Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

SCALING UP RtI 2.0.  Review of Year One  Consensus  Infrastructure  Implementation  Using Data to Take a Closer Look at Tiers  Effectiveness of.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "SCALING UP RtI 2.0.  Review of Year One  Consensus  Infrastructure  Implementation  Using Data to Take a Closer Look at Tiers  Effectiveness of."— Presentation transcript:

1 SCALING UP RtI 2.0

2  Review of Year One  Consensus  Infrastructure  Implementation  Using Data to Take a Closer Look at Tiers  Effectiveness of Tier 1  Peer Comparison  Individual Student Data  Interventions, Progress Monitoring, & Fidelity  RtI Collaborative Projects Outcomes

3  Let’s celebrate… we’ve survived Year 1.  Commit to sharing ideas that worked at your schools.  Safe environment to “toot” your own horn today. It’s not bragging, it’s collaborative planning.  Keep a sense of humor.

4 BUILDING CONSENSUS “Terrible" Terry Tate enforces the office rules at the Felcher and Sons' headquarters...

5 **Consensus Building Throughout the Phases

6

7  Making the shift to a new paradigm, like RtI, does not simply involve accepting a new set of skills. It also involves giving up certain beliefs in favor of others. Ken Howell

8 necessary to participate in a Problem Solving/ Response to Intervention Model None of Beliefs, Skills, Knowledge All of Beliefs, Skills, Knowledge

9 necessary to participate in a Problem Solving/ Response to Intervention Model None of Beliefs, Skills, Knowledge All of Beliefs, Skills, Knowledge

10 None of Beliefs, Skills, Knowledge All of Beliefs, Skills, Knowledge necessary to participate in a Problem Solving/ Response to Intervention Model

11 Eligibility Focus Eligibility Focus  Diagnostic/Test & Place Model  Get label in order to get help Outcome Focus Outcome Focus  Problem Solving/ Response to Intervention Model  Get help from the start without a label

12

13 “RtI is Prereferral Interventions on Steroids”

14 People resist change…

15 National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) Myths About Response to Intervention Implementation Implementation

16 Myth #1 The outcome and intent of RtI is identification, and therefore special education remains its own entity that "occurs" subsequent to "trying RTI."

17 Myth #2 Tier 3 (or the last tier in a tiered model) is only special education.

18 Myth #3 The major focus of RtI should be identifying students with Specific Learning Disabilities (LD). RtI can be used to “get rid of” those students who are not really LD, but who were simply not achieving for other reasons..

19 Myth #4 RtI is only pre-referral.

20 Myth #5 Comprehensive evaluations do not change with RtI, so districts should continue to do traditional assessments.

21 Myth #6 The research base for RtI is limited to beginning reading. There are no research studies comparing RtI to traditional special education services.

22 Myth #7 No contemporary research including student outcome are available.

23 Myth #8 The over-riding RtI model is the 3-tier. general ed/remedial ed/special ed model, so states should adopt it.

24 Myth #9 Tier 2 is short-term, not the 10-30 weeks that exists in many RtI models.

25 Myth #10 Because of “time to disposition” issues with longer Tier 2 interventions, the special education identification process will not fit into the RtI framework.

26 Myth #11 Move slowly because the status quo is not that bad. Some tweaking is needed, but RtI can support the “traditional but tweaked” model.

27 Tip 1: A supportive & collaborative environment takes the sting out of a mandate.

28  RtI is a way to help all students obtain the appropriate instruction and intervention to improve their academic process.  RtI is a preventative approach that aims to identify struggling students before they fall too far behind their peers.  RtI is the model for Student/School Improvement.  RtI can tie every school initiative together and make it part of one goal…Improved Academic and Behavioral Student Outcomes.

29 Tip 2: RtI will work if it is implemented as a School and Student Improvement Initiative It will not work when implemented only to determine eligibility

30  Multi-Tiered Level of Services ◦ Tier 1 – core ◦ Tier 2 – supplemental instruction/intervention ◦ Tier 3- extensive intervention  Problem Solving Process  Building Teams –Harnessing Collective Intelligence ◦ School Leadership Team ◦ Teacher Data Team ◦ Individual Problem Solving Team  Professional Development

31 ACADEMIC and BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS Tier 3: Intensive, Individualized Interventions & Supports. Tier 2: Targeted, Supplemental Interventions & Supports. Tier 1: Core, Universal Instruction & Supports.

32 Three Tiered Model of School Supports

33 Tiers of Service Delivery I II III Problem Identification Problem Analysis Intervention Design Response to Intervention

34  Consult with your team members  List the four steps of the problem solving process and the central question for each.  Identify the most important step and tell why.

35 Problem Solving/RtI “The Scientific Method” Identify the Problem Design Intervention Monitor Progress Analyze the Problem Implement Intervention Evaluate Intervention Effectiveness Timeline 

36 School Leadership Team Teacher Data Team Individual Problem Solving Team

37 None of us is as smart as all of us!!! Ken Blanchard Ken Blanchard

38 School Leadership Team Quick Reference Members Problem Solving Tasks Uses this type of data To discuss … Guiding Questions Administrator(s) - facilitate Guidance Counselor/Service Professional Instructional/Curriculum Coach(es): Reading/Math/Writing Elementary/Intermediate Teacher (s) Middle/High School Teacher (s) Exceptional Education Teacher(s) Activity Teacher(s) Team Function Plan, implement and monitor the progress of school improvement Implement Response to Instruction/Intervention as a school- wide method of raising student achievement outcomes for all students Provides the vision for the leadership for the school in terms of both academic and behavioral success in the RtI Process Systematically evaluates the school infrastructure, scheduling, personnel and curriculum resources, staff development, and school procedures as RtI is implemented in the building Tier 1 Screening data (3-4 times per year). Ex: State and District required assessments). Tier 2 Ongoing Progress Monitoring Data (every 2 to 3 weeks) Data that is specifically measuring the intervention used and is targeted to a specific skill or area, such as one phonics skill, one comprehension strategy, one math skill, one classroom management/behavior skill. Needs survey at the teacher level Using the school data (time of year will determine what data is analyzed): FCAT as a summative one time measure - TIER 1 (3 to 4 times a year screening data, all subjects as available) - TIER 2 (Intervention data, ongoing every 2 weeks or so) - TIER 3 (Intervention data) – ongoing every 1 week or so) - TIER movement report Generated from the Teacher Data Meeting and Individual Problem Solving Team Meeting monthly. Analyze data: Core instruction is effective at each grade level/department level. Guideline: 80% students meeting proficiency in Tier 1 Core). Analyze Data: Supplemental Intervention has been targeted to specific needs and is monitoring that progress with fidelity at each grade level/department level. Guideline: 70% of Intervention students making satisfactory progress in intervention. If no to any of the above, diagnose the problem as a team. Prioritize the needs of the students, sub groups, grade levels, departments, etc., and match the core curriculum and supplemental interventions to these needs. What kinds of professional development are needed for teachers for core instruction needs and intervention instruction needs? Analyze student achievement as evidenced by improved outcomes (individual, class, grade level, departments, and school Discuss movement between the tiers (1 to 2, 2 to 1, 2 to 3, 3 to 2, and referrals from Tier 3) Have we established our school’s mission, vision, values, and long-term goals? And are we making sure RtI is matching these? Are we making sure we model, teach, and expect a climate of collegiality among our staff? Have our teachers received adequate training in implementing the core and supplemental instruction? Do we have a plan to communicate the RtI Process to our families/parents? Have we analyzed the weaknesses in the core and supplement the core as needed? Looking at Tier 1 Screening Data, what type of instruction and intervention do our students need? Based on data, where do we see the need for staff development in the school? In a grade level? In a classroom? Based on data, where should we ‘spend’ or place our resources (money and personnel?) What skills and strategies can we learn about in professional development that will enhance our instruction and intervention? Based on Tier 1 data (trends, patterns), what are the strategies and skills we need to provide so all students receive the Differentiated Instruction that they need? Is our data representative of assessments that are reliable, valid, and sensitive measures that define student achievement over time?

39 Teacher Data Team Quick Reference Members Problem Solving Tasks Uses this type of data … To discuss … Guiding Questions Administrator(s) - facilitate Instructional/Curriculum Coach(es): Reading/Math/Writing Elementary Teacher (s) on grade level Middle/High School Teacher (s) MESH or Department Exceptional Education Teacher(s) associated with grade level or dept. Guidance Counselor/Service Provider, School Psychologists, etc., as neededFunction Utilize the problem solving process to meet academic and behavioral needs of students Analyze data from Tier 1 and Tier 2 assessments to monitor the effectiveness of core instruction (Tier 1) and supplemental instruction (Tier 2) across the grade level or department Monitor fidelity of core Tier 1 instruction Monitor fidelity of supplemental (Tier 2) instruction Brainstorm needs, curriculum, resources, effective schedules, etc. Using Tier 1 and Tier 2 data, address the curriculum, instructional practices, and optimal learning environment conducive to student achievement Tier 1 Screening data (3-4 times per year). Ex: State and District required assessments). Tier 2 Ongoing Progress Monitoring Data (every 2 to 3 weeks) Data that is specifically measuring the intervention used and is targeted to a specific skill or area, such as one phonics skill, one comprehension strategy, one math skill, one classroom management/behavior skill. Data at all levels Individual student data TIER movement report – Generated from the Teacher Data Meeting and Individual Problem Solving Team Meeting monthly. Analyze data: Core instruction is effective at each grade level/department level. Guideline: 80% students meeting proficiency in Tier 1 Core). Analyze Data: Supplemental Intervention has been targeted to specific needs and is monitoring that progress with fidelity at each grade level/department level. Guideline: 70% of Intervention students making satisfactory progress in intervention. If Tier 1 and Tier 2 data are showing need, diagnose the problem as a team. Prioritize the needs of the students, sub groups, grade levels, departments, etc., and match the core curriculum and supplemental interventions to these needs. What kinds of professional development are needed for teachers for core instruction needs and intervention instruction needs? Analyze student achievement as evidenced by improved outcomes (individual, class, grade level, departments, and school To move students within Tier 2 interventions Discuss movement between the tiers (1 to 2, 2 to 1, 2 to 3, 3 to 2, and referrals from Tier 3) Based on the tier 1 data, are 75-80% of the students meeting proficiency? Is the core curriculum meeting the needs of 75-80% of my student in my class? The grade level? Are the core instructional methods meeting the needs of 75-80% of my students in the class? Grade level? Is the classroom environment effective so that 75-80% of the students respond to the classroom rules, procedures, and routines? What do we need to do/address as a grade level for our inclusion classes? According to the data, how are our classes within our grade level / MESH team / departments alike? Different? According to Tier 2 data, are about 70% of the students making progress in the intervention? Do we see any students not responding to the tier 2 ongoing progress monitoring data? Do we need to look at different supplemental material to meet the needs of our students? How are the intervention teachers communicating with the classroom teachers? Are the ongoing progress monitoring assessments aligned to the targeted skill needed for intervention?

40 Individual Problem Solving Team (IPST) Quick Reference MembersFunction Tasks Uses this type of dataTo discuss … Administrator (s) Guidance Counselor/Service Provider (recommended facilitator) School Psychologist Classroom Teacher(s) Parents ESE contact/teacher Interventionalist/Title 1 Teacher Additional Members as needed: Speech/Language Pathologist Staffing Specialist Instructional Staff (coaches) Gifted Teacher Behavioral Analyst Occupational Therapist Physical Therapist Social Worker Activity or Specials teachers Individual Problem Solving meetings are designed to be an extremely diagnostic and prescriptive process. The IPST fully engages in the Problem Solving Method at each stage. The IPST should examine prior intervention data and all relevant cumulative history in order to problem-solve at the most intense level. A student should not be referred to Individual Problem Solving Team if the problem is instructional, curricular, or environmental in nature. The criteria for a child to be referred from the Teacher Data Team to the Individual Problem Solving Team is that data must show a significant discrepancy between the student and the benchmark, a significant discrepancy between the student and their peers, and an insufficient learning growth rate from previous Tier 2 interventions. The reason students should not be referred to the Individual Problem Solving Team without meeting the discrepancy or growth rate criteria is because the IPST only handles individual learner-centered problems. Gap Analysis: Divide the expected benchmark score by the current student performance. This is your benchmark comparison. Ex: 70% ÷ 35% = 2.0 Divide the average peer performance by the student performance on the grade level. This is your peer grade level comparison. Ex: 81% ÷ 35% = 2.3 Divide the average performance score of a selected subgroup (such as SES) by the student performance. This is your Subgroup Peer Comparison. Ex: 65% ÷ 35% = 1.8 Determine the Gain the student needs to make to close the GAP. To identify the necessary gain subtract the student’s current performance from the expected benchmark in the next benchmark period. Ex: 90 wpm – 56wpm = 34wpm Now evaluate the students growth as evidenced in progress monitoring data in comparison to the growth needed to close the gap. Determine what progress was realistic for the student. Assess the growth rate. Ex: If the expected growth rate for second grade students is 5 words per minute per week on oral reading fluency, then set your expected growth rate in accordance with that rate. Progress Monitor throughout the intervention. The team should assess whether the data shows the student/s are progressing sufficiently along the Aim Line. 1). Define the Problem The problem should be stated in objective measurable terms. The defined problem must focus on teachable skills. A problem is defined by the difference between what was measured and what was expected. 2). Analyze the Problem Ask “Why is the problem occurring?” Think of all relevant hypotheses 3). Develop a Plan A good instructional/intervention plan: Explicitly defines the skills to be taught Focuses on measurable objectives Defines the who, what, when, where, and how of the intervention Describes how the instruction/intervention will be progress monitored. Includes a Goal Statement and Aim Line with clear numerical measures that define success. A goal statement can be formed using steps 3 and 4 of the Gap Analysis process. Answer the question, “Is it working?” Modify Plan based on Progress Monitoring data: 4). Evaluate the Plan: Continue on if the growth rate is adequate Increase intensity, frequency, or duration if growth rate is improving, but not significantly enough. Change the intervention if the response is poor.

41 I C E L Importance of a Solid Core “Provide strong core curriculum, instruction, and assessment” - Florida Statewide RtI Plan (FSRtIP) Evidenced-based materials integrated into comprehensive core reading programs - K-12 Reading Plan (K12RP) Use data to determine effectiveness of instructional strategies - School Improvement Plan (SIP)

42 Share in groups what successful practices has your school implemented this year to strengthen Tier 1 in academics or behavior.

43 Tip 3: Be Real to be Successful

44

45

46 Total 847884 White 888289 Econ Disadv 716173 Students w/ Disabilities 614864 Expected Reading Level 51586572798693100 Percent Achieving Level 3 or Higher Expected Reading Level

47 Total 716973 White 777276 Econ Disadv 483847 Students w/ Disabilities 443847 Expected Math Level 56626874808693100 Percent Achieving Level 3 or Higher Expected Math Level

48 Is the core meeting the needs of 80% of the students? Are we meeting the needs of our SUBGROUPS?

49

50

51

52 Item Analysis for Math District Assessment Identifies Areas of Strengths/Weaknesses & Assists with Grouping of Students

53 Work Smarter Not Harder!

54 Is this an individual student problem or a larger systemic problem? adapted from: Heartland AEA 11, Improving Children’s Educational Results Are over 20% of students struggling? Are between 5% and 20% of Are 5% or fewer and develop group intervention Examine instruction, curriculum, and environment for needed adaptations Develop small group intervention Go to individual student problem solving Go to intervention evaluation students struggling? students struggling?

55 Problem ID Review Individual Student Data Student Benchmark Peers

56 Problem ID Review Individual Student Data Student Benchmark Peers

57 Problem ID Review Individual Student Data Student Benchmark Peers

58 Student Peers

59 Student Peers

60 1.What is the reality in our building today? Is the core sufficient? Why? Why Not? 2.What happens in our school when a student does not learn? Teacher? Class? Subgroups? Based on Whatever It Takes: Dufour, Dufour, Eaker, and Karhanek

61

62 Interventions, Progress Monitoring and Fidelity! Oh My!

63 Identify the Problem Monitor Progress Analyze the Problem Implement Intervention Evaluate Intervention Effectiveness Timeline  Select/Design Intervention Courtesy of Florida’s PS/RtI Project

64 Types of Interventions  Skill Deficit ◦ Student lacks skills to successfully complete task  Performance Deficit ◦ Factors interfering with student’s capability of performing the skill

65 Intervention Development: Verified Hypotheses  H: Only 55% of second grade students are achieving reading fluency benchmark because the curriculum lacks fluency focus.  P: If we modify the curriculum to focus on reading fluency, then more students will achieve benchmark.  Intervention: Modification of second grade curriculum to include more reading fluency focus

66 Intervention Development: Verified Hypotheses  H: Brandon is unable to stay in his seat because he lacks the self-monitoring skills necessary for self-control  P: If we teach Brandon self-monitoring skills, then he will display improved self-control.  Intervention: Self-instructional and self- monitoring training

67 Intervention Development: Verified Hypotheses  H: Ernesto is unable to complete arithmetic seatwork on time because he has not acquired math facts at the automatic level  P: If we provide Ernesto with strategies to increase fact fluency, then he will complete work on time.  Intervention: ◦ Provide Ernesto with strategies to increase fact fluency ◦ Provide Ernesto more time until strategies to increase fact fluency have had time to work

68 Trying to accurately pinpoint the reasons why a student is struggling in school and to design an effective intervention plan without good data is like the pilot who tries to fly across an unknown continent without navigation instruments.

69

70 Skill Specific Interventions

71 Inventory Your Resources And Try to Develop More!

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84  How can help teachers develop ownership of the intervention?  Has an intervention goal been set? Where do we want this student to be in 4 weeks?  How will we know if it’s working?  How will support be provided for the intervention? (time, materials, etc.)

85 3 rd Grade – Walk to Intervention (Turner Elementary) CVC Skill 2 (Jungovich 506) CVC Skill 2 (Mazziotti 801) Blends Skill 3 (Ross 507) Comp/Fluency Voyager (Shelton/Pagan) Comprehension Anthologies (Walsh 504) Comprehension Anthologies ( 505) Sherman Tiffany Gabriel Jane Bob Ross DeeDee Trevor Walsh Jake Kayla Ray (9) SRA Jungovich Caleb Sara Travis Dwight Ashley (5) Jungovich Bradlee Lillie Terri Walsh Christopher Ross(6) Joe Tom Pagan Group (3 rd Grade Pod) Jungovich Sara Joe Logan Lucia Daniel Walsh Charles A.J. Jospeh Colton (9) (Room 501) Trenton Dante J Dave Moe Nick Andrews Tommi Ross David Megan Shane Najet Jamie James Diamond Cassandra (15) Jungovich Zachary Kari Kate Nick Pam Dan Jon Derrick Bry Ed Wyatt Joey Sam Bobby Walsh Jim Dana Bill Elaina Javier (19) Walsh George Sophia Harvey Ken Christina Silvia Stever Eli Brianna Abel Ross Ethan Destiny Aiden Chris Tristi Melina Ki Kevin Jescee Dylan Alexis Ericka (22) Instructional Delivery: 95% Group Phonics Library Lessons and Decodable Text for Skill 2 Instructional Delivery: SRA Instructional Delivery: 95% Group Phonics Library Lessons and Decodable Text for Skill 3 Instructional Delivery: Voyager Passport F Instructional Delivery: Comprehension through Anthologies Instructional Delivery: Comprehension through Anthologies Progress Monitoring Tool: PSI Form B and C Progress Monitoring Tool: PSI Form B and C Progress Monitoring Tool: PSI Form B and C Progress Monitoring Tool: Voyager Passport RCT Progress Monitoring Tool: CARS Progress Monitoring Tool: CARS

86 Riviera Elementary – Grade 2 Intervention Groups

87  List as many intervention resources for each topic given.  You will have 1 minute to record.  Stop when you see the lights turned off.  Rotate one chart to the right when lights are turned on.  Repeat until your group has responded to all topics.

88  Good Response ◦ Gap is closing ◦ Can extrapolate the point at which student will “come in range” of peers – even if this is long range  Questionable Response ◦ Rate at which gap is widening slows considerably, but gap is still widening ◦ Gap stops widening but closure does not occur  Poor Response ◦ Gap continues to widen with no change in rate of progress

89  Data drives decisions  Time is our ally and our enemy ◦ Early Intervention and Prevention  Its all about the rate of student progress in the amount of time remaining  Data collection WITHOUT intervention integrity is useless  Staff, resources, and time must match the demand

90

91

92

93

94  The RtI Problem-Solving Model requires reliable information about the student, and lots of it.  Lack of quality data = guessing blindly Jim Wright, RtI TOOLKIT (Chapters 5 & 6)

95  Formative data ◦ Administered and collected frequently ◦ Provides a moving picture of the student’s progress over time ◦ What are some examples?  Summative data ◦ Static information that provides a fixed snapshot ◦ Historical data ◦ What are some examples?

96  1. Screening Assessments – assessments used to determine if additional investigation is warranted  Answers the question: is there a possible problem?  Examples: FCAT, FAIR etc.  2. Diagnostic Assessments: more in-depth analysis of a student’s strengths and weaknesses  3. Progress Monitoring Assessments: Sensitive to small increments of growth  Examples include Running Records, PASI, PSI, ORF, FAIR OPM

97  Aids in the analysis of inadequate progress and how to intensify instruction  Documents Progress for RtI Model ◦ Amount of time student received intervention ◦ Size of group ◦ Changes made to intensity ◦ Refer for evaluation

98 Intervention Documentation Worksheet

99  Support decision making such as whether to:  Continue  Change or  Adjust Instruction

100  Must match intervention/instruction  Should be a quick tool  Curriculum Based Measurement – Short, quick probes based on skills  Examples: ◦ Running records ◦ PASI ◦ PSI ◦ Math Probes

101  Assess as often as needed to inform instruction  Varies by Tier ◦ Tier 1 – 3 to 4 times a year ◦ Tier 2 – 2 to 3 times a month ◦ Tier 3 – Weekly ◦ Monitoring frequency increases with instructional intensity.  Serves a multifunctional purpose ◦ Establish a baseline ◦ Identify growth ◦ Measure performance over time

102 CYCLE = ______ WEEKS

103  Interventionist should always collect the data  Allows for test taking behavior to be taken into consideration  Some schools build time into intervention schedule for progress monitoring  Don’t ignore valuable informal assessments like observing, conferring etc. to inform instructional planning

104  Use results to inform instruction  Data should be graphed to provide a visual illustration of where students began (baseline), where we want them to go (targetline), and performance over time (trendline)

105 Step 4- Is it working? Goal Classroom Intervention I Making instructional decisions based on the review and analysis of student data Progress monitoring always includes graphing Progress Monitoring Classroom Intervention 2

106  When Progress Monitoring shows an intervention is not effective… ◦ Change intervention strategies ◦ Add time to intervention strategies ◦ Reduce size of intervention group ◦ Change intervention instructor

107  What are the factors that interfere with intervention implementation?  Create a Problem/Solution T-Chart and post on the wall. PROBLEM SOLUTION

108

109  Reliability = Consistency = Repeatability You can’t blame the intervention… if you didn’t do the intervention the way it’s supposed to be done… Dr. John E. McCook

110  Standardize Instruction  Train  Evaluate integrity/ fidelity/reliability  Provide feedback  Train some more  Ongoing integrity/ fidelity/reliability checks  Etc.

111  Informational Brochure  Intervention Notices  Progress Monitoring Updates  Include Parents at All Levels of the RtI Pyramid

112

113

114  Option 1: Develop procedures to communicate clear expectations and responsibilities of the RtI process.  Option 2: Evaluate your school’s progress in depth and create a plan of action using the NASDSE rubric. **One of these items must be submitted per school to receive inservice credit for today. Submit to Janet Stephenson at Port Malabar by Wednesday, May 19 th.

115

116


Download ppt "SCALING UP RtI 2.0.  Review of Year One  Consensus  Infrastructure  Implementation  Using Data to Take a Closer Look at Tiers  Effectiveness of."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google