Edward S. Shapiro

1
Planning for the Implementation of RTI Lessons
Learned from Project MP3

• Edward S. Shapiro
• Director,
• Center for Promoting Research to Practice
• Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA

2
Initial Planning Stage

• Implementation would require change
• Rethink how instructional decisions made
• Change is difficult!
• Comprehensive planning was critical to success of
  project
• Selection of Schools
• Roll out of Model
• Professional development and training
• Sustainability
• Preparation began several months prior to
  implementation

3
Assessing Readiness for Change

• Prior to planning, evaluated districts level of
  readiness
• Creative Tension (Green Ethridge, 2001)
  evident
• District administration recognized importance of
  RTI
• Internal evaluation- current practices not
  sufficient
• RTI implemented in only 1 of 13 schools
• DIBELS data collected but not used

4
Year Prior to Implementation
5
First Year of Implementation
No Intervention for School 2 and School 3
6
Second Year of Implementation
Professional Development Session with All Schools
Schools 2 3
PD Sessions
Core Team Training
Consultation and Support
Core Team Teaching
Consultation and Support
Coaching
Coaching
7
Professional Development- School 1

• School year prior to implementation
• 4- 45 minute sessions with entire staff
• Summer prior to implementation
• 5 days with data team
• 2 days with entire staff prior to start of school
• During first implementation year
• 7- 45 minute sessions throughout school year
• 2- 2 hour in-services
• 1- full day training

8
Professional Development- Schools 2 3

• School year prior to implementation
• 1- 2 hour in-service with entire staff
• 2- 45 minute sessions with staff
• 1-full day training
• Summer prior to implementation
• 5 days with data team
• 2 days with entire staff prior to start of school
• During first implementation year
• 2- 2 hour in-services
• Training conducted by district staff at
  additional professional development sessions

9
Initial Planning Meeting

• Held 8 months prior to implementation in schools
• All stakeholders involved
• Key administrators from district
• PaTTAN
• Project Staff
• Discussed topics related to planning
• Overview of model
• Proposed timeline
• Identified participating schools
• School level needs
• Readiness for change
• Building leadership
• Presentation of Model to schools

10
Meeting with Principals

• Met with principals from three participating
  schools
• Provided overview of model
• Question and Answer
• Discussed Professional Development Needs
• Discussed how to present to staff

11
Staff Meetings

• Met with teachers at each building
• Provided overview of project
• Question and Answer
• Teachers completed staff development survey
• Results used to plan future professional
  developments

12
Professional Development

• Ongoing throughout the course of project
• Attempted to provide as much training prior to
  implementation as possible
• Started with four 45 minute sessions held in
  Spring of year prior to implementation
• Session 1Overview and Question and Answer
• Session 2-4 Developed based on results of needs
  assessment

13
Professional Development

• Results of PD surveys indicated that teachers
  wanted additional training in use of data to make
  instructional decisions
• PD sessions focused on
• Rationale for data-based decision making
• Methods for using data to guide instruction
• Opportunities to practice

14
Additional Professional Development

• Week long training in summer for data team
• Data team members to serve as facilitators
• Principal, Reading Specialist, Instructional
  Support Teacher, School Psychologist, Key
  Teachers 1 per grade, 1 Special Ed teacher
• Training topics
• Progress Monitoring
• AIMSweb
• Data Analysis and Interpretation
• Data-based decision making

15
Additional Professional Development

• Two day training for all staff at start of school
  year
• Progress monitoring
• 5 Big Ideas of reading instruction
• Interventions Tiered interventions
• Provided multiple opportunities for discussion
  and practice
• Met with some resistance
• Teacher concerns
• Cant make decisions off of numbers.
• How can we fit this in a day of school?
• How much time will we waste moving kids around
  the school?
• Extra work placed on classroom teacher, like
  progress monitoring?

16
Additional Professional Development

• Additional sessions held throughout the school
  year
• Contracted 2 meetings per month prior to school-
  One was grade level meeting, One was professional
  development
• Differentiated Instruction
• Vocabulary Instruction
• AIMSweb
• Advanced data analysis
• Interventions
• Sessions conducted by school staff to promote
  sustainability
• Worked with Reading Specialist, IST with our help
  and support so they could continue after we left

17
Professional Development Sessions

• Skills built upon those presented in the past
• reviewed info from past sessions
• provided practice with learned skills
• introduced new information
• In vivo training and support provided throughout
  the course of the project
• Always followed didactic with in-classroom
  mentoring, coaching, modeling
• Not always Lehigh staff, could also be district
  personnel with our support
• Needs assessed and support faded when possible to
  facilitate sustainability

18
Assessment of Readiness

• Use the RTI Readiness and Implementation
  Self-Assessment
• Staff at school rate the components
• We also rated each school
• Ratings represent collective viewpoints of
  primary stakeholders

19
RTI Self Assessment Tool- School 1 Implemented
2 years

• SA PSS
• Standards Aligned Curriculum 2.8 2.5
• Universal Screening 3.0 3.0
• Shared Ownership 3.0 3.0
• Data-based Decision making 3.0 2.4
• Tiered Interventions 3.0 3.0
• Parent Engagement 2.3 2.5
• Behavior 1.0 1.0
• Eligibility Determination 2.5 2.5
• Leadership 3.0 2.7
• Professional Development 3.0 3.0

SA Self Assessment PSS Project Staff Assessment
20
RTI Self Assessment Tool- School 2 Implemented
1 year

• SA PSS
• Standards Aligned Curriculum 2.3 2.3
• Universal Screening 3.0 2.7
• Shared Ownership 2.5 1.0
• Data-based Decision making 2.8 2.0
• Tiered Interventions 3.0 2.2
• Parent Engagement 1.8 2.3
• Behavior 2.0 1.2
• Eligibility Determination 3.0 2.0
• Leadership 3.0 2.3
• Professional Development 3.0 2.2

SA Self Assessment PSS Project Staff Assessment
21
RTI Self Assessment Tool- School 3 Implemented
1 year

• SA PSS
• Standards Aligned Curriculum 2.8 2.8
• Universal Screening 3.0 2.7
• Shared Ownership 2.5 3.0
• Data-based Decision making 2.8 3.0
• Tiered Interventions 2.8 2.8
• Parent Engagement 2.3 1.3
• Behavior 1.6 1.4
• Eligibility Determination 2.5 2.5
• Leadership 3.0 2.7
• Professional Development 2.6 2.2

SA Self Assessment PSS Project Staff Assessment
22
Disclaimer

• This webinar was made possible by the support of
  the U.S. Department of Education Office of
  Special Education Programs.
• Opinions expressed herein are those of the
  authors and do not necessarily represent the
  position of the U.S. Department of Education.