1 Wayne Callender

RTI

Copyright

Wayne CallenderUniversity of Oregon

waynec@uoregon.edu

What’s So Appealingabout Response to Intervention?

Consider...

Despite the push for the popularized Pre-Referral concept of the 1980’s, resultinginterventions have failed to reduce the numberof students identified for services. Further,there is essentially no empirical evidence thatmost pre-referral processes resulted in betteroutcomes for students.

2 Wayne Callender

RTI

What Does Not Work: IQ-Achievement Discrepancy

IQ/Achievement discrepancy model is not relatedto student instructional needs and takes attentionaway from necessary interventions.– Unreliable-Poor Stability across time for

different pairs of tests– Expensive– Wait to Fail Effect (delays intervention until

late 3rd or early 4th grades)» Source: Daniel J. Reschly

Special Education:Statistics of Interest

• 60% all students in special education are those withspecific learning disabilities

• Up to 80% of SLD students are there because theyhaven’t learned to read.

• Students in Special Education:– Have less exposure to regular ed. curricula and have fewer

regular ed. friends– Academic achievement is no better than like, non-identified

peers• Few students in special education ever close the

achievement gap, even fewer exit.• Placement in Special Education is a life altering event

» President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education (2002)

3 Wayne Callender

RTI

President’s Commission onExcellence in Special Education

• “What we found was a system in need offundamental re-thinking…”

• Reduce the number of students placed inspecial education through research-basedinterventions before referral

• Simplify the identification process – “Servicesfirst, assessment later”

• Incorporate Response to Intervention.Implement models during the identificationprocess that are based on response tointervention and progress monitoring.

» President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education (2002)

Old Thinking New Thinking

Problems Learning is aSIGN of a LEARNING

PROBLEM

Problems Learning is a Sign ofa Break Down in the

Instructional Process-ManyStudents Have Problems

Learning at Points in Their Life

A LOTTA Testing to Get aKid a LITTLE Help

A LITTLE Testing toGet a Kid a LOTTA

Help

Test to IdentifyDisability/Disease

Test to IdentifyInterventions that Make

a DifferenceCredit to W. Alan Coulter for the concepts and the accent.

New Thinking: Outcome Driven

4 Wayne Callender

RTI

RTI...• Is about improving student outcomes• Provides support to teachers and parents• Allows for intervention immediately• Focuses on alterable academic and

behavioral skills and evaluates progress• Seeks to solve problems rather than create

placements

–Requires:• (1) Effective Systems and• (2) Problem Solving components

Learning Is an Interaction of 3Major Variables

Curriculum

InstructionStudent

Characteristicsand Skills

A “problem,” then, may be more than just“the student.”

5 Wayne Callender

RTI

Re-define Regular EducationBenchmark – will do fine

with a good core program(75 – 80%)

Strategic – will needsupplemental andreinforcement programsto hit targets (15%)

Intensive – will need anintensive program thataccelerates learning inkey skill areas (5%)

Regular Education

Regular Education

Special Education/Title 1

Ind

ivid

ual

Pro

ble

mS

olv

ing

Sch

ool-

wid

eA

ppr

oac

h

RTI...Combining a School-WideSystem and Problem Solving

1. All students receive high quality, research-based instruction in theclassroom.

2. General education system includes universal screening ofacademics and behavior.

3. School staff (reg. and special ed.) implement research-basedinterventions to address students with difficulties.

4. Interventions are predetermined and available for all5. School staff use progress-monitoring data to determine

interventions’ effectiveness and to make modifications as needed.Problem Solving occurs at the systems and group level.

6. Student’s not improving as anticipated are addressed by aproblem-solving team - interventions are designed for individualstudent needs

7. Progress monitoring and use of decision rules applied weekly toensure adequate progress

8. Student’s with inadequate progress may need special educationsupport.

6 Wayne Callender

RTI

What Effective Schools Have InCommon

• Strong Instructional Leadership• Highly Skilled Instructors• High Expectations of Student Achievement

for all students• Broadly Understood Instructional Focus• Measures of Student Achievement as a

Basis for Program Evaluation

To Get There in Practice, We Needto Establish the Following:

1. Systems - well designed structure foraddressing all students

2. Assessment - for the purpose ofidentifying students in need, differentiatinginstruction, and evaluating studentprogress and program effectiveness

3. Intervention - Scientifically validatedprograms and teaching practices across allfour levels of the system

4. Problem Solving - Systems and individuals

7 Wayne Callender

RTI

Academic Systems Behavioral Systems

5-10% 5-10%

10-15% 10-15%

Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment- based•High Intensity•Of longer duration

Intensive, Individual Interventions• Individual Students• Assessment-based• Intense, durable procedures

Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response

Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response

75-85% 75-85%Universal Interventions•All students•Preventive, proactive

Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive

STEP 1. Well Designed StructureEnter a School-Wide Systems for Student Success

School A Change in Benchmark/Intensive K-3

8 Wayne Callender

RTI

School B Change in Benchmark/Intensive K-3

Improvement Requires a Coordinated, Sustained Effort

How are building decisionsmade?

• Core (Benchmark)>Well designed and well implemented (preventsholes)>One year growth in one year

• Supplemental>Identify holes and fill>In addition to the core program

• Intensive>Replacement program (replaces the core)>Capable of accelerating learning (direct,explicit)

9 Wayne Callender

RTI

Effective Systems: Evaluating Grade Level Progress

LowISBI5753748772Interm.Elem. A

OverallLevel ofSupport/Target

ThirdGrad

e

Second

Grade

FirstGrad

e

Kinder-

gartenPrincipalCoach

3(200

5-2006

)

2(2005

-2006)

1(2005

-2006)

K(2005

-2006)

K -2(2005

-2006)

Areas of Greatest ConcernSupportGrade Data

SchoolContextSchools:

( ) indicates % of adequate progress Winter to Spring

Effective Systems: Identifying Concerns

2221688158I

5325638664S

KG & G 3: Programpacing? Other?

G 2: Phonics forreading? Fluency?Enhancements?

G 1: Walk to read?Fluency?

100968210089B

Elem. A

IntensiveStrategicBenchmark3

(2005-2006)

2(2005-2006)

1(2005-2006)

K(2005-2006)

K-2(2005-2006)

BSIProgress

Schools:

Areas of Concern/Actions

Evaluate the Health of Systems

AtRisk

Intensive Strategic Benchmark

Time 1: ( e.g., Winter)

Time 2: (e.g., Spring)

1. SomeRisk

2. LowRisk

AtRisk

SomeRisk

3. LowRisk

AtRisk

SomeRisk

4. LowRisk

Evaluating Systems4 Ways to Achieve Adequate Progress

Source: Oregon Reading First

10 Wayne Callender

RTI

Summary of Effectiveness Report

Source: DIBELS

The Basics of a Tiered Approachin Secondary Education

• Prevention– Systematic screening of all students entering middle

school.– Provision of at least 1 year of intensive remedial

reading.

• Remediation– Differentiate between students with direct and

indirect service needs.– Serve students with direct service needs with

standard direct instruction.– Serve students with indirect service needs through

mainstream consultation agreements.

11 Wayne Callender

RTI

School-Wide Attendance Model

Step 2: Assessment

• Use Benchmark Assessment Results toAnswer:– How many students are in need of additional

instructional support?– Which students are in need of additional

instructional support?

Use Progress Monitoring to EnsureInterventions are Effective

12 Wayne Callender

RTI

Different kinds of assessment data areneeded for different decisions

within the system

Four Purposes of Assessments1. Screening Measure2. Diagnostic Measure3. Progress Monitoring Measure4. Outcome Measure

Four Purposes of Assessment

Screening

Diagnostic

ProgressMonitoring

OutcomeMeasure

Identify Concern

Identify Level of Concern

Cause of Concern?

What Needs to be Taught?

Is it Working?

Ensure Gap is Closing at Desired Rate

Predicted by Screening and Progress Monitoring

Traditional testing... told us the obvious, but was of questionable teaching value

13 Wayne Callender

RTI

Is there a difference in theinstruction for children struggling or

at-risk for different reasons?“...thus far, no conclusive evidence

exists that the particular cause(genetic or environment) of a child’sdelay in either of these domains isrelevant to the type of instruction heor she will require in learning toread” National Reading Panel Report, based on

115,000 reading research studies

Diagnostic Testing...

How Much DiagnosticAssessment and When

• Primary Purpose: Identifying what to teach• Under what circumstances?

– All Strategic/Low Benchmark students– Some Intensive students– Key function is to tell us what to teach - not

just to know for explanation or curiositypurposes

14 Wayne Callender

RTI

Fluency or Decoding Issue?Does the student need instruction on fluency

or decoding?• Select a new passage at the highest level which the

student failed to meet fluency criterion but was +90%accurate and ask the student to read the passagealoud – cold timing.

• Teacher marks where the student is at the end of 1minute but allows the student to continue reading.

• Then ask the Student to reread the same passage asquickly and carefully as they can and the teacherstops the student at the end of 1 minute.

• Compute: Rereading Rate – Initial Rate X 100 = %

Initial Rate

Fluency or Decoding?Example: 90 rereading rate – 83 initial rate

83 initial rate X 100 = 8%

Example: 118 rereading rate – 83 initial rate 83 initial rate X 100 = 42%

• If the increase is greater than or equal to 40%, instruct to buildfluency;

• If the gain is less than 40%, then conduct further error analysisor diagnostic assessments to determine specific deficits

Curriculum Based Evaluation, Howell, Nolet, 2000

15 Wayne Callender

RTI

Two Types of ProgressMonitoring:

Type of Assessment: Answers:

In-Program Are studentsAssessment learning the

content?

CBM/DIBELS Are theygeneralizing?

1)

2)

Evaluate Support:Modify Instruction?

Whoops! Time to make a change!

10

20

30

40

Dec.Scores

Feb.Scores

Jan.Scores

MarchScores

Ap rilScores

MayScores

JuneScores

60

50

Wo

rds

Co

rre

ct

Aimline

16 Wayne Callender

RTI

Levels of Instructional Support

Addressing the needs of most students,some and a few…

Level ofSupport

InstructionalPlacement Assessment Plan

Benchmark

Strategic

Intensive

Core Program

Core PlusSupplement

InterventionProgram

• Benchmark Testing: Three times per year – all students• In Program assessments• Screening & Outcome Assessment

• Benchmark Testing: Three times per year – all students• In Program assessments• Screening & Outcome Assessment• Plus: monthly progress monitoring

• Benchmark Testing: Three times per year – all students• In Program assessments• Screening & Outcome Assessment• Bi-monthly progress monitoring

STEP 3. Use a ScientificallyValidated Approach

• Investigate the research base of yourprograms and interventions

• Identify sources of information forevaluating effectiveness of programs

• Know your own context and needs• Match interventions with student needs

(benchmark, strategic and intensive)• Monitor the extent to which they are

effective• Change ineffective programs and

strategies

17 Wayne Callender

RTI

Why Consider Programs?

Understanding the Purpose of DifferentPrograms

Classifying Reading Programs:

What is the purpose of the program?

1. Core2. Supplemental3. Intervention

CoreReading Program

SupplementalReading Program

Core

Supplemental

Intervention

InterventionReading Program

Meeting the needs for most Supporting the Core Meeting the needs for each

Programs are tools that are implemented by teachers toensure that children learn enough on time.

Vaughn et al. 2001

18 Wayne Callender

RTI

InterventionPrograms

SupplementalProgram

CorePrograms

•Early Reading Intervention(K-1) PA, P•Reading Mastery PA, P, F,C•Reading Mastery Plus PA,P, F, C, V•Horizons PA, P, F, C•Read Well (K-1) PA, P, F, C,V

•Waterford Levels PA, P, F,C, V(1-2)•Corrective Reading: (3rdand above) PA, P, F, C

•Road to the Code – PA•Read Naturally – F•Quick Reads-F•Phonemic Awareness inYoung Children – PA•Ladders to Literacy – PA•SIPPS – P•PALS – P•Lindamood Bell – PA, P•Wilson – PA, P•Language for Learning (k-1)V•Language for Thinking (2-4)V, C

•Open Court•Houghton MifflinNation’s Choice•Reading Mastery

Models of Reading ProgramsGrade K-3

*PA = PhonemicAwareness*P = Phonics*F = Fluency*C = Comprehension*V=Vocabulary

REACH **Corrective ReadingLanguage for LearningMorphographic Spelling

Read 180 plus SIPPS **Corrective Reading **Lindamood-BellLanguage! **WilsonRewardsHigh Point

**Intervention Program

Model of Reading ProgramsGrade 4-12

Supplemental/Intervention Programs

19 Wayne Callender

RTI

Interventions Are Not…

• Accommodations• Adaptations• Interagency referrals• Special education settings• Assessments, evaluations, screenings• Classroom observations• Advice or consultations• Assisting with instructional methods and

materials• Places

Don’t Just Stop with Intervention forReading

20 Wayne Callender

RTI

Websites for Scientifically Based BehaviorSupport

•National Technical Assistance Center on PositiveBehavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS):www.pbis.org•Safe and Civil Schools:www.safeandcivilschools.com

STEP 4: Establish a Problem-Solving Process

Problem Solve at the all Three Levels:

1. Problem Solving Systems (Benchmark,Strategic, and Intensive)

2. Problem Solving Instructional Groups

3. Problem Solving Individual Students

21 Wayne Callender

RTI

Systems Problem Solving vs.Individual Problem Solving

Group AStudent weekly

growth:.5 cwpm

InstructionalGroup Averageweekly growth:

.5 cwpm

Group BStudent weekly

growth:.5 cwpm

InstructionalGroup Averageweekly growth:

1.75 cwpm

Fien, 2007

Remember...Entitlement is NOTthe Purpose of RTI

• Student achievement/Supporting teachers is thepurpose

• RTI is about meeting the needs of all students -NOT the new way to qualify students for specialeducation

• RTI seeks to understand problems for the primarypurpose of intervention

• Progress monitoring is essential• Problem Resolution is the goal

“If RTI simply becomes the new way to qualifystudents for special education, it will not havebeen a worthwhile endeavor”

22 Wayne Callender

RTI

Focus on Trajectory

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1st Qtr 2ndQtr 3rdQtr 4thQtr

Strategic

Benchmark

Intensive

Dual Discrepancy: Severely discrepant ininitial skill level and growth

23 Wayne Callender

RTI

Look at the Individual’s Response toIntervention: What Happened?

10

20

30

40

Dec.Scores

Feb.Scores

Jan.Scores

Mar chScores

AprilSco res

Ma yScores

JuneScores

60

50

Aimline

Trendline

What Changes Once a Studentis Placed on an IEP

In regards to Intervention...hopefully nothing.If more effective intervention/instruction isavailable through special education, thesystem is not adequately designed.

An IEP assures that proper intervention andsupports will be provided long-term andnecessary accommodations will beavailable.

24 Wayne Callender

RTI

“When We Know Better,We Do Better”

Maya Angelou