Samuel O. Ortiz, Ph.D. St. Johns University Elaine Fletcher-Janzen, Ed.D. The Chicago School of Professional Psychology Culturally Responsive RTI—School

Samuel O. Ortiz, Ph.D.Samuel O. Ortiz, Ph.D.St. Johns UniversitySt. Johns University

Elaine Fletcher-Janzen, Ed.D.Elaine Fletcher-Janzen, Ed.D.The Chicago School of Professional PsychologyThe Chicago School of Professional Psychology

Culturally Responsive RTI—School Culturally Responsive RTI—School Psychologists as Cultural Psychologists as Cultural Interventionists.Interventionists.

Culturally Competent Culturally Competent Psychological Practice Part Psychological Practice Part 4:4:

What constitutes sufficient “opportunity to What constitutes sufficient “opportunity to learn?”learn?”

What works, and with whom?What works, and with whom?

What makes an intervention culturally or What makes an intervention culturally or linguistically appropriate? linguistically appropriate?

How will ELLs “catch up” on experiential vs. How will ELLs “catch up” on experiential vs. discrete skills and abilities?discrete skills and abilities?

What research guides intervention programs?What research guides intervention programs?

How does RTI measure up to the “Standards?”How does RTI measure up to the “Standards?”

Culturally Responsive Culturally Responsive InterventionIntervention

Baker & Good (1995) investigated the Baker & Good (1995) investigated the reliability, validity, and sensitivity of reliability, validity, and sensitivity of English CBM passages with bilingual English CBM passages with bilingual Hispanic students and concluded that it Hispanic students and concluded that it was as reliable and valid for them as for was as reliable and valid for them as for native English speakers native English speakers despite the despite the presence of differential growth ratespresence of differential growth rates. .

Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs with Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs with RTI RTI

Gersten & Woodward (1994) suggested Gersten & Woodward (1994) suggested that CBM could be used to develop that CBM could be used to develop growth rates for ELL students, but growth rates for ELL students, but erroneously concluded that erroneously concluded that ELL students ELL students generally continue to make academic generally continue to make academic progress toward grade-level normsprogress toward grade-level norms whereas ELL students with LD do not.whereas ELL students with LD do not.

Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs with Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs with RTIRTI

Although it has long been assumed that RTI will benefit ELLs by avoiding the types of biases associated with standardized testing, this premise does not appear to be wholly supported by research.

In describing a basic three-tier RTI model, one of the stated potential benefits included:

“Increased fairness in the assessment process, particularly for minority students”

Kovaleski & Prasse, 2004

Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs with Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs with RTIRTI

Tier 1 RTI evaluation implications for ELLs:Tier 1 RTI evaluation implications for ELLs:

Determine whether effective instruction is in Determine whether effective instruction is in place for groups of studentsplace for groups of students

Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs: Tier 1 Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs: Tier 1 Issues Issues

Source: Goldenberg, C. (2008). Teaching English language learners: What the research does—and does not—say. American Educator, 32 (2) pp. 8-23, 42-44.

“Teaching ELLs to read in their first language and then in their second language, or in their first and second languages simultaneously (at different times during the day), compared with teaching them to read in their second language only, boosts their reading achievement in the second language” (emphasis in original).

“The NLP was the latest of five meta-analyses that reached the same conclusion: learning to read in the home language promotes reading achievement in the second language.”

How can RTI-based evaluation be fair when the How can RTI-based evaluation be fair when the instructional programs most often used to instruct instructional programs most often used to instruct groups of ELL students (i.e., ESL, English immersion) groups of ELL students (i.e., ESL, English immersion) have been have been demonstrated empiricallydemonstrated empirically to be ineffective to be ineffective in promoting grade level achievement or academic in promoting grade level achievement or academic success?success?

Well designed and effective interventions cannot make Well designed and effective interventions cannot make up for deficiencies in educational pedagogy or up for deficiencies in educational pedagogy or artifactual developmental delays that result from the artifactual developmental delays that result from the unenlightened use of “intuitive science” (i.e., common unenlightened use of “intuitive science” (i.e., common sense) or application of misguided political ideology.sense) or application of misguided political ideology.



Provide effective instruction to the target Provide effective instruction to the target student and measure its effect on student and measure its effect on performanceperformance


“Making an assumption that what works with native English speakers will work with students from diverse language backgrounds may be inaccurate (McLaughlin, 1992). Although substantial empirical support exists for the use of a response-to-intervention (RTI) approach to address literacy problems with native English speakers (e.g., Burns, Appleton, and Stehouwer, 2005; Mathes et al., 2005; Vellutino, Scanlon, and Tanzman, 1998), very little data exist about the effectiveness of this approach with EL learners (Vaughn et al., 2006).”

Source: Vanderwood, M. L. & Nam, J. E. (2007). Response to Intervention for English Language Learners: Current developments and future directions. In S. R. Jimerson, M. K. Burns and A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of Response to Intervention: The Science and Practice of Assessment and Intervention (pp. 408-417).

What Works Clearinghouse Looks at What Works Clearinghouse Looks at Reading Recovery® for English Reading Recovery® for English Language Learners Language Learners

The WWC examined the research conducted in English on The WWC examined the research conducted in English on Reading Recovery® and identified 13 studies that were Reading Recovery® and identified 13 studies that were published or released between 1997 and 2008 that looked at published or released between 1997 and 2008 that looked at the effectiveness of this short-term tutoring intervention on the effectiveness of this short-term tutoring intervention on English language learners' literacy skills. English language learners' literacy skills. None of these studies None of these studies meet WWC evidence standardsmeet WWC evidence standards. Therefore, conclusions may . Therefore, conclusions may not be drawn based on studies conducted in English about the not be drawn based on studies conducted in English about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of Reading Recovery® for effectiveness or ineffectiveness of Reading Recovery® for English Language Learners. English Language Learners.

December 15, 2009December 15, 2009

Full report available at: Full report available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/english_lang/read_recov/ http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/english_lang/read_recov/

The WWC examined the research on "Accelerated Reader" and The WWC examined the research on "Accelerated Reader" and identified 13 studies that were published or released between 1983 identified 13 studies that were published or released between 1983 and 2008 that looked at the effectiveness of this curriculum on and 2008 that looked at the effectiveness of this curriculum on English language learners’ reading and math skills. English language learners’ reading and math skills. None of these None of these studies meet WWC evidence standardsstudies meet WWC evidence standards. Therefore, conclusions may . Therefore, conclusions may not be drawn based on research about the effectiveness or not be drawn based on research about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of "Accelerated Reader" on English Language ineffectiveness of "Accelerated Reader" on English Language Learners. Learners.

December December 22, 200922, 2009

Full report Full report available at: available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/english_lang/accreader/ http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/english_lang/accreader/

What Works Clearinghouse Looks at What Works Clearinghouse Looks at “Accelerated Reader” for English “Accelerated Reader” for English Language Learners Language Learners

How can RTI-based evaluation be fair to the individual How can RTI-based evaluation be fair to the individual student if the program used to instruct that student student if the program used to instruct that student (i.e., ESL, English immersion) has been demonstrated (i.e., ESL, English immersion) has been demonstrated empirically to be ineffective in promoting grade level empirically to be ineffective in promoting grade level achievement or academic success?achievement or academic success?

Even after an ELL has been exited from or deemed to Even after an ELL has been exited from or deemed to no longer need or require bilingual education or ESL no longer need or require bilingual education or ESL services (un-LEP’d), it cannot be assumed that he/she services (un-LEP’d), it cannot be assumed that he/she is comparable to age or grade matched monolingual is comparable to age or grade matched monolingual English speaking peers, or that interventions that English speaking peers, or that interventions that “work” for native English speakers will now suddenly “work” for native English speakers will now suddenly “work” just as well for non-native English speakers.“work” just as well for non-native English speakers.

Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs: Tier 2 Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs: Tier 2 IssuesIssues

What do, “scientifically validated,” “empirically What do, “scientifically validated,” “empirically validated,” and “evidence-based” all mean anyway?validated,” and “evidence-based” all mean anyway?

– In general, an intervention/teaching strategy meets the In general, an intervention/teaching strategy meets the definition of these terms when, through experimental definition of these terms when, through experimental investigation, one group of children were able to learn more investigation, one group of children were able to learn more than another group. That means, if you teach it, they should than another group. That means, if you teach it, they should learn it.learn it.

– However, it does not mean that ALL children will learn by that However, it does not mean that ALL children will learn by that technique and it does not mean that is even the best technique. technique and it does not mean that is even the best technique. For ELLs, it also means that no matter how well it works, it will For ELLs, it also means that no matter how well it works, it will not lessen the achievement gap or help them to fully “catch up” not lessen the achievement gap or help them to fully “catch up” to their native English speaking peers. to their native English speaking peers.

– Interventions can be shown to be evidence-based in that they Interventions can be shown to be evidence-based in that they “work” for ELLs, but it does not mean they will then begin to “work” for ELLs, but it does not mean they will then begin to reach classroom, school, or district-wide aimlines or reach classroom, school, or district-wide aimlines or expectations. expectations.

Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs: Tier 2 Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs: Tier 2 IssuesIssues


Refer students whose RTI warrants additional Refer students whose RTI warrants additional or intensive continuing interventionsor intensive continuing interventions


What exactly will evaluation look like beyond progress monitoring and curriculum based assessment of current academic skills?

How will these procedures systematically evaluate the influence of cultural and linguistic differences and the extent to which they are primarily responsible for lack of progress as compared to lack of progress due to a learning disability, particularly when RTI has not ensured that evidence-based instruction (i.e., in the native language) has been provided?

Source: Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., Alfonso, V. C. & Dynda, A. M. (2006). Integration of Response to Intervention and Norm-Referenced Tests in Learning Disability Identification: Learning from the Tower of Babel. Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 43(7), 807-825.

Once an ELL has been exited from or deemed to no longer Once an ELL has been exited from or deemed to no longer need or require bilingual education or ESL services (i.e., they need or require bilingual education or ESL services (i.e., they have been FLEP’d, or un-LEP’d), it cannot be assumed that have been FLEP’d, or un-LEP’d), it cannot be assumed that they are comparable in terms of their academic they are comparable in terms of their academic achievement to their monolingual English speaking peers.achievement to their monolingual English speaking peers.

ELLs will invariably continue to have increasingly less ELLs will invariably continue to have increasingly less foundation and life-long experiences in English language foundation and life-long experiences in English language development and in then acquisition of the acculturative development and in then acquisition of the acculturative knowledge that is embedded within and underlies the knowledge that is embedded within and underlies the subject matter of all curricula and for which mastery remains subject matter of all curricula and for which mastery remains a critical requirement for success in school.a critical requirement for success in school.

““Once a bilingual, always a bilingual.” ELLs do not suddenly Once a bilingual, always a bilingual.” ELLs do not suddenly cease to be bilingual simply because they have become cease to be bilingual simply because they have become proficient and dominant in English.proficient and dominant in English.


The most common type of instruction given in schools The most common type of instruction given in schools today, ESL, creates an today, ESL, creates an artifactual linguistic artifactual linguistic “handicap” “handicap” that puts otherwise capable children at that puts otherwise capable children at levels far below their age and grade related peers in levels far below their age and grade related peers in school achievement. What is “effective instruction” school achievement. What is “effective instruction” for the average 3rd grader may be totally for the average 3rd grader may be totally inappropriate for the average ELL who, nonetheless is inappropriate for the average ELL who, nonetheless is in 3rd grade. in 3rd grade.

ELLs are clearly able to make progress comparable to ELLs are clearly able to make progress comparable to English speaking peers on English speaking peers on discrete types of skills discrete types of skills (e.g., phonological processing or phonemic (e.g., phonological processing or phonemic awareness). However, progress on other abilities that awareness). However, progress on other abilities that develop as a function of develop as a function of age and experience age and experience (e.g., (e.g., vocabulary), is likely to remain behind that of peers.vocabulary), is likely to remain behind that of peers.


Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs: Fairness in Evaluation of ELLs: SummarySummaryFor the purpose of identifying SLD in ELLs, RTI will pose significant For the purpose of identifying SLD in ELLs, RTI will pose significant

limitations and obstacles including the fact that:limitations and obstacles including the fact that:

– ELLs in English-only or ELLs in English-only or ESL programs, by definition, do not meet the ESL programs, by definition, do not meet the fundamental principle of RTI fundamental principle of RTI regarding the provision of empirically regarding the provision of empirically validated intervention.validated intervention.

– The reasons why an ELL is not learning or responding to intervention The reasons why an ELL is not learning or responding to intervention as may be expected, in particular those related to cultural or as may be expected, in particular those related to cultural or linguistic differences, linguistic differences, are not likely to be revealed via RTI are not likely to be revealed via RTI alone.alone.

– RTI is not designed to identify or accommodate the developmentally RTI is not designed to identify or accommodate the developmentally based differences in academic skill acquisition based differences in academic skill acquisition needed to distinguish needed to distinguish specific learning differences from specific learning disabilitiesspecific learning differences from specific learning disabilities..

Comprehensive evaluation of a broad range of cognitive abilities Comprehensive evaluation of a broad range of cognitive abilities and processes in ELLs suspected of SLD via norm-referenced and processes in ELLs suspected of SLD via norm-referenced standards will be necessary to help determine whether learning standards will be necessary to help determine whether learning problems are the result of “difference vs. disorder.” The issue problems are the result of “difference vs. disorder.” The issue cannot be resolved by RTI alone.cannot be resolved by RTI alone.

Cultural Issues and Low SES Cultural Issues and Low SES

1 in 5 children in America grow up in 1 in 5 children in America grow up in conditions of chronic poverty and social conditions of chronic poverty and social disadvantagedisadvantage

Over 12 million children currentlyOver 12 million children currently Poverty rates among minority children Poverty rates among minority children

nearly double that of Anglo--30% of nearly double that of Anglo--30% of African American and Hispanic American African American and Hispanic American children.children.

Reasons for Low SES Children Scoring Reasons for Low SES Children Scoring Lower on Cognitive and Lower on Cognitive and Neuropsychological testsNeuropsychological tests

Poor prenatal carePoor prenatal care Birth injuriesBirth injuries MalnutritionMalnutrition Reduced access to long-term, ongoing, preventative health careReduced access to long-term, ongoing, preventative health care Increased dependency on ERs (Asthma example)Increased dependency on ERs (Asthma example) Less treatment adherence with low SES groups (medication Less treatment adherence with low SES groups (medication

example)example) Toxin exposure: lead, pesticides Toxin exposure: lead, pesticides Parasitic infections: neurocysticercosis, toxocariasisParasitic infections: neurocysticercosis, toxocariasis Health issues such as otitis media-(linked to reading)Health issues such as otitis media-(linked to reading) Low SES school district’s quality of educationLow SES school district’s quality of education Less emphasis on education in the homeLess emphasis on education in the home Less verbal interactions between low SES mothers and babiesLess verbal interactions between low SES mothers and babies Double-jeopardy--comorbidityDouble-jeopardy--comorbidity

Would any of these conditions have an affect on who is Would any of these conditions have an affect on who is identified for RTI?identified for RTI?

Would any of these conditions have an influence on Would any of these conditions have an influence on differential diagnosis?differential diagnosis?

KABC-I I Global Scale Mean Scores by Mother's Education: Norm Sample

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

>12 12 13-15 16+

Mother's Education Level

Glo

bal S

cale

Sco

res

All (N=2175)FCIMPI

Reasons for Low SES Children Scoring Reasons for Low SES Children Scoring Lower on Cognitive and Lower on Cognitive and Neuropsychological testsNeuropsychological tests

NCCRESt: Intervention Should NCCRESt: Intervention Should be Based on a Theory of be Based on a Theory of Culture in LearningCulture in Learning

RTI should be based on a theory of RTI should be based on a theory of how culture mediates learninghow culture mediates learning

Culture is not a set of characteristics Culture is not a set of characteristics but is activity indexed in practicebut is activity indexed in practice

Appropriate for researchAppropriate for research

NCCRESt: RTI-Culture Theory NCCRESt: RTI-Culture Theory Design Considerations Design Considerations

Consider changes in the sampling of Consider changes in the sampling of situations and taskssituations and tasks

Consider situations where others are not Consider situations where others are not physically present but are an physically present but are an anticipated anticipated audienceaudience

Consider not only what each person Consider not only what each person contributes but also what is expected for contributes but also what is expected for eacheach

Look for ways of combining an interest in Look for ways of combining an interest in shared tasks and in everyday situationsshared tasks and in everyday situations

NCCRESt: Research Must Account for NCCRESt: Research Must Account for How Contextual Contingencies and How Contextual Contingencies and Irregularities Across Context Irregularities Across Context Challenge Ecological Validity.Challenge Ecological Validity.

Evidence-based--but in what context?Evidence-based--but in what context? Experimental conditions may differExperimental conditions may differ Variation across schools, Variation across schools,

developmental levelsdevelopmental levels Promotion of a systems approach to Promotion of a systems approach to

evaluate potential effectivenessevaluate potential effectiveness

NCCRESt: Three Conditions NCCRESt: Three Conditions for Ecological Validityfor Ecological Validity

““(Research) must maintain the integrity of (Research) must maintain the integrity of the real-life situations it is designed to the real-life situations it is designed to investigate. Second, it must be faithful to the investigate. Second, it must be faithful to the larger social and cultural contexts from which larger social and cultural contexts from which the subjects come. Third, the analysis must the subjects come. Third, the analysis must be consistent with the participants’ definition be consistent with the participants’ definition of the situation, (i.e.,) the experimental of the situation, (i.e.,) the experimental manipulations and outcomes must be shown manipulations and outcomes must be shown to be “perceived by the participants in a to be “perceived by the participants in a manner consistent with the conceptual manner consistent with the conceptual definitions explicit and implicit in the research definitions explicit and implicit in the research design.” (p.4)design.” (p.4)

NCCRESt: RTI-Ecological NCCRESt: RTI-Ecological Validity Considerations Validity Considerations

When we observe in classrooms…When we observe in classrooms…– What do we notice about the nature of the What do we notice about the nature of the

relationship between a teacher and relationship between a teacher and students?students?

– How are students supported?How are students supported?– How does the teacher promote interest and How does the teacher promote interest and

motivation?motivation?– What can we conclude about the culture(s) of What can we conclude about the culture(s) of

the classroom?the classroom?– What can we conclude about the student’s What can we conclude about the student’s

opportunities to learn?opportunities to learn?

NCCRESt: RTI Research Must NCCRESt: RTI Research Must Have Population Validity Have Population Validity

What works with whomWhat works with whom Interventions should be evidenced-Interventions should be evidenced-

based on intended targets (e.g. ELL)based on intended targets (e.g. ELL) What do the “tiers” look like for different What do the “tiers” look like for different

groups of students?groups of students? If population validity is violated--what If population validity is violated--what

does that say about the study’s does that say about the study’s assumptions about what matters and assumptions about what matters and who counts?who counts?

NCCRESt: RTI Guidelines NCCRESt: RTI Guidelines About Sampling About Sampling

Why this group rather than another? Why this group rather than another? Look carefullyLook carefully

What is the nature of your link to this What is the nature of your link to this group?group?

Look for within-group differencesLook for within-group differences Could the question be answered by Could the question be answered by

looking within my own culture?looking within my own culture?

Documents

Samuel O. Ortiz, Ph.D. St. Johns University Elaine Fletcher-Janzen, Ed.D. The Chicago School of Professional Psychology Culturally Responsive RTI—School