Response to Intervention: Accelerating Achievement for ALL Students

1
Response to Intervention Accelerating
Achievement for ALL Students

• CESA 9
• Merrill, Wisconsin
• June 11, 2009
• Dr. George M. Batsche
• Professor and Co-Director
• Institute for School Reform
• Florida Statewide Problem-Solving/RtI Project
• University of South Florida

2
One of the major reasons why schools dont change
much is that change needs leadership. It needs
committed, intelligent leadership, an agenda, an
awareness of the conditions that have to be in
place and a grasp of the strategies that one has
to use to effect change. John Goodlad, 2000
3
The most important outcome of any fundamental
change process must be a change in the
stakeholders mindsets and beliefs about
education. Without changes in the users
mindsets, no fundamental change is likely to
succeed. Squire Reynolds, 2000
4
Table Top Activity

• Complete the Beliefs Survey
• Option 1Your Beliefs
• Option 2 Your Staffs Beliefs

5
National Resources to Support District and School
Implementation

• www.nasdse.org
• Building and District Implementation Blueprints
• Current research (evidence-based practices) that
  supports use of RtI (RtI Research to Practice)
• www.rtinetwork.org
• Blueprints to support implementation
• Monthly RtI Talks
• Virtual visits to schools implementing RtI
• Webinars
• Progress Monitoring Tools to Assess Level of
  Implementation
• www.floridarti.usf.edu
• Introductory Course (Web-Based/Competency Driven)

6
The Vision

• 95 of students at proficient level
• Students possess social and emotional behaviors
  that support active learning
• A unified system of educational services
• One ED
• Student Support Services perceived as a necessary
  component for successful schooling

7
Response to Intervention

• RtI is the practice of (1) providing high-quality
  instruction/intervention matched to student needs
  and (2) using learning rate over time and level
  of performance to (3) make important educational
  decisions.
• (Batsche, et al., 2005)
• Problem-solving is the process that is used to
  develop effective instruction/interventions.

8
Basic Questions

• Where are the students performing now?
• Where do we want them to be?
• How long do we have to get them there?
• How much do they have to grow per year/monthly to
  get there?
• What resources will move them at that rate?

9
The Outcomes

• Maximum effect of core instruction for all
  students
• Targeted instruction and interventions for
  at-risk learners
• Significant improvements in pro-social behaviors
• Reduction in over-representation of diverse
  student groups in low academic performance,
  special education, suspension/expulsion, and
  alternative education.
• Overall improvement in achievement rates
• Maximize efficiency and return on investment
• AYP

10

• The Model

11
Problem Solving Process
12
Three-Tiered Model of School Supports the
Problem-solving Process
ACADEMIC SYSTEMS Tier 3 Comprehensive
Intensive Students who need individualized
interventions. Tier 2 Strategic
Interventions Students who need more support in
addition to the core curriculum. Tier 1 Core
Curriculum All students, including students who
require curricular enhancements for acceleration.
BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS Tier 3 Intensive
Interventions Students who need individualized
intervention. Tier 2 Targeted Group
Interventions Students who need more support in
addition to school-wide positive behavior
program. Tier 1 Universal Interventions All
students in all settings.
13
Model of Schooling

• Where does the instruction/intervention/service
  fit in this model?
• How does it link with core instruction?
• What data will tell us if it is effective?

14
Problem-Solving/RtIResource Management

• Public Education Resource Deployment
• Support staff cannot resource more than 20 of
  the students
• Service vs Effectiveness--BIG ISSUE

Academic
Behavior
15
RtI Framing Issues and Key Concepts

• Academic Engaged Time (AET) is the best predictor
  of student achievement
• 330 minutes in a day, 1650 in a week and 56,700
  in a year
• This is the currency of instruction/intervention
  
• Its what we have to spend on students
• How we use it determines student outcomes.
• MOST students who are behind will respond
  positively to additional CORE instruction.
• Schools have more staff qualified to deliver core
  instruction than specialized instruction.
• Issue is how to schedule in such a way as to
  provide more exposure to core.

16
RtI Framing Issues and Key Concepts

• Managing the GAP between student current level of
  performance and expectation (benchmark,
  standards, goal) is what RtI is all about.
• The two critical pieces of information we need
  about students are
• How BIG is the GAP?
• AND
• How much time do we have to close it?
• The answers to these 2 questions defines our
  instructional mission.

17
RtI RATE

• Rate is growth per week (month) necessary to
  close the GAP
• Rate becomes the statistic we need to define
  evidence-based intervention (EBI)
• EBI is any intervention that results in the
  desired RATE

18
RtI 3 Priorities

• 1. Prevention Identify students at-risk for
  literacy failure BEFORE they actually fail.
• Kindergarten screening, intervention and progress
  monitoring is key.
• No excuse for not identifying ALL at-risk
  students by November of the kindergarten year.
• This strategy prevents the GAP.
• Managing GAPs is more expensive and less likely
  to be successful.

19
RtI 3 Priorities

• Early Intervention
• Purpose here is the manage the GAP.
• Students who are more that 2 years behind have a
  10 chance, or less, or catching up.
• Benchmark, progress monitoring data,
  district-wide assessments are used to identify
  students that have a gap of 2 years or less.
• Students bumping up against the 2 year level
  receive the most intensive services.
• This more costly and requires more specialized
  instruction/personnel

20
RtI 3 Priorities

• Intensive Intervention
• Reserved for those students who have a GAP of
  more than 2 years and the rate of growth to close
  the GAP is unrealistic. Too much growthtoo
  little time remaining.
• Problem-solving is used to develop instructional
  priorities.
• This is truly a case of you cannot do something
  different the same way.
• This is the most costly, staff intensive and
  least likely to result in goal attainment

21
How Does it Fit Together?Standard Treatment
Protocol
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Step 1
22
Critical Components

• Data are used to evaluate the effectiveness of
  core instruction
• 80 of students receiving ONLY core instruction
  are proficient
• Supplemental Instruction/Intervention uses a
  standard protocol of instruction based on
  student needs, informed by data
• 70 of students receiving Supplemental AND Core
  are proficient

23
Critical Components

• Intensive instruction developed for students who
  have not responded as desired to Core PLUS
  Supplemental Instruction

24
Discussion Topic

• Do your school buildings have a clearly
  articulated blueprint to guide how data inform
  the development and evaluation of instruction and
  intervention programs?
• Where are your strengths?
• Where is there room for growth?

25
What Does the Research Say About RtI?
26
Effective Schools

• 30 or more of students at risk but who were at
  grade level at the end of the year.
• Characteristics
• Strong Leadership
• Positive Belief and Teacher Dedication
• Data Utilization and Analysis
• Effective Scheduling
• Professional Development
• Scientifically-Based Intervention Programs
• Parent Involvement
• (Crawford and Torgeson)
• (

27
Data on the Top 10 Schools Meeting the Effective
School Criteria
28
Response to Intervention

• Implementation

29
How Do We Do RtI?

• Organized by a District PLAN
• Driven by Professional Development
• Supported by Coaching and Technical Assistance
• Informed by DATA

30
Principals Role in Leading Implementation of RtI

• Models Problem-Solving Process
• Expectation for Data-Based Decision Making
• Scheduling Data Days
• Schedule driven by student needs
• Instructional/Intervention Support
• Intervention Sufficiency
• Communicating Student Outcomes
• Celebrating and Communicating Success

31
Change Model
Consensus
Infrastructure
Implementation
32
Stages of Implementing Problem-Solving/RtI

• Consensus
• Belief is shared
• Vision is agreed upon
• Implementation requirements understood
• Infrastructure Development
• Problem-Solving Process
• Data System
• Policies/Procedures
• Training
• Tier I and II intervention systems
• E.g., K-3 Academic Support Plan
• Technology support
• Decision-making criteria established
• Implementation

33
Building Consensus

• Knowledge
• Beliefs
• Understanding the Need- DATA
• Skills and/or Support

34
ConsensusEssential Beliefs

• No child should be left behind
• It is OK to provide differential service across
  students
• Academic Engaged Time must be considered first
• Student performance is influenced most by the
  quality of the interventions we deliver and how
  well we deliver them- not preconceived notions
  about child characteristics
• Decisions are best made with data
• Our expectations for student performance should
  be dependent on a students response to
  intervention, not on the basis of a score that
  predicts what they are capable of doing.

35
Consensus DevelopmentData

• Are you happy with your data?
• Building/Grade Level Student Outcomes
• Disaggregated
• AYP

36
(No Transcript)
37
(No Transcript)
38
Discussion Topic

• Review the beliefs survey and reflect on the
  beliefs discussion
• Do you believe that your staff share the beliefs
  that drive this common vision or RtI?
• What data could you use to share with building
  staff that would facilitate the development of
  consensus?

39

• Development of the Infrastructure

40
District Responsibilities

• Based on self-assessment results, develop an RtI
  implementation plan organized around building
  consensus, infrastructure, and implementation.
  Plans should also address
• How current resources will be used to implement
  RtI and identify additional resources needed
• How stakeholders will be educated
• How stakeholders will be involved

41
Key Points

• Unit of implementation is the building level.
• Implementation process takes 4-6 years.
• Implementation progress must be monitored
• Must be guided by data indicating implementation
  level and integrity
• Must be supported by professional development and
  technical assistance
• Drive by a strategic plan
• It is a journey, not a sprint

42
Implementation Model

• District-based leadership team (DBLT)
• School-based leadership team (SBLT)
• School-based coach
• Process Technical Assistance
• Interpretation and Use of Data
• Evaluation Data

43

• The Infrastructure

44
Problem Solving Process
45
Steps in the Problem-Solving Process

• PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
• Identify replacement behavior
• Data- current level of performance
• Data- benchmark level(s)
• Data- peer performance
• Data- GAP analysis
• PROBLEM ANALYSIS
• Develop hypotheses( brainstorming)
• Develop predictions/assessment
• INTERVENTION DEVELOPMENT
• Develop interventions in those areas for
  which data are available and hypotheses
  verified
• Proximal/Distal
• Implementation support
• Response to Intervention (RtI)
• Frequently collected data
• Type of Response- good, questionable, poor

46
Group Activity-High School Example

• 800 students
• 450 have a GPA of 2.0 or higher
• 350 have a GPA of less than 2.0
• Goal
• Increase number of 2.0 or higher students from
  450 to 650 by the end of the year (9 months)

47
Group Activity-High School Example

• What are reasons why HS students do not make a
  2.0?

48
Data For Each Tier - Where Do They Come From?

• Tier 1 Universal Screening, accountability
  assessments, grades, classroom assessments,
  referral patterns, discipline referrals
• Tier 2 Universal Screening - Group Level
  Diagnostics (maybe), systematic progress
  monitoring, large-scale assessment data and
  classroom assessment
• Tier 3 Universal Screenings, Individual
  Diagnostics, intensive and systematic progress
  monitoring, formative assessment, other informal
  assessments

49
Middle/High School Data

• Skill or Content Assessment
• Skill
• Use existing reading/math skill assessments
• Content
• Use Common Assessments
• Standards-based assessment

50
Common Assessments

• Based on State-Approved, Content Area Standards
• Syllabus expected to reflect those standards
• Common Syllabi
• Common assessment given every 3rd week
• Data aggregated and disaggregated

51
Common Assessments Interpretation

• Mean level of performance of all students
• Disaggregated by section
• Disaggregated by demographics
• Are 75-80 of students attaining 70 accuracy?
  If not, implications for core instruction--Problem
  Solving
• Is syllabus implementation on track?
• Are 70 of students receiving supplemental
  instruction meeting 70 accuracy levels?
• Compare individual student performance to group
  data.

52
Academic Behaviors

• Class work completed/accuracy
• Home work completed/accuracy
• Test scores/accuracy
• Student Level of Performance
• Goal or benchmark
• Peer level of performance

53
Example

• Data taken during a single grading period (6
  weeks)
• Progress Monitor Homework completed and accuracy
• Goal Completed 75, Accuracy 75
• Student Completed 40, Accuracy 50
• Peers Completed 65, Accuracy 78
• Time Frame 6 weeks
• Assignments/Week 20

54
Example

• Completion
• 75-4030 improvement in 6 weeks
• 30/6 weeks Improvement rate of 5/week
• 5 of 20 assignments1 per week
• Rate of Improvement for an effective intervention
  is 1 ADDITIONAL ASSIGNMENT PER WEEK

55
Data Coach

• Gathers and Organizes Tier 1 and Tier 2 Data
• Supports staff for small group and individual
  data
• Provides coaching for data interpretation
• Facilitates regular data meetings for building
  and grade levels

56
Decision RulesWhat Constitutes Good RtI?
57
Decision Rules

• Response to Intervention Rules
• Linking RtI to Intervention Decisions

58
Decision Rules What is a Good Response to
Intervention?

• Positive Response
• Gap is closing
• Can extrapolate point at which target student(s)
  will come in range of target--even if this is
  long range
• Level of risk lowers over time
• Questionable Response
• Rate at which gap is widening slows considerably,
  but gap is still widening
• Gap stops widening but closure does not occur
• Poor Response
• Gap continues to widen with no change in rate.

59
Positive Response to Intervention
Expected Trajectory
Performance
Observed Trajectory
Time
60
Decision Rules What is a Questionable
Response to Intervention?

• Positive Response
• Gap is closing
• Can extrapolate point at which target student(s)
  will come in range of target--even if this is
  long range
• Questionable Response
• Rate at which gap is widening slows considerably,
  but gap is still widening
• Gap stops widening but closure does not occur
• Level of risk remains the same over time
• Poor Response
• Gap continues to widen with no change in rate.

61
Questionable Response to Intervention
Expected Trajectory
Performance
Observed Trajectory
Time
62
Decision Rules What is a Poor Response to
Intervention?

• Positive Response
• Gap is closing
• Can extrapolate point at which target student(s)
  will come in range of target--even if this is
  long range
• Questionable Response
• Rate at which gap is widening slows considerably,
  but gap is still widening
• Gap stops widening but closure does not occur
• Poor Response
• Gap continues to widen with no change in rate.
• Level of risk worsens over time

63
Poor Response to Intervention
Expected Trajectory
Performance
Observed Trajectory
Time
64
Response to Intervention
Expected Trajectory
Performance
Observed Trajectory
Time
65
Decision Rules Linking RtI to Intervention
Decisions

• Positive
• Continue intervention with current goal
• Continue intervention with goal increased
• Fade intervention to determine if student(s) have
  acquired functional independence.

66
Decision Rules Linking RtI to Intervention
Decisions

• Questionable
• Was intervention implemented as intended?
• If no - employ strategies to increase
  implementation integrity
• If yes -
• Increase intensity of current intervention for a
  short period of time and assess impact. If rate
  improves, continue. If rate does not improve,
  return to problem solving.

67
Decision Rules Linking RtI to Intervention
Decisions

• Poor
• Was intervention implemented as intended?
• If no - employ strategies in increase
  implementation integrity
• If yes -
• Is intervention aligned with the verified
  hypothesis? (Intervention Design)
• Are there other hypotheses to consider? (Problem
  Analysis)
• Was the problem identified correctly? (Problem
  Identification)

68
BUILDING THE FOUNDATION
69
Tier I Problem-Solving Data and Skills Needed
Tier I - Assessment Discipline Data
(ODR) Benchmark Assessment School Climate
Surveys Universal Screening FCAT Universal
Screening District-Wide Assessments
Tier I - Core Interventions School-wide
Discipline Positive Behavior Supports Whole-class
Interventions Core Instruction
10 - 15
80 - 90
70
(No Transcript)
71
H
72
Tier 1 Data Example
73
www.swis.org
74
Referral Analysis

• 42 Noncompliance
• 30 Off-Task/Inattention
• 12 Physical/Verbal Aggression
• 6 Relational Aggression
• 10 Bullying

75
Building-Level Behavior Data

• Building Referred
• Male 50 80
• White 72 54
• Hispanic 12 20
• African American 15 24
• Other 1 2
• Low SES 25 50

76
Tier 1 Data Days

• Typically, Tier 1 analyses done in the summer
• Based on
• High Stakes Assessment Data
• District-Wide Assessments
• Disaggregated Data
• Decisions used throughout year
• Core instruction changes decided at this time

77
Reading Priorities. . .
78
What does core instruction look like for reading?

• K-5
• 90 minute reading block
• Comprehensive reading program is the central tool
  for instruction.
• Explicit, systematic, and differentiated
  instruction is provided.
• In-class grouping strategies are in use,
  including small group instruction as appropriate
  to meet student needs.
• Active student engagement occurs in a variety of
  reading-based activities, which connect to the
  essential components of reading and academic
  goals.
• Effective classroom management and high levels of
  time on task are evident.
• 6-12
• Content area courses in which the reading content
  standards are addressed for all students
  including
• Middle School Developmental Reading
• English/Language Arts
• Other core areas such as science, social studies,
  and math

79
What strategies exist to differentiate
instruction for K-5 students in Tier 1?

• Differentiate in small, flexible reading groups
• Use data to form groups based on skills to be
  taught (comprehension, phonics, etc.)
• Ensure that groups are flexible
• Determine a schedule to rotate children through
  groups/centers
• Ensure that students with the most intensive
  needs meet in the teacher-led center everyday
• Targeted and deliberate independent reading
  practice that utilizes relevant practice,
  extension, and production opportunities

80
What strategies exist to differentiate
instruction for 6-12 students in Tier 1?

• CAR-PD
• Differentiate in small groups
• Use data to from groups based on skills to be
  taught
• Groups need to be flexible
• Determine a schedule to rotate students through
  groups
• Support from the reading coach
• Take responsibility for student learning

81
What data can be collected to evaluate the impact
of core instruction?

• Progress monitoring assessments three times a
  year (Benchmarking)
• Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM)
• Core Reading Program Unit Tests /
  Curriculum-based assessments
• Outcome measures (SAT-10 and State Tests) to make
  decisions about student placement for the
  following year

82
What strategies are available to evaluate the
fidelity of core instruction?

• Principal Reading Walk Through
• If it gets inspected, it gets respected
• Effective instruction checklist
• Elementary core reading program checklists

83
Effective Instruction (Foorman et al., 2003
Foorman Torgesen, 2001 Arrasmith, 2003
Rosenshine, 1986)
84
How should instruction at Tier 1 align with Tier
2 and Tier 3 levels of instruction?

• Teachers should communicate about the following
  topics in order to align instruction
• the scope and sequence of the instruction as well
  as the scope and sequence of Tier 2 and 3
  instruction
• student progress
• information about upcoming lessons to help
  facilitate pre-teaching
• common vocabulary to determine if there are
  discrepancies with the instruction at the
  different tiers

85
Table Top Discussion

• Review the Principals Walkthrough Fidelity
  Assessments for Tier 1
• How are you ensuring fidelity of Tier 1
  instruction in your building?
• What is your criterion for effective Tier 1
  Instruction?

86
Tier II Problem-Solving Data and Skills Needed
1 - 5
Tier II - Targeted Interventions Targeted Group
Interventions Increased Intensity Narrow
Focus Linked to Tier I
Tier II - Assessment Behavioral
Observations Intervention Data Group
Diagnostic Universal Screening Progress Monitoring
10-15
80 - 90
Tier I - Core Interventions
Tier I Assessment
10 - 15
80 - 90
87
Data Infrastructure Using Existing Data to
Predict Intervention Needs for Tier 2

• Previous referral history predicts future
  referral history
• Benchmark and Progress Monitoring Data
• Common Assessments in Middle and High School
• Middle and High School
• Student data history prior to entering

88
Data-Driven InfrastructureEstablishing a
Building Baseline

• Code referrals (reasons) for past 2-3 years
• Identifies problems teachers feel they do not
  have the skills/support to handle
• Referral pattern reflects skill pattern of the
  staff, the resources currently in place and the
  history of what constitutes a referral in that
  building
• Identifies likely referral types for next 2 years
• Identifies focus of Professional Development
  Activities AND potential Tier II and III
  interventions
• Present data to staff. Reinforces Need concept

89
Tier Functions/Integration

• How the Tiers work
• Time aggregation
• Tier integration

90
How the Tiers Work

• Goal Student is successful with Tier 1 level of
  support-academic or behavioral
• Greater the tier, greater support and severity
• Increase level of support (Tier level) until you
  identify an intervention that results in a
  positive response to intervention
• Continue until student strengthens response
  significantly
• Systematically reduce support (Lower Tier Level)
• Determine the relationship between sustained
  growth and sustained support.

91
Integrating the Tiers

• 5th grade student reading at the 2nd grade level
• Tier 3
• Direct Instruction, Targeted, Narrow Focus (e.g.,
  phonemic awareness, phonics, some fluency)
• Tier 2
• Fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, pre-teach for
  Tier 1
• Tier 1
• Focus on comprehension, participation, scripted
  decoding
• Use core materials for content
• Progress monitor both instructional level and
  grade placement level skills

92
What do we know about the characteristics of
effective interventions?

• They always increase the intensity of instruction
  - they accelerate learning

• They always provide many more opportunities for
  re-teaching, review, and practice

• They are focused carefully on the most essential
  learning needs of the students.

93
Characteristics of Tier 2 Interventions

• Available in general education settings
• Opportunity to increase exposure (academic
  engaged time) to curriculum
• Opportunity to narrow focus of the curriculum
• Sufficient time for interventions to have an
  effect (10-30 weeks)
• Often are standardized supplemental curriculum
  protocols

94
Interventions Tier 2

• First resource is TIME (AET)
• HOW much more time is needed?
• Second resource is curriculum
• WHAT does the student need?
• Third resource is personnel
• WHO or WHERE will it be provided?

95
Tier 2 Getting TIME

• Free time--does not require additional
  personnel
• Staggering instruction
• Differentiating instruction
• Cross grade instruction
• Skill-based instruction
• Standard Protocol Grouping
• Reduced range of standard curriculum
• After-School
• Home-Based

96
Tier 2 Curriculum

• Standard protocol approach
• Focus on essential skills
• Most likely, more EXPOSURE and more FOCUS of core
  instruction
• Linked directly to core instruction materials and
  benchmarks
• Criterion for effectiveness is 70 of students
  receiving Tier 2 will reach benchmarks

97
Tier 2 Personnel

• EVERYONE in the building is a potential resource
• Re-conceptualize who does what
• Personnel deployed AFTER needs are identified
• WHERE matters less and less
• REMEMBER, student performance matters more than
  labels, locations and staff needs.
• A school cannot deliver intensive services to
  more than 7 of the population

98
3 Fs 1 S Data PD Effective Powerful
Instruction

• Frequency and duration of meeting in small groups
  every day, etc.
• Focus of instruction (the What) work in
  vocabulary, phonics, comprehension, etc.
• Format of lesson (the How) determining the
  lesson structure and the level of scaffolding,
  modeling, explicitness, etc.
• Size of instructional group 3, 6, or 8
  students, etc.
• Use data to help determine the 3 Fs and 1 S (the
  Why)
• Provide professional development in the use of
  data and in the 3 Fs and 1 S

99
What does supplemental instruction/intervention
look like for reading?

• Logistics of supplemental instruction/
  intervention
• Specific time and place included in schedule
• Who will provide it? (classroom teacher or
  outside support Reading specialist, ESE, SLP,
  etc.)
• Materials/how will the provider access them?
• Common planning time established between the
  classroom teacher and intervention teacher, if
  applicable
• Establish guidelines for when to evaluate the
  effectiveness of instruction and guidelines to
  determine what is a good response

100
What strategies are available to evaluate the
fidelity of Tier 2 instruction?

• Checklists following the scope and sequence of
  the program or the learning objectives of the
  programs
• Reading Walk Throughs
• Principal/Teacher Conference
• Schedule reflects that intervention is
  implemented
• Observation

101
How do we ensure that Tier 2 instruction is
integrated with/includes core instructional
content and transfers to student success in Tier
1 instruction?

• Instructors need to communicate, if applicable
• Both instructors must have access to the core
  materials, if applicable
• Understanding the core content in order to
  provide access to the information but at an
  appropriate reading level

102
Intervention Support

• Intervention plans should be developed based on
  student need and skills of staff
• All intervention plans should have intervention
  support
• Principals should ensure that intervention plans
  have intervention support
• Teachers should not be expected to implement
  plans for which there is no support

103
Critical Components of Intervention Support

• Support for Intervention Integrity
• Documentation of Intervention Implementation
• Intervention and Eligibility decisions and
  outcomes cannot be supported in an RtI model
  without these two critical components

104
Intervention Support

• Pre-meeting
• Review data
• Review steps to intervention
• Determine logistics
• First 2 weeks
• 2-3 meetings/week
• Review data
• Review steps to intervention
• Revise, if necessary

105
Intervention Support

• Second Two Weeks
• Meet twice each week
• Following weeks
• Meet at least weekly
• Review data
• Review steps
• Discuss Revisions
• Approaching benchmark
• Review data
• Schedule for intervention fading
• Review data

106
(No Transcript)
107
(No Transcript)
108
(No Transcript)
109
Tier 3 Decisions

• GAP?
• Rate??
• Independent Functioning?
• Fade Intervention to Supplemental Level
• Evaluate Rate

110
Tier 3

• Individual and Very Small Group
• Individual Diagnostic Procedures
• Intensive Interventions
• Goal is to determine interventions that close the
  GAP
• Pre-requisite for consideration for any special
  education program

111
Ways that instruction must be made more powerful
for students at-risk for reading difficulties.
More powerful instruction involves
More instructional time
Smaller instructional groups
More precisely targeted at right level
Clearer and more detailed explanations
More systematic instructional sequences
More extensive opportunities for guided practice
More opportunities for error correction and
feedback
112
What are the logistics of Tier 3 instruction?

• Specific place and time set aside on the schedule
  (daily)
• Who will provide it? (classroom teacher or
  outside support Reading specialist, ESE, SLP,
  etc.)
• Materials/how will the provider access them?
• Common planning time established between the two
  providers, if applicable
• Establishing guidelines for when to evaluate the
  effectiveness of instruction and guidelines to
  determine what is a good response

113
Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM)

• K-2
• all of the same TDI tasks
• ORF in grades 1 and 2
• 3-12
• ORF at grades 3-5
• MAZE at grades K-12
• Informal toolkit with
• Instructional Level reading comprehension
  passages passage-specific Question Response
  templates
• Multiple Lexiled passages for oral reading
  fluency, accuracy, and comprehension
• Phonics Inventory
• Sight Word Inventory
• Instructional Implications of Word Analysis Task

114
What strategies are available to evaluate the
fidelity of Tier 3 instruction?

• Checklists following the scope and sequence of
  the intervention/program or the learning
  objectives of the intervention/program
• Reading Walk Throughs
• Principal/Teacher Conferences
• Schedule reflects that intervention is
  implemented daily
• Observation

115
How do we ensure that Tier 3 instruction is
integrated with/includes core instructional
content when appropriate and transfers to student
success in core?

• Instructors need to communicate, if applicable
• Both instructors must have access to the core
  materials, if applicable
• Understanding the core content in order to
  provide access to the information but at an
  appropriate reading level

116
Data-Based Determination of Expectations Elsie

• Benchmark Level 100 WCPM
• Current Level 47 WCPM
• Difference to June Benchmark (Gap) 53 WCPM
• Time to Benchmark 41 Weeks
• Rate of Growth Required
• 53/41 1.29 WCPM for Elsie
• Peer Group Rate about 1.1 WCPM growth (at
  benchmark) 1.2 WCMP (for some risk benchmark)
• REALISTIC? Not unless you increase AET

117
Questionable RtI
118
Tier 2- Supplemental Instruction - Revision

• The intervention appeared to be working. What
  the teachers thought was needed was increased
  time in supplemental instruction.
• They worked together and found a way to give
  Elsie 30 minutes of supplemental instruction, on
  phonics and fluency, 5x per week.

119
Data-Based Determination of Expectations Elsie

• Benchmark Level 100 WCPM
• Current Level 56 WCPM
• Difference to June Benchmark (Gap) 44 WCPM
• Time to Benchmark 27 Weeks
• Rate of Growth Required
• 44/27 1.62 WCPM for Elsie
• Peer Group Rate 1.1 WCPM growth (at benchmark)
  1.2 WCMP (for some risk benchmark)
• REALISTIC? Not unless you increase AET

120
(No Transcript)
121
Good RtI
122
Aimline 2 percent/week
Trendline 3 percent/week
123
Aimline 1.50 words/week
Trendline 0.95 words/week
124

• Behavioral
• Case
• Examples

125
II
126
Table Discussion

• Review each of the following and indicate (1well
  developed, 5 significant need) the following
  components of infrastructure in your buildings
• Problem-Solving Process
• Data Interpretation
• Decision Rules
• Instructional Integration Across Tiers
• Intervention Integrity and Support