Response to Intervention Power Point (revised)

1

Response-to-Intervention:

An Overview and Connection to Other Education Initiatives

April 2007

Leah M. Nellis, Ph.D.Blumberg Center

Indiana State [email protected]

812.237.2830

2

Prior Knowledge RtI is a Special Education initiative

FALSE RtI takes one year to put into place completely

FALSE RtI’s primary function is to identify children with learning disabilities

FALSE RtI is an initiative for reading only

FALSE

3

Topics for Today’s Presentation

Definition and Contextualizing of RtI/Tiered Systems

Components of Tiered Systems

Continuum of Supports/Services

Assessment System

Problem Solving

Application of Tiered Systems

Implementation of Tiered Systems

4

Children and Youth in Need Estimated 1 in 10 adolescents experience a serious mental health disorder (Surgeon

General’s Report, 2000)

Approximately 31% of 4th graders are proficient in reading. Among poor and minority populations, only 16% are proficient (NCES, 2005)

In math, only 35% of 4th graders are proficient (NCES, 2005)

5.1% of youth aged 12-18 report some form of victimization at school (NCES, 2005)

29% of schools report significant acts of bullying (NCES, 2005)

10% of 16-24 year olds not enrolled in school and have no diploma/GED (NCES, 2003)

A Freshman semester with 2 F grades, decreases liklihood of graduating to 44%, 3 F grades to 31%. (Deshler, Hock, & Catts, 2006)

Significant increases in students identified for special education services. 319% increase of Other Health Impaired, 36% increase of Specific Learning Disabilities categories.

5

The Need is Validated No Child Left Behind Act, 2001

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 2004

President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, 2003

Surgeon General’s Report on the Mental Health of the Nation, 2000

President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education, 2002

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities

National Reading Panel, 2000

Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation – Exchanges in Early Education, 2001

Annenberg Foundation Trust at Sunnylands’ Adolescent Mental Health Initiative

And many more…..

6

Leading Up to RtI... Research & Concerns

Empirical evidence supporting Use of a problem solving method (Bergan et al, 1970’s) Formative assessment and goal setting (Deno et al, 1970’s) Use of scientifically-based instruction, especially in the area of

reading

Concern about traditional practices for identifying students for special education,

especially specific learning disabilities Service delivery models where general and special education

are separate

7

Leading Up to RtI…Conceptual Framework

Public Health Prevention and Intervention Models (Caplan, 1964; Gordon, 1983)

Learning and teaching environments can be designed to

teach, monitor, & acknowledge prosocial behaviors and academic skills

Resulting in A decrease in the development of new problems

AND A decrease in the worsening of existing problems

8

Leading Up To RtI…Federal Initiatives/Reports

National Research Council Panel on Minority

Overrepresentation

OSEP white papers & LD Summit

President’s Commission on Excellence in

Special Education

National Reading Panel

NCLB, IDEA 2004

9

So What Is RtI…

A framework for prevention and early

intervention which involves determining

whether all students are learning and

progressing adequately when provided

with high quality instruction and

intervention.

10

Integrated Three Tier Model for

Academic and Behavioral Supports

Core curriculum, instruction, & learning environment

Targeted, SupplementalSupports

Intense, Individualized Support

Data-based Decision Making Across the Tiers

Problem Solving

Tier I

Tier II

Tier III

11Intensity of Problem

Am

ou

nt

of S

ervi

ces/

Res

ou

rces

N

eed

ed t

o M

eet

Pro

ble

m

12

Areas of Application & Connection to Other

Initiatives Areas of Application

Academic Behavior Social-Emotional Learning

Connection to Other Initiatives Reading First Positive Behavior Support School Based Mental Health Crisis Prevention and Response And Many More

13

Essential Components of Tiered Models

1. Curricula, Instruction, and Intervention

2. System of Assessment and Progress

Monitoring

3. Data-based Problem Solving

4. Leadership

14

Integrated, Three Tier Model for

Academic and Behavioral Supports

Core curriculum, instruction, & learning environment

Targeted, SupplementalSupports

Intense, Individualized Support

Data-based Decision Making Across the Tiers

Problem Solving

15

Some Cautions Tier I vs Tier II vs Tier III

Empirical evidence predominantly on elementary level implementation

Continuum of services can be articulated at the grade, building, or district level

16




Monitoring


4. Leadership

17

Essential Components:Scientifically-Based Curricula, Instruction, and Intervention

General education environment (Tier 1) Primary prevention, before problems exist

Supplemental interventions (Tier 2) Secondary prevention, at the first sign of difficulty

Intensive interventions (Tier 3) Tertiary prevention, to reduce effects of difficulties

Key across all tiers….. Scientifically-based instruction and intervention Culturally responsive practices Consistent and rigorous implementation Changes to instruction are data-based

18

Alterable Variables to Intensify Instruction

Program Emphasis

Grouping

Time

19

What’s In The Curriculum, Instruction & Intervention

Triangle?

Core Curriculum, Instruction, and Learning Environment

Targeted, Supplemental Supports

Intense, Individualized

Support

20

Example for Elementary Reading

Tier Curriculum, Instruction, Intervention

III Students needing additional supports participate in individualized interventions for 20-30 minutes daily. Activities include Read Well, Sounds & Letters, and reteaching of priority skills.

II Students who are identified as needing additional supports participate in small group (3-4 students) interventions using Read Well for 30 minutes, 3 days per week.

I All first graders participate in a 90-minute reading block where whole-class and small-group instruction is provided using the Open Court reading curriculum.

21

Example for Secondary Reading


III Students reading more than 2 years below grade level participate in daily, 90-minute blocks of instruction on word level skills (accuracy & fluency), strategy instruction and engagement in thinking about the text, embedded & systematic instruction, and guided, supported practice.

II Students reading 1-2 years below grade level participate daily, 60-minute blocks of instruction on word level skills (fluency), strategy instruction and engagement in thinking about the text, embedded & systematic instruction, and guided, supported practice.

I Students with grade-level skills participate in General Language Arts classes

Torgeson, J. Adolescent Literacy: An overview of skill and requirements.Center on Instruction.

22

Example for Dropout Prevention


III Rehabilitation, Empowerment, Natural supports, Education, and Work (RENEW) which includes personal futures planning, flexible credit earning experiences, interagency collaboration, and workplace mentoring.

II “Function-based” interventions for individuals and groups of students, and incoming freshmen, who exhibit difficulty behavior or are deemed “at-risk”. One example is “Freshmen Advisories”. Involves peers through a student leadership initiative.

I Application of Positive Behavior Support to evaluation and re-design high school and discipline systems. Student leadership initiative, Main Street Academix, which recruits diverse groups of students to fill school leadership roles, train as “school climate” experts, and examine factors that contribute to drop-out.

New Hampshire’s APEX II Program.http://iod.unh.edu/projects/APEX.html

23

What’s In Your Curriculum, Instruction & Intervention

Triangle?

Core Curriculum, Instruction, and Learning Environment

Targeted, Supplemental Supports

Intense, Individualized

Support

Across the tiers,

What’s the curriculum for reading, math, behavior, and behavior/social-emotional learning?

How is the curriculum being taught? What materials are being used?

What services/supports are available?

24




Monitoring


4. Leadership

25

Essential Components:Integrated Assessment and Progress

Monitoring System Tier I

Universal screenings

Progress monitoring at least 3 times per year to identify those at risk

Tier II

Diagnostic assessment to inform instruction and intervention

Progress monitoring weekly or bi-weekly

Tier III

Progress monitoring multiple times a week

Additional assessment information as needed

Key across all tiers….. The assessments conducted and the frequency of data collection is determined by

student need.

26

Essential Components:Integrated Assessment and Progress

Monitoring System

Critical Questions Across the Tiers….

What decision will be made with the data?

Who will use the information?

What type of data is needed?

What assessment tool is needed?

27

28

29

What’s In TheAssessment Triangle?

Universal Screening, Benchmarking, Progress Monitoring

Progress Monitoring, Additional Assessments

PM, Addtl

AssessmentsFrequency of Progress Monitoring

30


Tier Assessment

III First graders receiving Tier III supports continue to be assessed using DIBELS progress monitoring probes 2-3 times per week. Data is graphed and reviewed weekly. If needs dictate, a referral for special education consideration is made.

II First graders receiving Tier II supports are assessed using DIBELS progress monitoring probes in NWF and ORF weekly. Data is graphed.

I All first graders are assessed using district assessments and DIBELS administered 3 times per year.

31


Tier Assessment

III Additional assessment in the areas below, as needed.

Progress monitoring collected multiple times a week.

II Based on student need, consider reading comprehension,

oral reading fluency, vocabulary knowledge, word recognition speed and accuracy, knowledge of phoneme-grapheme correspondences in writing. Curriculum based measurement and standardized assessments.

I Statewide assessment, district benchmarks, curriculum based measurement probe for oral reading fluency.

Winterbottom & Howard. (2005)Assessments for Secondary Students.Florida Center for Reading Research, www.fcrr.org.

32

Sampling of Possible Assessments for Secondary

Literacy Reading comprehension

Gray Oral Reading Test Diagnostic Assessment of Reading

(DRA) Nelson Denney

Oral reading fluency Gray Oral Reading Test Diagnostic Assessment of Reading

(DRA) Qualitative Reading Inventory-III Curriculum based measurement

Vocabulary knowledge Gates MacGinitie Reading Test, 4th

Edition Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test Test of Word Knowledge Curriculum based measurement

Word recognition speed and accuracy Test of Word Reading Efficiency Test of Silent Word Reading

Fluency

Knowledge of phoneme-grapheme correspondences in writing

Woodcock Reading Mastery Woodcock Dianostic Spellography Spelling Inventory

Commonly Used Assessments for Older Students. Florida Center for Reading Research, www.fcrr.org.

33

www.fcrr.org

34

35

Example for Dropout Prevention

Tier Assessment

III

II Student-led data collection including below data.

I Absences, tardies, expulsions, suspensions, office referrals for discipline problems (including information about when, where, or why behaviors occurred), school culture and climate surveys from students and faculty.


36

What’s In YourAssessment Triangle?

Universal Screening, Benchmarking, Progress Monitoring

Progress Monitoring, Additional Assessments

PM, Addtl

Assessments

Across the Tiers,

How are we identifying students who need additional supports or are at-risk?

How are we measuring the progress of all students?

37




Monitoring


4. Leadership

38

Essential Components : Problem Solving Method

A data-based decision making process that includes four basic steps:

Defining the Problem

Analyzing why it exists

Determining what to do about it

Evaluating Progress

39

Level I

Level II

Level III

Level IV

* Adapted From Heartland, IA AEA

Model

Levels of Problem Solving

Am

ou

nt

of S

ervi

ces/

Res

ou

rces

N

eed

ed t

o M

eet

Pro

ble

m

Intensity of Problem

40

Level ITeacher

Level IIGrade/Content

Area Level Teams

Level IIIBuilding/Core

Team

Level IVDistrictTeam

* Adapted From Heartland, IA AEA

Model

Levels of Problem Solving

Am

ou

nt

of S

ervi

ces/

Res

ou

rces

N

eed

ed t

o M

eet

Pro

ble

m

Intensity of Problem

Team composition determined bystudent needs

41

What’s In TheProblem Solving Triangle?

Teacher Inquiry, collaboration with parent and other professionals

Grade or Academic Teams,

Building Level/Core Team

BLT, District

42


Tier Problem Solving

III Progress monitoring data is reviewed regularly by teacher/interventionist and by building based teams. Multidisciplinary and IEP teams involved for those students who are referred for special education evaluation.

II Progress monitoring data is reviewed regularly by teacher/interventionist and for some students, by building based teams to inform decisions about need for additional supports/services.

I School Improvement Team regularly analyzes District Assessments and DIBELS data (coinciding with 3 benchmark administrations). Grade level teams/teachers use data for flexible grouping and instructional design. Teachers collaborate with parents and other professionals to address individual student concerns.

43


Tier Problem Solving

III Progress monitoring data is reviewed regularly by case manager and by building based teams. Multidisciplinary and IEP teams involved for those students who are referred for special education evaluation.

II Academic teams including across grade-level and content-area teachers, administrators, and specialists as needed use data to develop intervention plans.

I School Improvement Team regularly analyzes District Assessments and universal screening data. Departmental teams use data for grouping and class assignment. Teachers use data for instructional design and collaborate with parents and other professionals to address individual student concerns.

44

Example for Dropout PreventionTier Problem Solving

III RENEW teams including administrators, teachers, and representatives from community organizations/agencies.

II Teams consisting of administrators and teachers.

I Leadership teams consisting of administrators and teachers.


45

What’s In YourProblem Solving Triangle?

Teacher Inquiry, collaboration with parent and other professionals

Grade or Academic Teams,

Building Level Team

BLT, District

Across the Tiers,

How is assessment data being used for groups of students and individual students?

How is assessment data being used to develop intensify instruction/intervention?

What happens when a teacher or parent has a concern about a student?

46

Addressing Barriers to Learning Through Tiered Prevention & Intervention: A Student Assistance Core Team Approach

Tier III: Intensive Interventions School & Community resources for students who did not respond to Tier II interventions. Research predicts approximately 5% of GSP will be served in Tier III.

Tier II: Targeted InterventionsSchool & Community Resources for students who have been identified as in need of support. At least two-thirds of students referred to Tier II are expected to respond well. Research predicts approximately 15% of GSP will be served in Tier II.

Tier I: Prevention / Baseline InterventionsSchool & Community programsand supports available to all students, specifically students across all socio-economic, cultural, and gender groups establishing a positive learning environment. Research predicts approximately 80% of general student population (GSP) will be served in Tier I.

Assessment Supports

Collaborative Problem Solving: Data based problem solving is on-going with team membership that is responsive

to individual student need.

Examples:Frequent Progress Monitoring Referrals to Multi-Disciplinary Evaluation

Examples:SA CORE TEAMStrengths-Based NeedsFunctional Behavioral AnalysisCurriculum-Based Progress Monitoring

Examples: Required Health Screens Academic Data / BenchmarkingAttendance / Behavioral DataUniversal Academic ScreeningStandardized Tests

Examples:Relevant Special Ed.Systems of CareLinked Support Services

Examples:Small Group InstructionEducational Support GroupsParent ConsultationIndividual / Group Counseling

Examples:General Ed. CurriculumExtra-Curricular ActivitiesDevelopmental GuidancePrevention & Incentive ProgramsCommunity Programs

Reference: US Office of Special Education Programs—PBIS

Needs Assessment—School & community data collection to identify needs and resources

47

Thinking About Local Capacity at a District and

School LevelTier Curriculum, Instruction,

InterventionData Collection/

Assessment

Problem Solving

III

II

I

48

Moving toward Tiered System Implementation

Consensus Building

Developing an Infrastructure

Implementation

A process that takes 3-6 years for full implementation!

Necessary at the State, District, &Local Levels

49

Consensus Building Shared beliefs about why tiered systems/RtI is

important and needed,

Shared vision of what tiered systems would look like for those involved,

Shared understanding of how policies,

procedures, and initiatives will be integrated

50

Why use a School-Wide Tiered System Approach?

The best way to address problems is to prevent them before

they happen.

Achievement of all students is everyone’s responsibility

within a school.

Early intervention to promote success is critical to future

school achievement.

Early intervention requires accurate identification of children

at risk for failure.

Assessment, instruction, and meaningful outcomes for

students must be aligned.

From George Batshe, 2006

51

Building An Infrastructure Regulations, policies, procedures Curriculum, instruction, and intervention Assessment system Problem solving Ongoing professional development and

technical assistance Data management and technology

52

Where to Begin? Building consensus through inquiry

Assessing current practices,

Identifying needs,

Developing a timeline for consensus building and infrastructure development,

Integrating with school improvement plans and activities

53

Empirical Evidence for Tiered Systems

Emerging evidence to suggest fewer students (less than 2%) are identified as LD.

Burns, Appleton, Stehouwer, 2005

Reduction in special education referrals in early grades. Tilly, 2003

Overall reduction in special education placements. O’Connor, 2003

54

Empirical Evidence for Tiered Systems

Field-based practices yield similar or stronger results than university research-based efforts.

Burns, Appleton, Stehouwer, 2005

Emerging evidence on the individual components of RTI. Coleman, Buysse & Neitzel, 2006

55

Take-Home Message

What’s something that you’ve learned today that you see as your “take home message”?

Who will you share it with?

56

Key Websites

National Center on Student Progress Monitoring (NCSPM) www.studentprogress.org

National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (NCRLD)www.nrcld.org

Research Institute on Progress Monitoringwww.progressmonitor.org

IRIS Centerhttp://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/

Florida Center for Reading Researchhttp://www.fcrr.org/

57

Key WebsitesFlorida Center for Reading Research

http://www.fcrr.org/

Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts http://www.texasreading.org/utcrla/

Center on Instructionhttp://www.centeroninstruction.org

University of Oregon http://www.reading.uoregon.edu/curricula

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learninghttp://www.casel.org

OSEP Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supportshttp://www.pbis.org/tools

58

References

Brown-Chidsey, R., & Steege, M.W. (2005). Response to intervention: Principles and strategies for effective practice. The Guilford Press.

Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice, 18, 157-171.

Gordon, R.S. (1983). An operational classification of disease prevention. Public Health Reports, 98, 107-109.

Gresham, F.M. (2002). Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 467-519). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE). Response to Intervention: Policy Considerations and Implementation. (2005). Available from NASDSE Publications www.nasde.org

59

ReferencesNational Research Center on Learning Disabilities. (2004). Executive summary of

the NRCLD symposium on responsiveness to intervention [Brochure]. Lawrence, KS: Author.

O'Connor (2003). Tiers of intervention in kindergarten through third grade. Paper presented at the Response-to-Intervention Symposium, December 4-5, 2003, Kansas City, MO. Retrieved June 12, 2006, from www.nrcld.org/html/symposium2003.

Tilly, W.D., III. (2003, December) How many tiers are needed for successful prevention and early intervention? Heartland Area Education Agency’s evaluation from four to three tiers. Paper presented at the Response-to-Intervention Symposium, December 4-5, 2003, Kansas City, MO. Retrieved June 12, 2006, from www.nrcld.org/html/symposium2003.

Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L.S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137-146.

60

School systems are not responsible

for meeting every need of their students.

But when the need directly affects learning,

the school must meet the challenge.

Carnegie Council Task Force on Education of Young Adolescents, 1989

Health & Medicine

Response to Intervention Power Point (revised)