Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Response to Intervention (RTI) Lindenhurst Schools

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Response to Intervention (RTI) Lindenhurst Schools"— Presentation transcript:

1 Response to Intervention (RTI) Lindenhurst Schools 2007-2008
Long Island Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (LIASCD) Fall Conference – October 19, 2007

2 Workshop Objectives Understanding the stages of adopting and integrating RTI into several elementary schools Identify factors that contribute to the effective implementation of RTI Recognizing the importance of a collaborative approach Understanding the necessity of managing data Sharing ideas and insights between districts

3 Response to Intervention - RTI
Federal Government - Reauthorization of IDEA in 2004 Shift in identifying students with reading difficulties and classifying them Learning Disabled. General Education and Special Education work in a collaborative model. Roles of each teacher must be redefined to address literacy. Schools must shift resources to support struggling readers in the general education setting.

4 Definition of RTI High-quality instruction/intervention that is matched to students’ needs and has been demonstrated through scientific research and practice to produce high learning rates for most students Learning rate and level of performance are the primary sources of information used in ongoing decision-making Important educational decisions about intensity and duration of interventions are based on individual student’s response to instruction across multiple tiers of intervention. National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005

5 Problem-solving Model – IST Process, not interventions, are standardized
Individualized plan for each child that involves different levels of consultation: Description of student’s problem Data collection and problem analysis Intervention design and implementation – differentiated instruction determined by data Progress monitoring Evaluation of intervention effectiveness Flexible groupings throughout the year Wilson, 2007

6 Interventions are NOT Shortened assignments Preferential seating
Parent contacts Classroom observations Suspensions Doing more of the same assignments Retention McCook, J., 2005

7 CORE Concepts of RTI Research-based instruction – core programs are taught with fidelity as intended to maximize effectiveness. Instruction is focused on achieving state standards Use of data to inform instruction – universal screening of all students to measure and to monitor the development of skills – provide program accountability Measurement of response – progress monitoring is used to determine the effectiveness of interventions – it is systematic, documented, and shared with staff

8 Intervention Organized in Tiers
Layers of intervention responding to students’ needs Each tier provides more intensive and supportive intervention Aimed at preventing reading disabilities Torgeson, 2004

9 Multi-Tiered Response

10 3 Tier Model for RTI Tier 3 More Differentiated Intense Interventions
*Increase frequency and duration of intervention *Referral to Special Education Strategic Monitoring Tier 2 Implementing Supplementary Instruction *General Ed Teacher, AIS Teacher, Related Service Providers, Special Ed Teachers *Fundations, Wilson, Small Group Instruction through AIS Reading, ERSS Speech Progress Monitoring Tier 1 Implementing Classroom Instruction – General Ed Teacher * Researched Based Curriculum – Harcourt Reading Program, Differentiated Instruction, Focus instruction on Big Ideas of Literacy.

11 Three Levels of Assessment
Benchmark Assessment – 3 times a year Are there children who need additional support? How many? Which children? What to do? Evaluate benchmark assessment data Progress Monitoring – - Assess at-risk children more frequently – every two weeks - Are current programs sufficient to keep progress on track or are additional supports / interventions needed? Strategic Monitoring - weekly monitoring

12 What decisions do we make with data?
Plan for support with focus on BIG IDEAS. Grouping – small group instruction, homogenous groups, differentiated instruction, flexible grouping. Time – How much? How Frequently? When? Teacher / Student Interactions – modeling, direct explanation, increase student engagement, increase guided practice with immediate feedback, scaffolding to support learning, review

13 BIG IDEAS Phonemic Awareness Alphabetic Principle
Accuracy and Fluency with connected text Vocabulary Comprehension

14 General Outcome Measures- (GOM) of Early Literacy
Relevant Features Measure Basic Early Literacy Skills (Big Ideas) Efficient Standardized Sensitive to growth and change over time and to the effects of intervention

15 How can we use GOM to change Reading Outcomes?
Begin Early Focus Instruction on the BIG IDEAS of Early Literacy Focus Assessment on Outcomes for Students

16 Getting Started….. Select a team –
Classroom teachers, reading specialists, psychologist, building principal, special education teacher(s), speech teacher, other. People that have a vested interest in reading and literacy outcomes. Attend training sessions Plan for data collection – Who will collect data? When will you collect data? How will you collect data?

17 Collecting Data Plan and Schedule Data Collection Organize Resources
Collect Data Enter the Data Use Data for Educational Decision Making

18 Scheduling Data Collection
Classroom Approach – Obtain coverage for classroom teacher. Approximately 1-2 minutes per benchmark per student. Teacher works in hallway / room. Advantages – Teachers assess own students, less disruptive to entire school. Disadvantages – Loss of instructional time, coverage, requires more days. Building-wide Approach – Multiple specialists / trained members of team will assess students. Teacher brings class to library, cafeteria, gym, or other location with tables. Entire class can be assessed in 30 minutes. Advantages – can be completed in one day, minimal classroom disruptions and loss of instructional time. Disadvantages – space, trained staff, teachers not assessing.

19 Benchmark Assessments
Kindergarten Fall – Initial Sound Fluency (ISF), Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Letter Sound Fluency (LSF) Winter – Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Letter Sound Fluency (LSF), Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) Spring – Same as Winter

20 Benchmark Assessments
Grade 1 Fall – Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Letter Sound Fluency (LSF), Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) Winter – Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF), DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (DORF), Maze Spring – Same as Winter

21 Benchmark Assessment – Cont’d
Grade 2 – 5 Oral Reading Fluency Maze (Comprehension)

22 Data Management System
AIMS Web – Achievement Improvement Monitoring System

23 School Readiness for RTI
Assessment: screening measures, progress monitoring practices and procedures Curriculum: high-quality, research-based core curricula Instruction: focus on effective instruction and interventions

24 School Readiness - Continued
Positive School Climate: school-wide processes and structures, individual student interventions, and a professional learning community Professional Development: outcome focused content and ongoing assistance Leadership: problem solving and individual characteristics of strong leaders Closing the Achievement Gap: School Readiness for RtI, Sopris West Educational Services, 2007

25 Thank You for Your Attention and Participation

Download ppt "Response to Intervention (RTI) Lindenhurst Schools"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google