Making Data Driven Decisions: Cut Points, Curve Analysis,

and Odd BallsRobert Rosenthal, David Lillenstein,

Jason Pedersen, Laura Lent, Richard Hall, Joe Kovaleski, and

Edward Shapiro

Agenda

To hear how decisions are made regarding intervention and evaluation in schools from all over Pennsylvania that implement Response to Intervention and Instruction models.

To learn about some outcomes as a result of these decision strategies.

Overlook Elementary

K-6 Enrollment 460

% Free/Reduced 25%

% Minority 45%

% Proficient on Reading PSSA 77%

% Proficient on Math PSSA 84%

4th Year with RtII

RtI Level Curriculum Component

Grade Level

K – 2 3 - 6

Tier 1 

Treasures (Macmillon/McGraw Hill) X X

First 2 yrs- Houghton Mifflin X X

Compass Learning X X

Tier 2

First 2 yrs Breakthrough to Literacy

Treasures Leveled Reader X X

Soar to Success X

Tier 3

Fundations X

First 2 yrs Breakthrough to Literacy

Wilson Reading X

Triumphs (Macmillon/McGraw Hill) X X

Instructional Programs ‘06- ‘10

Grade Level Team Meetings

Examine data every 6 weeks Include all data on excel spreadsheet Use DIBELS Prog monitoring charts Calculate slope (rate of progress)

Generally follow DIBELS recommended Instructional levels

Must present data to not follow recommended levels

Data examined at Team Meetings

Universal screening (DIBELS) Unit (curriculum) test scores Unit (curriculum) weekly assessment 4-Sight scores (3 times) PSSA (annual state assessment) Rate of progress (slope of PM data) Length of time at a tier level Instructional program at T2&3 Behavior infractions

Tier Assignment Decisions

First look at DIBELS recommendation K-2

Then examine Unit/Weekly test scores For students in T2 or 3:

Sub-groups decoding/fluency/comp

3-6 Then examine Unit/Weekly tests, PSSA,

4-Sight Sub-group

fluency/decoding/comprehension/writing

Making Sub-Groups

Every 6 Weeks, Once Tier Level Decision is Made: Group by high vs low Group by decoding vs fluency vs comp Group by Program (Fundations)

K-2nd Teacher Perceptions-What Influences Tier Placement

3rd-6th Teacher Perceptions- What Influences Tier Placement

Percent of Time We Followed DIBELS Instructional Recommendations

When Didn’t Follow Inst Rec

43 times (10% of total students) we gave more support than indicated

31 times (8%) we gave less support Reasons:

Unit Test scores Behavior/Emotional Issues (gave more) Borderline- look at other data Not a fluency problem (gave more) A fluke (gave less- other indicators ok) Resources- group when similar

Decision to Evaluate

Rate of progress is below target and typical rate (unless not fluency prob)

History of failure in curriculum In targeted instructional support for at

least 6 months with multiple data-driven changes using research-proven techniques and programs

PM shows significantly below peers BB or B on PSSA’s

Teacher Perceptions: What Influences Decision to Evaluate

Eligibility Decisions

LEA decided to use discrepancy Augment ER with RtI data Slope scores can help support decision

(especially when ½ target rate) Helps in making recommendations

Type and quantity of program Sometimes data is conflictual:

Used to be: Discrepancy rules Now any sign of success makes it difficult

Always helps with ED classification

Evaluations Across Years

Placements Across Years

Average T/A: Differences between Referral Sources

State Testing Across Years

Conclusions Must include special ed students Teachers need more training We see a reduction in testing, with school

referrals being more accurate Now at Team meetings staff don’t ask about

evaluations, they ask about interventions Must continually remind staff to look at data

to make decisions- we need to move them to less support more often