked to student needs.
• The data tell us what our students strengths and weaknesses are.
• As educators, we need to focus our own development on what the data indicate students need in terms of instruction instruction
Facilitation
Meeting facilitation - another role for school psychologists
• Building RtI team
• Grade level teaming
PurposeGrade Level Data Review, Analysis,
and Intervention Planning
Define Tier Cut-Off Scores
& Review Triangle
Data
Group Students According to Tiers & Needs
Review Interventions
& Match to Students’
Needs
Review Resources &
Match to Interventions
Create Updated Intervention
Plan for Each Tier
Grade Level Meetings
Courtesy of D204Courtesy of D204
Plan
Implementation
Fall Grade 3 Data:Students of Concern
GradeMAP Reading Fall 07-08 2008 RIT ScoreMAP Reading Fall 07-08 2008 PercentileOral Reading Fluency Fall Benchmark 2008 RAW SCOREOral Reading Fluency Fall Benchmark 2008 Number of Errors% Accuracy ORF3 181 33 66 5 93%3 180 31 92 1 99%3 179 33 24 3 89%3 177 31 73 5 94%3 175 16 35 8 81%3 173 33 56 1 98%3 172 27 80 11 88%3 172 12 69 5 93%3 171 11 52 6 90%3 170 10 43 5 90%3 165 31 48 5 91%3 165 7 27 5 84%3 162 5 10 9 53%3 149 1 13 8 62%
10th %ile10th %ile
90th %ile90th %ile
75th %ile75th %ile
50th %ile50th %ile
25th %ile25th %ile
Student is above the90 %ile and is well above average.
Student is above the90 %ile and is well above average.
TargetTarget
____________________________________Box and Whisker Charts
MPS box plotfor grade level
Building RtI teams
• The problem solving process needs nurturing
• You can use agenda or forms to guide the process
• Well-oiled teams may not need either after working together and solving problems
Clearly defined roles of team members
Think, Pair, Share
What are qualities of good meeting facilitators?
Facilitation “Quiz”
Agendas
• See handout
Problem Solving
• As a school psych you can be very instrumental in – developing a well-defined problem
identification statement – as well as helping teams through problem
analysis and generating relevant hypotheses for developing a plan
Student: ____________________________________________ Date Form Completed: ____________________________________
St e p 3: Ind icate selecte d hypo t hesi s (cir cle or bold type ). Selecte d hypo t hesi s mu st ha ve conve r gen t da t a to suppor t inc ludi n g qua n titat ive da t a.
S tep 1: Lis t al l h ypothes is regar d in g caus e or func t ion of pri oritized probl em:
S tep 2: Lis t al l rele van t dat a t o suppo r t or refute ea ch hypo t hesi s lis ted
HYPOTHESES
R REVIEW
I INTERVIEW
O OBSERVE
T TEST
I
INSTRUCTION
1.
2.
3.
Instructional approaches, pacing, dif ficulty, class schedule, attendance, lesson plans
Expectations, alignment of instruction and curriculum, preferred practices, teachers philosophical orientation
Effective teaching practice, evidence of teacher expectations, modification of materials, classroom routines and behavior management
Aggregated peer performance on class assessments, class standing on district or statewide assessments, Checklists and questionnaires.
C
CURRICULUM
1.
2.
3.
Permanent student products, scope and sequence of lessons, Curriculum materials, books, worksheets, curriculum guides
District policy regarding adoption and use of curriculum materials, philosophical orientating of curriculum
Alignment of curriculum and materials, use of mandated curriculum, use of modified materials, assignments, assessments
Level of assignments and curriculum diff iculty
E
ENVIRONMENT
1.
2.
3.
Reports about school rules, class size, policy on disruptive behavior, peer’s work
Classroom routines, rules, behavior management plans, expectations
Physical environment, interaction patt erns, opportunity to learn, distractions,
Classroom environment scales (TIES), Aggregated peer performance on class assessments
L
LEARNER
1.
2.
3.
Health records, student work, teacher intervention records
Int erviewees perception of the problem, significance to student and peers, patt erns of behavior, current knowledge and skill
Present levels of performance, targets for instruction, nature and dimensions of target behavior, response to interventions, interaction patterns
CBM, classroom tests, norm-referenced tests, self-reports
Let’s do one together
• Problem ID - Joe, a 2nd grader is reading 27 cwpm when he is expected to be reading 52 cwpm
• Where do we begin in PA?
BREAK