Presentation on theme: "Building Capacity for the Implementation of SRBI"— Presentation transcript:
1 Building Capacity for the Implementation of SRBI Dr. George M. BatscheProfessor and Co-DirectorInstitute for School ReformSchool Psychology ProgramUniversity of South Florida
2 The Challenges Agreeing on a Vision Defining Problem-Solving/RtI Agreeing on the “Model”Ensuring it is a General Education InitiativeCreating Policies and ProceduresProfessional DevelopmentCreating Decision RulesDeveloping InterventionsIntervention Support and Integrity
3 The Vision 95% of students at “proficient” level Students possess social and emotional behaviors that support “active” learningA “unified” system of educational servicesOne “ED”Student Support Services perceived as a necessary component for successful schooling
4 Components of the Organizational Delivery System Academic and Behavior InstructionLearning SupportsLeadership
6 Response to Intervention RtI is the practice of (1) providing high-quality instruction/intervention matched to student needs and (2) using learning rate over time and level of performance to (3) make important educational decisions.(Batsche, et al., 2005)Problem-solving is the process that is used to develop effective instruction/interventions.
7 Problem Solving Process Define the ProblemDefining Problem/Directly Measuring BehaviorEvaluateResponse to Intervention (RtI)Problem AnalysisValidating ProblemIdent Variables that Contribute to ProblemDevelop PlanImplement PlanImplement As IntendedProgress MonitorModify as Necessary
8 Steps in the Problem-Solving Process PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION• Identify replacement behavior• Data- current level of performance• Data- benchmark level(s)• Data- peer performance• Data- GAP analysisPROBLEM ANALYSIS• Develop hypotheses( brainstorming)• Develop predictions/assessmentINTERVENTION DEVELOPMENT• Develop interventions in those areas for which data are available and hypotheses verified• Proximal/Distal• Implementation supportResponse to Intervention (RtI)• Frequently collected data• Type of Response- good, questionable, poor
10 Problem-Solving/Response to Intervention: Basic Issues Effective Core Instruction is the basis for this model.The model cannot “fix” core instruction issues through student removalAcademic Engaged Time (AET) is the treatment “dosage” for this modelCannot do “more” in “same” time frameThe “unit of analysis” is the school building, not the districtRole of the building principal is critical to the success of the model
11 Problem-Solving/Response to Intervention: Key Issues Supplemental instruction is best delivered through “standard protocols” of intervention to groups of students with common needsData drive decisionsTime is our ally and our enemyEarly intervention and PreventionIts all about the rate of student progress in the amount of time remainingData collection WITHOUT intervention integrity is uselessStaff, resources and time must match the demand
12 Components of the Model: Standard Procedures All intervention and eligibility decisions are based on the assumption that the “core” instruction--academic and behavior--is effective.A single problem-solving process exists and the implementation steps and skills are standardized.Criteria exist for different types of RtICriteria and procedures exist for eligibilityProcedures exist to support intervention integrity and to document the “dosage” of intervention providedIntervention decisions are base on the type of RtIA cadre of interventions exist that the entire school is knowledgeable about
13 Problem-Solving/RtI Resource Management 1-5%5-10%80-90%StudentsPublic Education Resource DeploymentSupport staff cannot resource more than 20% of the studentsService vs Effectiveness--BIG ISSUEAcademicBehavior
15 How Does it Fit Together? Standard Treatment Protocol Step 2Step 3Step 4Step 1Addl.DiagnosticAssessmentInstructionResultsMonitoringAll Students ata grade levelODRsMonthlyBxScreeningBench-MarkAssessmentAnnualTestingBehaviorAcademicsIndividualDiagnosticIndividualizedIntensiveweeklySupplemental1-5%5-10%80-90%CoreIntensiveStandardProtocolSmallGroupDifferen-tiatedBy Skill2 times/monthNoneContinueWithCoreInstructionGradesClassroomAssessmentsYearly Assessments
16 How Do We Know If This is a General Education Initiative? Priority of superintendent and school boardDistrict Leadership TeamStrategic PlanFocus is on effectiveness of Tier 1 for disaggregated groupsUnit of Analysis is the BUILDING
17 How Do We Know If This is a General Education Initiative? Principal LedRegular data analysisData DaysTeam focuses in improving impact of core instructionPrevention and Early InterventionScreening and early intervention with Kindergarten students
19 Initial Steps District Leadership Team Building Leadership Teams Curriculum/General EducationMISStudent ServicesSpecial EducationReading, Math, BehaviorBuilding Leadership TeamsMirrors District Leadership Team
20 Initial Steps Develop Implementation Plan 4 Years Consensus, Infrastructure, ImplementationBegin with Tier 1 IssuesDataEffectivenessEvaluate Effectiveness of Supplemental Services70% Criterion
21 Initial Steps Develop Implementation Plan Infrastructure DataDecision RulesTechnologyCascade of Interventions (Integrated)Intervention SupportIdentify Professional Role and Development NeedsData Coach and SkillsProblem-Solving ProcessIntervention Development and SupportParent Involvement
22 Initial Steps Develop Implementation Plan Implementation Entire DistrictVertical ProgrammingPilot SchoolsEvaluation Plan
24 Role of District Leaders Give “permission” for modelProvide a vision for outcome-based service deliveryReinforce effective practicesExpect accountabilityProvide tangible support for effortTrainingCoachingTechnologyPolicies
25 Role of the Principal Sets vision for problem-solving process Supports development of expectationsResponsible for allocation of resourcesFacilitates priority settingEnsures follow-upSupports program evaluationMonitors staff support/climate
26 Role of the Facilitator Ensures pre-meeting preparationReviews steps in process and desired outcomesFacilitates movement through stepsFacilitates consensus buildingSets follow-up schedule/communicationCreates evaluation criteria/protocolEnsures parent involvement
27 Data Coach Gathers and Organizes Tier 1 and Tier 2 Data Supports staff for small group and individual dataProvides coaching for data interpretationFacilitates regular data meetings for building and grade levels
28 Role of ParticipantsReview Request for Assistance forms prior to meetingComplete individual problem-solvingAttitude of consensus buildingUnderstand dataResearch interventions for problem area
29 Role of Parent Review Request for Assistance form prior to meeting Complete individual problem solvingPrioritize concernsAttitude of consensus building
32 Stages of Implementing Problem-Solving/RtI ConsensusBelief is sharedVision is agreed uponImplementation requirements understoodInfrastructure DevelopmentProblem-Solving ProcessData SystemPolicies/ProceduresTrainingTier I and II intervention systemsE.g., K-3 Academic Support PlanTechnology supportDecision-making criteria establishedImplementation
33 The Process of Systems Change Until, and unless, Consensus (understanding the need and trusting in the support) is reached no support will exist to establish the Infrastructure. Until, and unless, the Infrastructure is in place Implementation will not take place.A fatal flaw is to attempt Implementation without Consensus and InfrastructureLeadership must come both from the Principal and from the educators in the building.
34 Building Consensus Beliefs Understanding the “Need” Skills and/or Support
35 Consensus: Essential Beliefs No child should be left behindIt is OK to provide differential service across studentsAcademic Engaged Time must be considered firstStudent performance is influenced most by the quality of the interventions we deliver and how well we deliver them- not preconceived notions about child characteristicsDecisions are best made with dataOur expectations for student performance should be dependent on a student’s response to intervention, not on the basis of a “score” that “predicts” what they are “capable” of doing.
36 Contextual Issues Affecting The Problem-Solving Process in General and Special Education IDEA Re-AuthorizationFocus on academic outcomesGeneral education as baseline metricLabeling as a “last resort”Increasing general education optionsPooling building-based resourcesFlexible funding patternsRtI Introduced as option for LD eligibilityESEA Legislation-No Child Left BehindNational Emphasis on ReadingEvidence-based Interventions
37 Why Problem-Solving ? BIG IDEAS AYP and Disaggregated Data (NCLB) move focus of attention to student progress, not student labelsBuilding principals and superintendents want to know if students are achieving benchmarks, regardless of the students “type”Accurate “placements” do not guarantee that students will be exposed to interventions that maximize their rate of progressEffective interventions result from good problem-solving, rather than good “testing”Progress monitoring is done best with “authentic” assessment that is sensitive to small changes in student academic and social behavior
38 Big Ideas (con’d) Interventions must be “evidence based” (IDEA/NCLB) Response to Intervention(RtI) is the best measure of problem “severity”Program eligibility (initial and continued) decisions are best made based on RtIStaff training and support (e.g., coaching) improve intervention skills“Tiered” implementation improves service efficiency
39 Consensus Development: Data Are you happy with your data?Building/Grade Level Student OutcomesDisaggregatedAYP
43 Break for Group Discussion Are you comfortable with the structures that you have in your district and school to support the implementation of SRBI? (DBLT, SBLT, Staff Roles)Have you developed an implementation plan?Have you achieved consensus? Have you identified the method(s) for achieving consensus?Break for Group Discussion
45 Infrastructure: Critical Issues Policies and ProceduresThe ModelSteps in the ModelDecision RulesDecision Rules and Impact on Intervention DevelopmentExpectation for Tier Functions/IntegrationData Collection and InterpretationIntervention DevelopmentIntervention Integrity and Documentation
46 Infrastructure: Policies and Procedures Clearly delineate the components of the modelTriangle4-Step ModelIdentify steps/skills required for each componentDecision Rules
47 Cascade of Interventions Entire staff understands “triangle” and the available interventions at each Tier.Supplemental and intensive interventions are in addition to core instruction.A student intervention plan is a single document that is integrated across the tiers.Different tiers ensure that outcomes in Tier 1 are improvedTier 1 progress monitoring data are used for effectiveness determination for all Tiers
48 Three Tiered Model of School Supports: Anclote Elementary-Pasco County Academic SystemsBehavioral Systems1-5%Tier 3: Comprehensive and Intensive InterventionsIndividual Students or Small Group (2-3)Reading: Scholastic Program, Reading,Mastery, ALL, Soar to Success, Leap Track, FundationsTier 3: Intensive InterventionsIndividual CounselingFBA/BIPTeach, Reinforce, and Prevent (TRP)Assessment-basedIntense, durable procedures5-10%Tier 2: Strategic InterventionsStudents that don’t respond to the core curriculumReading: Soar to Success, Leap Frog, CRISS strategies, CCC Lab Math: Extended DayWriting: Small Group, CRISS strategies, and “Just Write Narrative” by K. RobinsonTier 2: Targeted Group InterventionsSome students (at-risk)Small Group CounselingParent Training (Behavior & Academic)Bullying Prevention ProgramFBA/BIP Classroom Management Techniques, Professional DevelopmentSmall Group Parent Training ,Data80-90%Tier 1: Core CurriculumAll studentsReading: Houghton MifflinMath: HarcourtWriting: Six Traits Of WritingLearning Focus StrategiesTier 1: Universal InterventionsAll settings, all studentsCommittee, Preventive, proactive strategiesSchool Wide Rules/ Expectations Positive Reinforcement System (Tickets & 200 Club)School Wide Consequence System School Wide Social Skills Program, Data (Discipline, Surveys, etc.) Professional Development (behavior)Classroom Management Techniques,Parent TrainingThree Tiered Model of School Supports:Anclote Elementary-Pasco CountyStudents
49 Data Infrastructure: Using Existing Data to Predict Intervention Needs Previous referral history predicts future referral historyHow do we interpret teacher referrals?Previous intervention history predicts future intervention historyHow do we use this information to establish an infrastructure for change?
50 Data-Driven Infrastructure: Establishing a Building Baseline Code referrals (reasons) for past 2-3 yearsIdentifies problems teachers feel they do not have the skills/support to handleReferral pattern reflects skill pattern of the staff, the resources currently in place and the “history” of what constitutes a referral in that buildingIdentifies likely referral types for next 2 yearsIdentifies focus of Professional Development Activities AND potential Tier II and III interventionsPresent data to staff. Reinforces “Need” concept
51 Data For Each Tier - Where Do They Come From? Tier 1: Universal Screening, accountability assessments, grades, classroom assessments, referral patterns, discipline referralsTier 2: Universal Screening - Group Level Diagnostics (maybe), systematic progress monitoring, large-scale assessment data and classroom assessmentTier 3: Universal Screenings, Individual Diagnostics, intensive and systematic progress monitoring, formative assessment, other informal assessments
65 Break for Group Discussion Has your district/school developed a policies and procedures manual for implementation?Do you believe that the existence of an “intervention map” would facilitate implementation?Are you comfortable with your data sources for Tiers 1 and 2?
66 Tier Functions/Integration How the Tiers workTime aggregationTier integration
67 How the Tiers WorkGoal: Student is successful with Tier 1 level of support-academic or behavioralGreater the tier, greater support and “severity”Increase level of support (Tier level) until you identify an intervention that results in a positive response to interventionContinue until student strengthens response significantlySystematically reduce support (Lower Tier Level)Determine the relationship between sustained growth and sustained support.
68 Integrating the TiersTier 1 (Core) instruction present at all three levelsPurpose of Tier 2 is to improve success in Tier 1Purpose of Tier 3 is to improve success in Tier 2Is there a single “intervention” plan made up of different Tier services?
69 Integrating the Tiers 5th grade student reading at the 2nd grade level Direct Instruction, Targeted, Narrow Focus (e.g., phonemic awareness, phonics, some fluency)Tier 2Fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, pre-teach for Tier 1Tier 1Focus on comprehension, participation, scripted decodingUse core materials for contentProgress monitor both instructional level and grade placement level skills
70 Intervention Development Tiers 1 and 2Critical ComponentsEvidence-based
71 Intervention Development Criteria for “Appropriate” and “Effective” Interventions:Evidence-basedType of ProblemPopulationSettingLevels of SupportFocused on most important needsGroup interventions have priorityInterventions MUST be linked to Tier 1 focus, materials, performance criteria
72 Tiers or Levels Tier One- Examining “Universal” Interventions Questions:How is this student doing compared to other students? GAP analysisWhat percent of other students are achieving district benchmarks? Effectiveness of instructionHypothesesHo: Has this student been exposed to an effective learning environment?Ho: Has this student had access to an effective learning environment?
73 Interventions: Tier 1 Group students based on skill data Differentiate instruction based on groupingOrganize students based on skill performanceHigher performing, more students,Lower performing, fewer studentsSame amount of time, different use of that timeBreadth of skill focus might vary
74 Tiers or Levels Tier Two- Examining “Supplemental” Interventions Hypotheses:Ho: Student requires additional time for direct instructionHo: Focus of the curriculum must narrowAssessment:DIBELS, CBM, district assessmentsInterventions:Increase AET ( )e.g., K-3 Academic Support PlanNarrow focus to fewer, barrier skillsDistrict Supplemental Curriculum
75 Characteristics of Tier 2 Interventions Available in general education settingsOpportunity to increase exposure (academic engaged time) to curriculumOpportunity to narrow focus of the curriculumSufficient time for interventions to have an effect (10-30 weeks)Often are “standardized” supplemental curriculum protocols
76 Interventions: Tier 2 First resource is TIME (AET) HOW much more time is needed?Second resource is curriculumWHAT does the student need?Third resource is personnelWHO or WHERE will it be provided?
77 Tier 2: Getting TIME“Free” time--does not require additional personnelStaggering instructionDifferentiating instructionCross grade instructionSkill-based instructionStandard Protocol GroupingReduced range of “standard” curriculumAfter-SchoolHome-Based
78 Tier 2: Curriculum Standard protocol approach Focus on essential skillsMost likely, more EXPOSURE and more FOCUS of core instructionLinked directly to core instruction materials and benchmarksCriterion for effectiveness is 70% of students receiving Tier 2 will reach benchmarks
79 Tier 2: Personnel EVERYONE in the building is a potential resource Re-conceptualize who does whatPersonnel deployed AFTER needs are identifiedWHERE matters less and lessREMEMBER, student performance matters more than labels, locations and staff needs.A school cannot deliver intensive services to more than 7% of the population
80 Intervention SupportIntervention plans should be developed based on student need and skills of staffAll intervention plans should have intervention supportPrincipals should ensure that intervention plans have intervention supportTeachers should not be expected to implement plans for which there is no support
81 Critical Components of Intervention Support Support for Intervention IntegrityDocumentation of Intervention ImplementationIntervention and Eligibility decisions and outcomes cannot be supported in an RtI model without these two critical components
82 Intervention Support Pre-meeting First 2 weeks Review data Review steps to interventionDetermine logisticsFirst 2 weeks2-3 meetings/weekRevise, if necessary
83 Intervention Support Second Two Weeks Following weeks Meet twice each weekFollowing weeksMeet at least weeklyReview dataReview stepsDiscuss RevisionsApproaching benchmarkSchedule for intervention fading
87 Evaluating the effectiveness of the intervention Is the intervention evidence-based?How “intense” is the intervention?What can we “expect” the intervention to do?Was the intervention implemented as planned?How effective is this intervention with students from similar backgrounds?Research-based vs. evidence-basedIs there research- or evidence-based data on the effectiveness of intervention with difference groups of students?What are realistic expectations for the improvement based on deficit in performance and the intensity of the intervention?Intervention fidelity
88 Demonstrates how you can use data to examine effectiveness – on the CD Let’s try to improve slide- DAVE88
89 Decision Rules: What is a “Good” Response to Intervention? Positive ResponseGap is closingCan extrapolate point at which target student(s) will “come in range” of target--even if this is long rangeQuestionable ResponseRate at which gap is widening slows considerably, but gap is still wideningGap stops widening but closure does not occurPoor ResponseGap continues to widen with no change in rate.89
90 Positive Response to Intervention Expected TrajectoryPerformance90Observed TrajectoryTime90
91 Decision Rules: What is a “Questionable” Response to Intervention? Positive ResponseGap is closingCan extrapolate point at which target student(s) will “come in range” of target--even if this is long rangeQuestionable ResponseRate at which gap is widening slows considerably, but gap is still wideningGap stops widening but closure does not occurPoor ResponseGap continues to widen with no change in rate.91
92 Questionable Response to Intervention Expected TrajectoryPerformance92Observed TrajectoryTime92
93 Decision Rules: What is a “Poor” Response to Intervention? Positive ResponseGap is closingCan extrapolate point at which target student(s) will “come in range” of target--even if this is long rangeQuestionable ResponseRate at which gap is widening slows considerably, but gap is still wideningGap stops widening but closure does not occurPoor ResponseGap continues to widen with no change in rate.93
94 Poor Response to Intervention Expected TrajectoryPerformance94Observed TrajectoryTime94
95 Decision Rules: Linking RtI to Intervention Decisions PositiveContinue intervention with current goalContinue intervention with goal increasedFade intervention to determine if student(s) have acquired functional independence.95
96 Decision Rules: Linking RtI to Intervention Decisions QuestionableWas intervention implemented as intended?If no - employ strategies to increase implementation integrityIf yes -Increase intensity of current intervention for a short period of time and assess impact. If rate improves, continue. If rate does not improve, return to problem solving.96
97 Decision Rules: Linking RtI to Intervention Decisions PoorWas intervention implemented as intended?If no - employ strategies in increase implementation integrityIf yes -Is intervention aligned with the verified hypothesis? (Intervention Design)Are there other hypotheses to consider? (Problem Analysis)Was the problem identified correctly? (Problem Identification)97
106 Elsie Second grade student End of School Year Regular Education Scores at 62 wcpm in second grade materialTeacher judges (based on in-class observation/evaluation) comprehension to not be substantially different from ORF – not great, not terribleAt the end of second grade, Elsie is a reader, but not a good reader. Her fluency is below benchmark. Her Fluency is also below her peers.
108 Decision Model at Tier 1- General Education Instruction Step 1: ScreeningORF = 62 wcpm, end of second grade benchmark for at risk is 70 wcpm (see bottom of box)Compared to other students, Elsie scores around the 12th percentile + or -Elsie’s teacher reports that she struggles with multisyllabic words and that she makes many decoding errors when she readsIs this student at risk?Continue Tier 1 InstructionTraining Notes:This is an example from a school that collected DIBELS data for a time, but did not use it. The spring of this school year is when they first started using their data to help make instructional decisions. Elsie’s historical data throughout second grade (fall and winter) are included for illustrative purposes.These are data of tier 1 screening data indicating an intense problem. That is,This Student is at Risk, General Education Not WorkingElsieNoYesMove to Tier 2: Strategic Interventions
109 Decision Model at Tier 2- Supplemental Instruction Supplemental, small group instruction will be provided to ElsieShe will participate in two different supplemental groups, one focused on Decoding (Phonics for Reading; Archer) and one focused on fluency building (Read Naturally; Imholt)She will participate in small group instruction 3x per week, 30 minutes each – and she will also continue with her core instructionSupplemental instruction implemented by certified teachers in her school (2 different teachers)Progress monitoring about every 2 weeksTraining NotesAdditional data were collected on Elsie’s performance using additional reading fluency passages to look at both Fluency and accuracy (a proxy for decoding), she completed some maze comprehension assessments. Because her reading accuracy was below the preset cutoff in her school (95%), Elsie was asked to read some additional passages to elicit a set of errors. Her errors were typified and summarized. There were a number of patterns present in her errors (including multisyllabic words, compound word errors, and leaving off suffixes). It was noted that Elsie’s fluency also decreases as she is given even slightly more difficult passages.The literacy team in her school placed her in two existing supplemental groups as described above.
111 Data-Based Determination of Expectations: Elsie Benchmark Level: WCPMCurrent Level: WCPMDifference to June Benchmark (Gap): 34 WCPMTime to Benchmark: WeeksRate of Growth Required:34/41= .83 WCPM for ElsieNOT VERY AMBITIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!What would happen if we moved the target to the middle of the “some risk box?”
113 Data-Based Determination of Expectations: Elsie Benchmark Level: WCPMCurrent Level: WCPMDifference to June Benchmark (Gap): 53 WCPMTime to Benchmark: WeeksRate of Growth Required:53/41= 1.29 WCPM for ElsiePeer Group Rate = about 1.1 WCPM growth (at benchmark) 1.2 WCMP (for “some risk” benchmark)REALISTIC? Not unless you increase AET
114 Training notes. At the end of Questionable RtI
115 Tier 2- Supplemental Instruction - Revision The intervention appeared to be working. What the teachers thought was needed was increased time in supplemental instruction.They worked together and found a way to give Elsie 30 minutes of supplemental instruction, on phonics and fluency, 5x per week.Training NotesThe revised intervention made a huge difference. Elsie was now getting 2:00 hours of reading instruction a day (between her core and her supplemental) and she is making gangbusters progress.
116 Data-Based Determination of Expectations: Elsie Benchmark Level: WCPMCurrent Level: WCPMDifference to June Benchmark (Gap): 44 WCPMTime to Benchmark: WeeksRate of Growth Required:44/27= 1.62 WCPM for ElsiePeer Group Rate = 1.1 WCPM growth (at benchmark) 1.2 WCMP (for “some risk” benchmark)REALISTIC? Not unless you increase AET
119 Decision Model at Tier 1- General Education Instruction Step 1: ScreeningORF = on track for 100 wcpm, end of third grade benchmark for some risk is 110 wcpm (see top of box)Compared to other students, Elsie scores around the 19th percentile + or -Is this student at risk?Still a bit of risk, maintain Tier II instruction for another benchmark period, if progress continues, move to tier 1Continue Monitoring or Move Back to Tier 1ElsieNoYesMaintain Tier 2: Strategic Interventions
120 By the Spring of Third Grade Elsie’s reading accuracy had improved significantly. Her average % correct hovers around 95 percent.She still struggles with multisyllabic wordsNormatively, at periodic and annual review time, she is now performing at about the 19th percentile compared to peers. She is catching up!Elsie is not a student with a disability
123 Break for Group Discussion Have a group discussion regarding decision rules for type of RtI and rules for intervention decisions.How will your district ensure consistent decision-making across students and schools?