Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

R.T. Why?: RTI 101 PBIS Conference March 2010 Jon Potter & Lisa Bates.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "R.T. Why?: RTI 101 PBIS Conference March 2010 Jon Potter & Lisa Bates."— Presentation transcript:

1 R.T. Why?: RTI 101 PBIS Conference March 2010 Jon Potter & Lisa Bates

2 Objectives: Participants will be familiar with the “Big Picture” of RTI Participants will understand system requirements for a strong RTI system.

3 RTI Misconception: What it is and what it’s not RTI Misconception: What it is and what it’s not Is NotIs An instructional programA framework to implement effective practices A group of students that leaves your room for extra instruction A system of matching resources to each individuals student’s needs Possible to implement aloneA collaborative effort The same for every schoolUniquely designed for each building A special education, a general education, a Title 1, a Talented and Gifted initiative An “Every” Education Initiative An educational fadA systematic method for delivering instruction

4 Defining Terms: Is a system of organizing gen. ed. curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of all students Integrates all support programs to use resources more efficiently Applies to all students Can exist without using RTI Is an evaluation procedure identified in IDEA for identifying learning disabilities Is a special education procedure that is limited to assessment Applies only to children suspected of having LD Cannot be implemented without a system like MTI in place Multi-Tiered Instruction (MTI) Response to Intervention (RTI)

5 To increase the achievement for ALL students by providing them with appropriate instruction matched to their needs To better identify and instruct students who may have a learning disability Purposes of RTI

6 RTI focus is on General Education! Teachers don’t fail students, systems do. RTI is a system for differentiation of instruction! RTI is a system that is predicated on the general education teachers’ skill and knowledge of instruction, assessment, curriculum, and children.

7 Assumptions in RTI-land Every child can and will learn IQ and intelligence are not the same thing People are first Flexible skill grouping changes (frequently) based on data (about skills) “Ability” grouping implies tracking, tracking = bad news

8 Core RTI Principles We can effectively teach all children Intervene early Use a multi-tier model of service delivery Use a problem-solving method to make decisions within a multi-tier model Use research-based, scientifically validated interventions/instruction to the extent available Monitor student progress to inform instruction Use data to make decisions Use assessment for 3 different purposes – Screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring NASDSE, 2006

9 Our education system has grown up through a process of “Disjointed Incrementalism” (Reynolds, 1988) One Perspective on History The current Education System’s Programmatic Evolution K-12 Education Gifted Title 1 SPED Migrant ELL At Risk

10 In The Past General Education Title Reading or Other Reading Support Special Education Some “Fell’” Through Some “Fell’” Through

11 Pre-referral team (CARES) reviews what teacher has tried Jessie participates in the curriculum Jessie isn’t doing well Teacher tries again Resumes regular program Jessie doesn’t improve Jessie improves Teacher’s effort is deemed sufficient Special Education referral is initiated by the teacher Jessie’s teacher does his best to differentiate instruction and keeps anecdotal data Teacher is told to try again Jessie is tested, usually by special education personnel, using IQ, achievement, and other tests The pre referral/discrepancy approach

12 The RTI Way….. Does the child find the system, or does the system find the child?

13 Builds a unified (collaborative) system Identifies students who need help EARLY It helps students receive instruction that they NEED RTI leads to a seamless INSTRUCTION focused evaluation process for students who may have a Specific Learning Disability How does RTI SYSTEMATICALLY help to teach all students effectively?

14 RTI: Full Continuum of Support General Education Title Reading & Reading Support, Gifted Ed. Special Education, Gifted Ed. I I I I I I I I all along the continuum! I =

15 Selecting screening measures to identify at-risk students early is key: Need for Screening Words Per Minute

16 Reading is a crucial skill not optional Teach reading early – Days and weeks matter RTI prevents students from falling behind at the start..

17 Reading Is Not An Optional Skill Poor readers in 4 th grade struggle in literacy in Kindergarten (Torgeson, 2004) Children who struggle K-3 rarely achieve average reading skills (Torgeson, Rashotte, Alexander, 2001) Children who cannot read drop out of school Over 60% percent of people without a high school diploma do not currently have a job. (underemployed, incarnated, self employed, raising families, ect.) (Bureau of Labor Statistics) Academic success or failure is strongly related to adaptive functioning as an adult

18 Is it a skill deficit or developmental lag ? Can’t we wait for them to “bloom?” – Without intervention, kids who are behind stay behind (Juel, 1988; Francis, et al., 1996, Shaywitz, 1999) – Skill deficits can be erased—especially if you catch them early! Good reading builds reading AND cognitive skills! Days and Weeks Matter

19 Independent Reading %tile Minutes Per Day Words Read Per Year 98 65.0 4,358,000 90 21.1 1,823,000 70 9.6 622,000 50 4.6 282,000 30 1.3 106,000 10 0.1 8,000 2 0.0 0 Adapted from Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding (1988). Reading makes you Smarter

20 RTI helps students receive instruction that they need

21 Daisy participates in the general core curriculum with strong instruction Daisy isn’t doing well Second Group Intervention EBIS Team designs individualized intervention Resumes general program Daisy doesn’t improve Daisy improves Daisy doesn’t improve Daisy improves Intervention is intense and LD is suspected Improvement is good and other factors are suspected as cause Special Education referral is initiated by the team EBIS Team reviews screening data and places Daisy in group intervention Parents Notified How RTI Works from a Student’s Perspective Progress monitoring and intervention data is used

22 RTI Process differs from Pre- Referral Process RTI ProcessPre-Referral Process Student in need of assistance identified by screening data Student in need of assistance identified by individual teacher Multi-tiered instruction addresses students need Individual teacher typically responsible for addressing student’s need Students progress is monitored closely through systematic progress monitoring Student’s progress is monitored by the teacher through informal assessments Decision about continued need for support is determined by district decision rules Decision about continued need for support is made by team’s beliefs about the student’s progress systematicNot Systematic

23 Teacher – “RTI really advocates for the student. The data really needs to be gathered and assessed. Are the child’s academic needs really being met? Are they making progress? If not, what is the problem and what instructional strategies need to be changed? It seems that the child’s issues becomes one of the team’s and not solely the responsibility of the classroom teacher. Also, in many cases I am sure, some individual students just need some intervention to be successful and NOT special education!” – Nancy Greene, 2 nd grade teacher Shared Responsibility

24 Teacher – “RTI is designed to help target a specific deficit in a student’s learning and through collaboration with others design a plan to meet that particular need. This has helped to improve my teaching.” – Jeff Kelley, 4 th grader teacher Shared Responsibility

25 Discussion Does the child find the system, or does the system find the child?

26 Seamless “instruction focused” evaluation process RTI improves our identification & instruction of students who may have LD

27 In the Past….. Evaluations were based on… – Discrepancy between cognitive abilities and achievement – Psychological processing deficits

28 Discrepancy Based Evaluation IQ: 100 Achievement in Reading is : 80 Qualify for special education

29 What does a discrepancy based evaluation tell you about what instruction a student needed to make progress? Discrepancy Based Evaluation

30 Psychological Processing Deficit Evaluation What does a psychological processing deficit evaluation really tell you?

31 Performance on tests that measure psychological processing are biased No patterns have been found that differentiate LD/not LD The Psychological Processing Problem:

32 Patterns on psychological processing tests do not predict outcomes Patterns on psychological processing tests do not lead to treatment The Psychological Processing Problem:

33 What does a psychological processing based evaluation tell you if it does not... – differentiate LD students from non-LD students or – lead to recommendations that improve achievement? Psychological Processing Based Evaluation

34 Special education placements tend to stabilize the reading growth of students with reading disabilities rather than accelerate it. (Vaughn, 1998, Moody, 2000) Students who enter special education 2+ years below age mates can be expected to maintain disparity or fall farther behind. Special Education Outcomes

35 What do you really want to know when a student gets evaluated? What’s wrong with them? Vs. What can I do to instruct them effectively?

36 Evaluation focused on teaching and learning – Information is gathered in classroom context – “Response” is objective and measurable Process leads to effective plan – Intervention eligibility IEP – Nature and intensity of service is identified – Tells you what the child needs for instruction! RTI Based Evaluation

37 How do you plan and implement a RTI based system? Build CONSENSUSamongst the staff PLAN to develop your system requirements (Infrastructure) IMPLEMENT your system requirements EVALUATE how your system is working and make changes as needed

38 The Process is Ongoing and Long-Term CONSENSUS

39 Assumptions

40 1.Leadership 2.Teaming 3.Research based core reading 4.Universal Screening 5.Research based interventions 6.Progress Monitoring 7.Decision Rules 8.Procedures for LD evaluation & eligibility 9.Professional development & Fidelity System Requirements

41 1. Leadership District Level Strong administrative support to ensure commitment and resources AND School Level Strong teacher support to share in the common goal of improving instruction

42 District Classroom teachers & Specialists (representing different levels and schools) District office leaders Principals School Principal Classroom Teachers Specialists Counselor Psychologist 2. Teaming The Team is only as strong as the least invested member

43 Research-Based CORE Program RTI is predicated on effective, research-based programs that include the BIG 5 components of reading: Phonemic Awareness Phonics Fluency Vocabulary Comprehension PhonicsPhonics FluencyFluency Phonemic Awareness ComprhensionComprhension Vocabulary For all students!

44 How does it help a struggling reader to be in core? They need the most instruction Need to be exposed to grade level material If they miss grade level material, they will never catch up Just because there is a deficit in one area, does not mean there is a deficit in all areas of reading Interventions are limited in scope

45 Differences in Learning to Read Estimates from NICHHD research Population %Journey to ReadingInstructional Requirements 5 Easy: children read before starting school Need no formal decoding instruction 35 Relatively EasyLearn to read regardless of instructional approach 40 Formidable ChallengeNeed systematic and explicit instruction 20 One of the most difficult tasks to be mastered during schooling Need intensive, systematic, direct, multi- sensory instruction

46 Differences in Learning to Read- Discussion How does this research match up with your own experience of learning to read? Your children’s? Your students’?

47 More about the core Important Facts : Students cannot be identified as LD if their difficulty is due to lack of instruction in the BIG 5. Research-based program must be implemented as designed (fidelity)

48 Universal Screening Procedures must identify which students are proficient (80%) and which are deficient (20%). Good screening measures: Are not intended to measure everything about a student, but provide an efficient an unbiased way to identify students who will need additional support (Tier 2 or Tier 3) Help you assess the overall health of your Core program (Are 80% of yours students at benchmark/proficiency?)

49 Why Use Fluency Measures for Screening? Oral Reading Fluency and accuracy in reading connected text is one of the best indicators of overall reading comprehension (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001) We always examine fluency AND accuracy Without examining accuracy scores, we are missing a BIG piece of the picture Students MUST be accurate with any skill before they are fluent. Oral reading fluency (ORF) does not tell you everything about a student’s reading skill, but a child who cannot read fluently cannot fully comprehend written text and will need additional support.

50 Interventions – Must be designed to match identified needs – Should always be based on student data – Almost always given in small groups (Not necessarily 1:1) – On-going data determines need to continue, discontinue, or change curriculum, instruction, and/or assessment – Uses more explicit instruction – Provides more intensity Additional modeling and guided feedback Immediacy of feedback – Does NOT replace core

51 Interventions Students pulled out for interventions may be “missing” something else… BUT If a student can’t read, how much are they already missing in the classroom? “No one seems to notice that it is only during that single period each day [intervention time] that the struggling readers are provided with texts and lessons that theory and research support. The other 5 hours each day are largely comprised of texts and lessons that are over their heads.” Richard Allington

52 Which students: – All receiving intervention – Borderline scores or performance-as resources allow Progress Monitoring Tools Must Be: Brief Valid Reliable Repeatable Easy to Administer Frequency: Every 2 weeks (minimum) Every week (ideal) Are the children learning? How can we tell?

53 Decision Rules Provide the “now what” after teams have analyzed student data Guide decisions for all tiers Take the guesswork out of “what to do next” Ensure equity across schools I think… I feel… I believe What data do you have that makes you think/feel/believe that? -Dr. Ed Shapiro

54 Aimline Decision Rule Example: 4 Points Below the Goal Line Oral Reading Fluency Add 15 minutes to intervention Reduce group size to 3 students

55 Districts must adopt common procedures for doing this work: Decision Rules Forms SPED Procedures Think of RTI as a standardized test Students should be identified similarly from school to school Policy and Procedure Development (Standardization)

56 Professional Development and Fidelity Content: Core curriculum & instruction Assessment Interventions Teaming Data-based decision making SPED procedures Delivery: Ongoing Sufficient time to collaborate and plan Incorporates fidelity checks Anticipate and be willing to meet the newly emerging needs based on student performance Data ALSO used to drive professional development needs

57 Does it REALLYwork????? Let’s look at some data!

58 Tigard-Tualatin School District OAKS Reading Proficiency

59 Tigard-Tualatin School District OAKS Math Proficiency

60 A Tale of Two Districts District 1: RTI for 4-5 yearsDistrict 2: Non RTI Small, rural school district 350 elementary students (PK-5) 470 elementary students (PK-5) Title 1 services 31% students on Free and Reduced Lunch 19% students on Free and Reduced Lunch

61 A Tale of Two Districts District 1: RTI 3 rd Grade ORF

62 A Tale of Two Districts District 2: Non RTI 3 rd Grade ORF

63 RTI District: 3 rd Grade ITBS Reading Comprehension

64 Questions?

65 Contacts Jon Potter – – 503-431-4149 Lisa Bates – – 503-431-4079

Download ppt "R.T. Why?: RTI 101 PBIS Conference March 2010 Jon Potter & Lisa Bates."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google