Foundations for A Problem Solving, SchoolWide Model

1
Foundations for A Problem Solving, School-Wide
Model

• Rhode Island Technical Assistance Project
• Summer Institute
• July 24 and 25, 2003

Correspondence about this presentation should be
directed to David Tilly, Heartland AEA 11, 6500
Corporate Dr., Johnston, IA 50131. Email is
dtilly_at_aea11.k12.ia.us, [phone].
2
Overview of PS, SWM Objectives

• Communicate major components of a problem
  solving, school wide model
• Provide an integrative picture of the STRUCTURE
• Example effectiveness data on model
  implementation
• Provide a picture of the PROCESS of getting it
  all in place
• Begin to consider application in your setting

3
Keep Our Eye on The Prize

• 100 Percent of our students proficient by the
  year 13-14

4
Vocabulary Convergence of Thinking

• Problem Solving Model (PS) Proposed,
  implemented and refined since the early 80s in
  special education as an alternative system to the
  traditional Refer-Test-Place system. It
  encompasses both general education and special
  education systems. Initially was individual
  student focused.
• Response To Intervention (RTI) Also called a
  Standard Treatment Approach (STA) Being proposed
  by researchers across the country as an
  alternative method for identifying individuals
  with Learning Disabilities. An opportunity to
  link IDEA thinking with NCLB thinking.
• School-Wide Model (SWM) An integrative way of
  thinking logically and rationally about meeting
  All childrens needs in a school. It represents
  a promising way for schools to comprehensively
  draw together and allocate their resources to
  meet childrens educational needs.

5
Important Point

• They are not different
• The represent different spins on the same core
  thinking by different people
• The same big components are there
• We will attempt to use these terms with precision
  for clarity sake

6
Important Point!

• Everything from here on out represents
  guidelines, not absolutes
• The problems are the same everywhere you go
• The principals for solving them are the same
• The SPECIFICS will be different in your setting
• Your solutions will differ from our
  solutions!!!!!!

7
PS, RTI, School Wide Model
8
Quote

• We have witnessed over the last 30 years numerous
  attempts at planned educational change. The
  benefits have not nearly equaled the costs, and
  all too often, the situation has seemed to
  worsen. We have, however, gained clearer and
  clearer insights over this period about the dos
  and donts of bringing about change.One of the
  most promising features of this new knowledge
  about change is that successful examples of
  innovation are based on what might be most
  accurately labeled organized common sense.
  (Fullan, 1991, p. xi-xii)
• Fullan, M. G. (1991). The new meaning of
  educational change. New York, NY Teachers
  College Press.

9
The Marriage of Problem Solving and School-Wide
Models
10
The Problem Solving Approach
11
If you teach the same curriculum, to all
students, at the same time, at the same rate,
using the same materials, with the same
instructional methods, with the same expectations
for performance and grade on a curve you have
fertile ground for growing special education.
Gary Germann, 2003
12
The Problem Solving Process
Define the Problem (Screening and Diagnostic
Assessments)
What is the problem and why is it happening?
Develop a Plan (Goal Setting and Planning)
Evaluate (Progress Monitoring Assessment)
What are we going to do?
Did our plan work?
Implement Plan (Treatment Integrity)
Carry out the intervention
13
The Problem Solving Approach
Initial Instruction
14
Level One

• Consultation Between Teacher and Parent

Define the Problem
Informal discussion focusing on behaviors of
concern
Evaluate
Develop a Plan
Parent and teacher determine effectiveness and
need for additional resources
Anecdotal documentation
Implement Plan
Parent and teacher gather information and monitor
15
The Problem Solving Approach
Strategic Instruction/ Intervention
16
Level Two
Strategic Instruction Consultation with Other
Resources
Define the Problem
-Available Screenings
-Further definition of the problem
Teacher
Develop a Plan
Evaluate
BAT
-Data used to evaluate progress
-Team offers strategies
-
Building
Assistance
-Solutions generated
Team
-Plan written
-Success determined
Parent
Implement Plan
- Team assists with implementation
- Data collected from naturally occurring sources
if possible
17
Level Three
Strategic Instruction Consultation with
Extended Problem Solving Team
Define the Problem
-Identify concern -Define behavior of
concern -Problem validation
-Problem analysis -Functional assessment -Write
problem statement
Develop a Plan
Evaluate
Generate possible solutions -Evaluate
solutions -Select a solution -Collect baseline
data -Set a goal -Write action plan -Select
measurement strategy -Develop plan to evaluate
effectiveness
-
-Data analyzed to determine effectiveness -Success
determined by rate of progress size of
discrepancy -Recycle or determine need to
consider entitlement for special education

Implement Plan
18
The Problem Solving Approach
Intensive Instruction
19
Level Four
Intensive Instruction Intervention and
Entitlement Consideration (Due Process)
Define the Problem
Develop a Plan
Evaluate
-Using all data gathered at all levels problem
solving , determine if appropriate interventions
and whether or not special education services are
needed. -Team develops IEP
-Success determined by rate of progress and size
of discrepancy -Plan rewritten once per year or
as often as data indicates the need
-


Implement Plan
-Implement according to IEP -Ongoing systematic
data collection -Instructional changes made as
needed
20
Some Characteristics

• Works in important student performance domains
• Academics
• Reading
• Math
• Science
• Writing
• Social, emotional and behavioral development
• Works for large groups, small groups and
  individuals
• Consistent logic set is used throughout

21
Elements of an Effective Model

• Set of goals
• Valid and reliable assessment system to monitor
  progress
• Adoption of research proven materials and
  programs
• Adequate, prioritized instructional time
• Differentiated instruction, grouping, and
  scheduling
• Strong instructional leaders maintaining focus
  and establishing support mechanisms
• An integrated system of research-based
  professional development and resource allocation.

Adapted from Kameenui and Simmons
22
Acknowledgments

• The triangle for resource allocation comes from a
  number of different places
• Mental Health (Adelman and Taylor)
• Social, Emotional and Behavioral Development
  (Sugai and Horner)
• Curriculum and Instruction (Kameenui and
  Simmons)
• The School Wide Model

23
School-Wide Systems for Student Success
1-5
1-5
5-10
5-10
80-90
80-90
24
Why use a School-Wide Approach?

• The best way to address problems is to prevent
  them before they happen
• Achievement of all students is everyones
  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.

25
Why use a School-Wide Approach?

• Some students will require intensive
  interventions.
• Assessment data will be needed to determine
  resources needed to address concerns.
• Ongoing monitoring should direct instructional
  decisions and be repeated with the frequency
  needed for timely interventions.
• No matter how great the idea or how compelling
  the research, if an intervention is not working,
  something must change.

26
Foundations Activity 1a

• Identify a person at your table to work with
• Look in your activity packet, turn to Foundations
  activity 1a
• Brainstorm a list things you remember about a PS,
  School wide model from the presentation. What
  stood out most for you? Why is it important?

27
Activity 1b

• Come together at your table.
• Discuss
• How is the problem solving/school wide model
  similar to service delivery in your school today?
• How do the models differ from the service
  delivery model in your school today?
• What questions arise at this point for your
  group? Write them down, put them on the parking
  lot.

28
Problem Solving and the School-Wide Model in
Practice
Heartland Early Literacy Project
Helping Children Read ...Helping Teachers Teach
29
Four Organizing Principles

• Earlier rather than later -- Prevention and early
  intervention are supremely more effective and
  efficient than later intervention and remediation
  for ensuring reading success.

30
Four Organizing Principles

• Schools, not just programs -- Prevention and
  early intervention must be anchored to the school
  as the host environment and primary context for
  improving student outcomes.

31
Four Organizing Principles

• Evidence, not opinion -- Prevention and early
  intervention pedagogy, programs, instruction and
  materials should be based on trustworthy
  scientific evidence.

32
Four Organizing Principles

• Each and All-- To teach all children to read, we
  must teach each child to read.
• Kameenui, E. and Simmons, D. (2002)
• University of Oregon, Beginning
• Reading Institute

33
(No Transcript)
34
Were aiming to help children establish
trajectories toward success
Trajectory- the path a projectile makes under
the action of given forces such as thrust, wind
and gravity. --Encarta World English
Dictionary
35
Assessment and Instructional Grouping
Benchmark 1
Benchmark 2
Benchmark 3
Established - Benchmark
Score
Emerging - Strategic
Deficit - Intensive
Time
36
Assessment and Instructional Grouping
Benchmark 1
Benchmark 2
Benchmark 3
Established - Benchmark
Score
Time
37
What Does the School-Wide Model Look Like?
38
Key Features of HELP

• DIBELS
• Student interventions based on response to
  instruction
• Benchmark
• Strategic
• Intensive
• Ongoing Monitoring
• Instructional changes based on data
• Literacy Team
• Administrative support

39
Continuous School Improvement
Assess Needs
Evaluation
Planning
Implementation and Monitoring
40
Five Stages to Implementation
41
Stage One

• Conduct School Audit
• Assess Student Performance

Assess Needs
Planning
Evaluation
Implementation
Ed Kameenui and Deb Simmons
42
Conduct a School Audit
Planning and Evaluation Tool for Effective
School-Wide Reading Programs
Ed Kameenui and Deb Simmons
43
Assess Student Performance

• Benchmark assessments 3 times per year for all
  students
• Ongoing monitoring for strategic students once
  per month
• Ongoing monitoring for intensive students once
  per week
• Literacy team assisting teachers in providing
  instruction guided by data

44
Stage Two

• Analyze School and Student Performance
• Identify Reading Priorities
• Identify Students who require
• Benchmark Intervention
• Strategic Intervention
• Intensive Intervention

Assess Needs
Planning
Evaluation
Implementation
Ed Kameenui and Deb Simmons
45
Adapted from Sugai and Horner
46
Stage Three

• Design Core Instructional Interventions
• Customize Intensive and Strategic Interventions

Assess Needs
Planning
Evaluation
Implementation
Ed Kameenui and Deb Simmons
47
Curriculum Maps Mapping Instruction to Achieve
Instructional Priorities
Ed Kameenui and Deb Simmons
48
Curriculum Maps Mapping Instruction to Achieve
Instructional Priorities
Ed Kameenui and Deb Simmons
49
A Consumers Guide To Evaluating a Core Reading
Program Grades K-3 A Critical Elements Analysis
Ed Kameenui and Deb Simmons
50
Stage Four

• Establish and Implement Progress Monitoring
  System
• Customize Progress Monitoring System for
  Intensive and Strategic Interventions

Assess Needs
Planning
Evaluation
Implementation
Ed Kameenui and Deb Simmons
51
First Grade Benchmark Goals(Working Backwards)
Established Reader by Spring of First Grade if
you hit 40 or more correct on Curriculum-Based
Measurement (CBM) Reading in spring of first
grade you are an established reader.
Established Alphabetic Principle by Winter of
First Grade if you hit 40 or more correct on
Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) in winter of first
grade, the odds are in your favor to hit 40 or
more correct on Curriculum-Based Measurement
(CBM) Reading in spring of first grade.
Roland H. Good and Cheri Cornachione
52
Kindergarten Benchmark Goals
Established Phonological Awareness by Spring of
Kindergarten if you hit 35 to 45 correct on
Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF) in spring of
K/fall of first grade, the odds are in your favor
to hit 40 or more correct on Nonsense Word
Fluency (NWF) in winter of first grade.
Established Initial Sounds (Onset) Phonological
Awareness by Winter of Kindergarten if you hit 25
- 35 correct on Onset Recognition Fluency (OnRF)
in winter of K, the odds are in your favor to
reach 35 to 45 correct on Phoneme Segmentation
Fluency (PSF) in spring of K.
Roland H. Good and Cheri Cornachione
53
Stage Five

• Evaluate School Level Performance
• Intensify Intervention

Assess Needs
Evaluation
Planning
Implementation
Ed Kameenui and Deb Simmons
54
How are we doing?
55
(No Transcript)
56
(No Transcript)
57
Components of Successful School Implementation of
HELP

• Administrative Support
• Link to School Improvement
• Adequate Time for Staff Development
• Materials
• Data Collection by Teachers
• Data Interpretation and Understanding
• Instruction Guided by Data

58
Cross-year box plots phonological awareness
Kindergarten Heartland Students
59
Cross-year box plots oral reading fluency First
Grade Heartland Students
Legend 20012002
Beginning Middle 4427
End 4412
2000-2001 Beginning
Middle 4036 End 4151
1999-2000 Beginning
Middle 1595 End 1879
60
Effects of Heartland Early Literacy Project on
New
Special Education Placements Kindergarten Across
36
School Buildings
70
60
Prior to HELP
Mean
HELP Implementation
50
Mean
55 Reduction in
Insert K Placement Data
Kindergarten New SPED
Placements
40
Number of New SPED Placements
30
20
10
0
96-97
97-98
98-99
99-00
00-01
01-02.
School Year
61
Insert 1 Placement Data
62
(No Transcript)
63
(No Transcript)
64
Punch Line
Table 1. Z-Score Growth For Phonemic Segmentation
Fluency, Heartland Early Literacy Program
1999-2002.
65
Punch Line
Table 2. Z-Score Growth For Oral Reading Fluency,
Heartland Early Literacy Program 2002-2003.
66
Foundations Activity 2

• Leave your stuff, take your activity handout, get
  up and find a new table.
• Rule for new table no one from your current
  table should be there. Sit down. Introduce
  yourself.
• At your new table discuss your answers to the
  following questions
• If we implemented a system of early intervention
  similar to this in all of our schools, what
  implications might it have for
• Teachers?
• Administrators?
• Parents?
• NCLB Implementation?
• IDEA Implementation?
• At risk students?
• Students with disabilities?
• Talented and Gifted Students?
• Secondary Students?