Operationalizing Response to Intervention in Eligibility Decisions

1
Operationalizing Response to Intervention in
Eligibility Decisions
University of OregonCollege of Education

• Roland H. Good IIIDeb SimmonsEd KameenuiDavid
  Chard

Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium December
4-5, 2003 Kansas City, Missouri The National
Research Center on Learning Disabilities, a
collaborative project of staff at Vanderbilt
University and the University of Kansas,
sponsored this two-day symposium focusing on
responsiveness-to-intervention (RTI) issues. The
symposium was made possible by the support of the
U.S. Department of Education Office of Special
Education Programs. Renee Bradley, Project
Officer. Opinions expressed herein are those of
the authors and do not necessarily represent the
position of the U.S. Department of
Education. When citing materials presented
during the symposium, please use the following
Good, R. H., Simmons, D., Kameenui, E.,
Chard, D. (2003, December). Operationalizing
Response to Intervention in eligibility
decisions. Paper presented at the National
Research Center on Learning Disabilities
Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas
City, MO.
2
Overarching Goals of Response to Intervention

• 1. Early intervention and prevention to enhance
  outcomes for students with disabilities and
  students at risk of disabilities.
• Rapidly escalating intensity of support
• 2. Make accurate and defensible decisions about
  services and eligibility.
• Reliable and valid decision procedures that can
  be manualized and brought to scale.

3
Operationalizing Response to Intervention

• The key construct of interest is Response to
  Effective Intervention. We need to spend as much
  time establishing procedures to evaluate the
  effectiveness of instruction and intervention as
  to evaluate response.
• 1. Evaluating Effectiveness of Intervention
• Core curriculum and instruction
• System of intervention
• 2. Evaluating response to intervention
• Deficit in initial level
• Deficit in slope or rate of progress

4
Evaluating the Core Curriculum and Instruction

• If students are not making adequate progress
  because they are not being taught, they are
  teaching disabled not learning disabled.
• Is the core curriculum research based? However, a
  research-based curriculum isnt enough. We also
  need to evaluate how it is delivered
• Core fidelity
• Core fidelity supplements
• Core fidelity supplements time
• Core fidelity supplements time timeliness
• Core fidelity supplements time timeliness
  intangibles

5
Evaluating Secondary Interventions

• System of support
• How are students identified to receive support?
• Who will provide the support?
• How much time and when?
• What program components or adjustments will be
  used?
• What are the characteristics of the tasks?
• How intensive is the intervention?

6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
Evaluating Effectiveness of Intervention A
Modest Proposal

• Phase 1 Empirical. A school that meets
  established standards for effective core
  curriculum and instruction and effective
  intervention for an instructional step is
  accepted as having an effective intervention.
• Phase 2 Observation. A school that does not meet
  established standards provides direct observation
  evidence for effectiveness of core curriculum and
  instruction and effectiveness of intervention.
• Note The direct observations can be a part of
  consultation to improve the effectiveness of
  instruction for these schools.

9
Empirical Standards for Core Curriculum and
Instruction

• Effective core curriculum and instruction
• 1. 90 or more of benchmark students in the
  school achieve the benchmark goal for the step,
  or
• 2. The school is in the upper third of
  effectiveness of their core curriculum and
  instruction.
• An ambitious absolute standard (1) is needed so
  that all schools can achieve the standard. A
  relative standard (2) is needed so schools cannot
  argue that the absolute standard is too rigorous.

10
Instructional Steps to Reading Outcomes
In the beginning of first grade, the primary
instructional goal is development of the
alphabetic principle meeting a goal of 50 or more
on Nonsense Word Fluency.
11
Step 3 Nonsense Word Fluency in First Half of
First Grade

• Middle first goal 50 on NWF
• Beginning first
• Low risk gt 24
• At risk lt 13
• Mid first NWF
• Established NWF gt 50
• Deficit lt 30
• Additional Goal ORF gt 20

Low Risk
Some Risk
At Risk
12
Effectiveness of Core Intervention
Based on 384 schools, a typical (median) school
gets 25 percent of strategic and 68 percent of
benchmark students to the goal of 50 on NWF, with
substantial school to school variability.
13
Empirical Standards for Core Curriculum and
Instruction

• Effective core curriculum and instruction
• 1. 90 or more of benchmark students in the
  school achieve the benchmark goal for the step,
  or
• Is the 90 standard too high?
• Or are most core curricula and instruction not
  providing enough emphasis on alphabetic
  principle?
• 2. The school is in the upper third of
  effectiveness of their core curriculum and
  instruction.
• 76 percent of benchmark students achieving the
  NWF goal of 50 is in the upper third.

14
(No Transcript)
15
Empirical Standards for Intervention

• Effective system of intervention is in place for
  a school if
• 1. 50 percent or more of strategic students in
  the school achieve the benchmark goal for the
  step, or
• 2. The school is in the upper third of
  effectiveness of their strategic intervention.
• For Step 2 in the first half of first grade, 33
  percent of strategic students achieving the NWF
  goal would be in the upper third of effectiveness
  of schools strategic intervention.

16
Instructional Steps to Reading Outcomes
In the beginning of first grade, the primary
instructional goal is development of the
alphabetic principle meeting a goal of 50 or more
on Nonsense Word Fluency.
17
Step 4 Oral Reading Fluency in Second Half of
First Grade

• End first goal 40 on ORF
• Middle first ORF
• Low risk gt 20
• At risk lt 8
• End first ORF
• Low risk gt 40
• At risk lt 20
• Additional Goal Retell gt ORF/4

Low Risk
Some Risk
At Risk
18
Step 4 End of first grade
Based on 399 schools, a typical (median) school
gets 96 percent of strategic and 39 percent of
benchmark students to the goal of 50 on NWF, with
little school to school variability for benchmark
students.
19
(No Transcript)
20
Empirical Standards for Core Curriculum and
Instruction for Step 4

• Effective core curriculum and instruction
• 1. 90 or more of benchmark students in the
  school achieve the benchmark goal of 40 or more
  on Oral Reading Fluency, or
• 2. The school is in the upper third of
  effectiveness of their core curriculum and
  instruction.
• 98 percent of benchmark students achieving the
  ORF goal of 40 is in the upper third.

21
Empirical Standards for System of Intervention

• Effective system of intervention
• 1. 50 percent or more of strategic students in
  the school achieve the benchmark goal of 40 on
  ORF, or
• 2. The school is in the upper third of
  effectiveness of their strategic intervention.
• 50 percent of strategic students achieving the
  ORF goal of 40 is in the upper third of
  effectiveness of strategic intervention.

22
Evaluating Adequate Progress in Step 3

• Middle first goal 50 on NWF
• Beginning first
• Low risk gt 24
• At risk lt 13
• Mid first NWF
• Established NWF gt 50
• Deficit lt 30
• Additional Goal ORF gt 20

Adequate Progress
Deficit in level slope
23
Three Tier Model of Primary, Secondary, and
Tertiary Prevention
Note. Adapted from Walker, H. M., Horner, R. H.,
Sugai, G., Bullis, M., Sprague, J. R., Bricker,
D, Kaufman, M. J. (1996). Integrated approaches
to preventing antisocial behavior patterns among
school age children and youth. Journal of
Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 194-209.
24
Purposes of Three Tier Prevention

• to reduce the number of new cases of severe
  difficulty learning to read
• Primary Prevention
• to reduce the duration of existing cases of
  severe difficulty learning to read.
• Secondary Prevention
• to reduce sequelae and complications from
  established cases of severe difficulty learning
  to read
• Tertiary Prevention

Simeonsson, R. J. (1994). Promoting children's
health, education, and well being. In R. J.
Simeonsson (Ed.), Risk, resilience, and
prevention Promoting the well-being of all
children (pp. 3-12). Baltimore Paul H. Brooks.
25
Needed Resources for Three Tier Prevention

• Effective core curriculum and instruction.
• System of effective intervention and support.
• Interventions that can be arranged on a continuum
  of intensity and level of support ranging from
  good (1) to bullet proof (5).
• Meaningful and important goals, waypoints, or
  benchmarks representing reading health or
  wellness.
• Brief, repeatable, formative assessment of
  progress toward benchmark goals that is sensitive
  to intervention.

26
Additional Needs for Three Tier Model

• Integrated, flexible general and special
  education service delivery to provide
  intervention of increasing intensity.
• Decision procedures that are reliable and valid
  and that can mobilize intensive prevention
  resources very early, before reading difficulty
  and failure.
• Schoolwide process to bring school resources and
  context to bear to accomplish three tier
  prevention needs.
• Procedures that get effective intervention to
  students at risk early to prevent more severe
  difficulties.