Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Overview of RtI Assessment  Brief history and review of RtI  Description of Tiers  Assessment Tools  Instructional Materials to Use based on Assessment.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Overview of RtI Assessment  Brief history and review of RtI  Description of Tiers  Assessment Tools  Instructional Materials to Use based on Assessment."— Presentation transcript:

1 Overview of RtI Assessment  Brief history and review of RtI  Description of Tiers  Assessment Tools  Instructional Materials to Use based on Assessment Data  Resources Available

2 IDEA 1997 v. IDEA 2004  IDEA 1997 –Student has SLD if: Student failed to achieve commensurate with age and ability if provided appropriate teaching experiences AND Student failed to achieve commensurate with age and ability if provided appropriate teaching experiences AND - IEP team found SEVERE DISCREPANCY between achievement and intellectual ability  IDEA 2004 –No longer required to find severe discrepancy  IEP team may use a process that determines if the child responds to a SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHED BASED INTERVENTION

3 Problems with the Discrepancy Model  Critics have described the model as a wait to fail model. Students must be at least 2 years behind before receiving help.  Easier to catch students up at an earlier age but they would not qualify.  By the time they qualify emotional damage and self concept issues are harder to get rid of.

4 Multi Tiered Model of Service Delivery  Tier 1 - Universal Interventions  Tier 2 - Selected Interventions  Tier 3 - Intensive Interventions

5 3 tiered model 1-5% 5-10% 80-90% Tier 3: Intensive, Individual Interventions (5%) Individual Students Assessment-based High Intensity Of longer duration Tier 2: Targeted Group Interventions (15%) Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Tier 1: Universal Interventions (80%) All students Preventive, proactive Students

6 RtI Decision-Making Guide  TIER I  Universal screening: fall, spring, winter  Cut-off score = 25th percentile.  Principal chairs a meeting with RtI team. Data are analyzed to identify trends in students falling below cutoff score. Consultation with teachers occurs regarding curriculum and instructional practices.

7 Tier I (cont.)  Teachers implement core curriculum and strategies for 6–8 weeks. Review classroom data and analyze progress of struggling learners with CBMs or classroom-based assessments.  *Decision point: Identify students who continue to fall below cutoff score and demonstrate a lack of progress, falling within the bottom 10 percent of students based on district norms. Schedule RtI meeting to discuss their move to Tier 2.

8 TIER II  Strategic interventions: 9–12 weeks; repeat  Use researched fluency learning rates (Fuchs, Deno, Shapiro, AIMSweb, etc.). –Establish baseline scores and develop aimline (goal). –Determine number of weeks of intervention, a 30- minute session 2 or 3 days per week. –Problem-solve intervention. –Assign case manager, assessment support, and intervention support. –Begin intervention. –Progress monitoring 2 times per week.

9 Tier II (cont.)  *Decision point: Weeks 4–6. Use a 3- or 4- data-point decision rule to monitor progress, and problem-solve if intervention needs to be altered. –Continue intervention.  *Decision point: Weeks 9–12. Reconvene RtI team, and analyze data. If learning rate improves according to aimline, continue intervention. If not, change intervention and monitor for a repeat of weeks 9–12 ; or if learning rate continues to fall significantly below that of peers (10th percentile), refer student to Tier III.

10 TIER III  Intensive interventions  Increase intensity of intervention to two 30-minute sessions per day, 5 days a week, conducted by trained support personnel. RtI team may also add to standard protocol interventions.  Increase progress monitoring to 3 times per week.

11 Tier III (cont.)  Decision point: Weeks 9–12. If learning rate increases, continue intervention. If learning rate does not increase or if intensity of intervention is judged to be long-term based upon resources, refer student for a comprehensive evaluation.  *Decision point: IEP (individualized education plan) team convenes to review comprehensive evaluation and determine special education eligibility. If student is deemed eligible, IEPs are developed based on all data. Progress monitoring continues. Student receives Tier 1 and Tier 3 interventions

12 Tier 1 Program (Primary Prevention; General Education; Universal core instructional program) During the Tier I pull-out program, focus in on the “BIG IDEAS” of reading instruction: Phonemic Awareness Alphabetical Principal Accuracy and fluency reading to connected text Vocabulary development Reading Comprehension

13 Tier II  More intense instruction  Biweekly progress monitoring  Small groups  More individualized

14 Tier III  Most intensive instruction  Weekly progress monitoring  Programs are individualized and adjusted as needed  Usually preliminary to a referral

15 Referral  Maintain tracking sheets when students switch levels  Put tracking sheets in reg ed cum  Can now use tracking sheets to establish interventions  No longer need a discrepancy

16 School Psych Report  Answers the following questions: –Does xxx qualify for special education based on the criteria set forth under Federal RtI guidelines?  Data must be collected to establish a pattern.

17 Examples of High School Assessment Tools  Ideas for assessment –Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE) –Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests Revised –Research going on using Strategies Intervention Model

18 Example of Middle School Assessment Tools  Use CST and CELDT as screening tools  Students are placed into reading strategies classes and further testing is continued  San Diego quick is used to measure word in isolation decoding  Scholastics 3-minute fluency is used to measure oral reading fluency

19  Reading Specialist does most of the individual assessments  Performs these assessments during lunch, prep period and class time.  District used to hire a substitute to help in order to finish assessments, now uses PEP/Tutorial time

20 Example of Elementary School Assessment Tools  Dibels  Pseudoword Decoding (GL WIAT)  AR- STAR  Color coded tracking sheet for ease of selection  Learn to trust data!!!  Check with reg ed teachers

21 Examples of Interventions at Elementary Level  Rewards  6-Minute Solution (ORF)  Read Naturally  Pilot Site for Reading Plus (on computer)

22 Who Gets Assessed?  Students scoring as Basic (below 325 CST) Below Basic and Far Below Basic.  Teacher or Parent Concerns can trigger an assessment.  Students scoring below a 2.0 GPA.  Students placed in an intervention class receive additional testing.  Students scoring on grade level are then moved out of intervention class.

23 Logistics  Students grouped by grade level or ELD label but not on data  Students stay for a year, can be moved at semester  Interventions for 7 th and 8 th graders delivered in a double block period combining the intervention with the core Language Arts Instruction

24 Tier I Tier I  Assessment –CELDT –AR STAR –Read Naturally –Rewards  Delivery –Gen Ed classroom/ small group instruction  Monitor –DIBLES monthly, AR STAR monthly, Unit Assessments

25 Tier II Tier II  Assessment –Quick phonics screener –Phonics for Reading –Rewards –Literature Connection/complete  Delivery –4 days a week 30 min time blocks  Monitor –Tier 2+ weekly DIBLES, Biweekly program progress –Tier 2 Monthly DIBLES, AR STAR M, Program Progress

26 Tier III  Assessment –EL- IPT listening/speaking –Test used in other Tiers  Delivery –Small group (3 - 4)  Monitor –Weekly DIBLES –Biweekly program monitor –IEP Quarterly Check


28 Planning Instructional Groupings  Team process  Relied heavily on Dibels data –Must determine most important indicator  Analyzed other diagnostic measures  Analyzed STAR CST testing levels

29 Examples of Elementary Tier I Instructional Materials  Teachers have the freedom to use their professional judgment in providing differentiated instruction –Open Court: Reteach –Open Court: ELD component –Hampton Brown –SRA –Readers Theater –Literature Circles –Partner Reading –Teacher directed grouping –Team teaching

30 Examples of Elementary Tier II Instructional Materials Lexia: primary reading/ CD Rom, -(phonemic awareness and phonics) -(phonemic awareness and phonics) Rewards: Intermediate level, -(multisyllabic decoding) -(multisyllabic decoding) Read Naturally: tapes and CD Rom, -(fluency) -(fluency) Drops in the Bucket/Frog Games -(language skills) After School Achievers Reading Club - (reading strategies/language skills/comprehension) - (reading strategies/language skills/comprehension) Hampton Brown: (language Development for EL’s) Guided Reading Book Sets

31 Examples of Elementary Tier III Instructional Materials  Orton Gillingham/Zoophonics  Steck Vaughn Power up (intermediate CD Rom/online)  Read Naturally  Edmark reading (CD)  Some students/Language focus

32 For More Information  National High School Center-  National Center on RTI-  Center on Instruction-  RTI Wire  Iris Center- Vanderbilt University  ces.html hures/IRIS_RTI_Brochure.pdf

Download ppt "Overview of RtI Assessment  Brief history and review of RtI  Description of Tiers  Assessment Tools  Instructional Materials to Use based on Assessment."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google