1. Michael Curtis Rachel Cohen Jose Castillo
Understanding Systems Change Techniques to Implement RTI in your School
Michael Curtis
Rachel Cohen
Jose Castillo
Ideas: use a parking lot for random ideas/questions, thoughts

2. Objectives 1. Overview of PS/RTI
2. Understand why school innovations fail
3. Identify systems change practices
and principles
4. Understand systems issues related to
implementing PS/RtI
5. Collaborative problem solving process
training
Leave this a few principles instilled in their mind so they can rely on these principles when making change in their school

3. PART 1
OVERVIEW OF PS/RTI

4. Calls for change No Child Left Behind (NCLB), 2001
Individuals with Disabilities in Education Improvement Act (IDEIA), 2004
Multi-site Conference on the Future of School Psychology, 2002
calls for change PERSIST (Sheridan & Gutkin, 2000).
NCLB- increased accountability in the form of measurable positive outcomes for students achieved through the use of scientifically-based professional practices.
All students of all subgroups must meet state standards for reading, math, and science flexible service delivery
IDEIA - takes out requirement for achievement iq discrepancy, included option to use a lack of a response to intervention as an eligibility criteria
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2002) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004)
ｷ the problem-solving method is identified as the best way to achieve better outcomes for students (Tilly, this volume).
One outcome of the 2002 Multisite Conference on the Future of School Psychology was a proposed paradigm shift in the foundational philosophy of school psychology away from a special education focused medical model to a public health model in which health promotion and problem prevention are dominant themes (Dawson et al., 2004).

5. School Psychologists as Change Agents
School psychologists can, should, and must play a significant role in changing American education!
Discrepancy between where school psychologists actually spend most of their time where they want to spend more of their time
(Meacham & Peckham, 1978)
Special education-related activities dominate practices of many school psychologists
(Curtis, Grier, Abshier, Sutton, & Hunley, 2002; Curtis, Lopez, Batsche, & Smith, 2006)
How many can relate to this finding?
School psychologists are finding themselves in the position of change agents in their school while many do not have the foundation or skills in systems change. This presentation will provide an overview of the systems change literature, a problem solving model for initiating and sustaining systems-level change, and an example of systems-level change in a school. Attendees will gain a systems perspective on school change, or “ability to understand how the various component parts of a system, the system itself, and the surrounding systems or environment influence one another” (Curtis & Stollar, 2001, p. 225) and will learn how to implement change in their schools.
ｷ School psychologists can, should, and must play a significant role in changing American education! For the last half century, the literature has included calls for role expansion (Cutts, 1955), and reResearch has documented major discrepancies between the professional practices in which school psychologists actually spend most of their time (i.e., assessment and other activities relating to special education eligibility) and those in which they want to spend more of their time (e.g., consultation and intervention-focused services) (Meacham & Peckham, 1978).
ｷ However, relatively little seems to have changed across that time in terms of what school psychologists do. Special education-related activities continue to dominate the professional lives of many school psychologists (Curtis, Grier, Abshier, Sutton, & Hunley, 2002; Curtis, Lopez, Batsche, & Smith, 2006). Kn

6. Problem
The preparation of most school psychologists has not included knowledge and skills relating to systems change
Only recent NASP standards for training programs address system-level influence and change
School Psychology: A Blueprint for Training and Practice III
Unfortunately, the preparation of most school psychologists has not included knowledge and skills relating to systems change.
In fact, only the most recent standards for training programs adopted by the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) (NASP, 2000b) and guidelines for the provision of school psychological services (NASP, 2000a) address preparation and practice in system-level influence and change. Nevertheless, the inclusion of systems change in these most recent documents attests to the growing recognition of the importance of this area.
In addition, the recently published School Psychology: A Blueprint for Training and Practice III (Ysseldyke, et al., 2006; Ysseldyke, this volume) places special emphasis on knowledge and skills in understanding and changing systems.

7. Problem (continued)
Sarason (1990) purports that a lack of understanding of systems functioning and change principles has doomed many school reform efforts to failure from the start
We have the means and tools to make the change, but we have failed to implement those practices effectively in a specific school setting.
ｷ We have the means and tools to make the change
ｷ the problem does not lie with the availability of effective practices; it lies with the failure to implement those practices effectively in a specific school setting.
ｷ How do you go from one point to another-how do schools change?
ｷ In fact, Sarason (1990) purports that a lack of understanding of systems functioning and change principles has doomed many school reform efforts to failure from the start.
ｷ knowledge and skills relating to both the innovative practice and systems change are essential if we are to be successful in bringing about meaningful change in our schools.

8. School psychologists need 3 areas of expertise. . .
Understanding of human behavior from a social systems perspective
Familiarity with principles for organizational change
Ability to use collaborative planning and problem solving procedures
ｷ school psychologists need to call upon three areas of expertise: (a) understanding human behavior from a social systems perspective, (B) familiarity with principles for organizational change. (C) ability to use collaborative planning and problem solving procedures,

9. 1. Understanding of human behavior from a social systems perspective
A system is an orderly combination of parts that interact to produce a desired outcome or product
A school is a system because it consists of component parts (e.g., students, teachers, school psychologists, cafeteria workers, parents, principal) that are organized and interact for the purpose of producing a definable outcome (e.g., academic achievement by all students)
Reciprocal influence
BASIC
1. SOCIAL SYSTEMS PERSPECTIVE
ｷ a school is a social system- the school building must be the focus of system-level change efforts.
ｷ A system is an orderly combination of parts that interact to produce a desired outcome or product. (An automobile engine is an example of a system. It consists of a number of specific parts that interact to produce power and motion.) However, in contrast to a living system, an automobile engine is an example of an inert system (i.e., as long as the parts continue to function in the same way, the engine should continue to produce power in essentially the same way). Because it is people who give schools their real meaning, )
ｷ schools are living systems. A critical difference between a living system and an inert system is the ability of the living system to learn from its experiences and to adapt to its environment.
ｷ A school is a system because it consists of component parts (e.g., students, teachers, school psychologists, cafeteria workers, parents, principal) that are organized and interact for the purpose of producing a definable outcome (e.g., academic achievement by all students). As is true of all systems, the school building also is part of a larger system, the school district.
ｷ Individual classrooms, grade level teams of teachers, local school improvement committees, and problem-solving teams are examples of systems within the school. Each consists of component parts that interact for the purpose of attaining desired outcomes, and each exists within a larger system.
ｷ Reciprocal Influence. Schools must be "open systems." Each of the parts of a system influences all of the other parts, as well as the performance of the system as a whole. A change in one part of the system will cause changes in other parts of the system. For example, if the current building principal is replaced by a new principal, that change is likely to affect classrooms, students, teachers, the school psychologist, cafeteria workers, and others. Although changes in one component of the system may tend to have more impact than would change in others because of the role played by that particular part (a principal versus one student), each part, regardless of role or size, influences the system as a whole to some degree. Also, circumstances may significantly alter the system more than normally would be expected (e.g., a tragedy involving one student that affects everyone in the school). Similarly, changes in the larger surrounding environment influence the school building as a system, as well as the components within the building. For example, a district decision to implement a specific behavioral intervention program in every building would influence not only the individual school, but its teachers, students, and other personnel as well.
ｷ capacity to solve problems effectively. In some cases, they are not sufficiently open to accept important information. Or they may have been open at an earlier time, but because they did not have the ability to solve problems confronting them, they became closed, somewhat like the ostrich with its head in the sand. The inability to interact with influential forces, internally as well as externally, creates tremendous tension in closed systems. If the tension reaches a high enough level, a crisis occurs that causes some type of change in the system.
ｷ Ex. Rigidity and crisis

10. 2. Familiarity with principles for organizational change
People differ in their:
level of willingness and ability to adopt innovations
level of concern about the problem
PRINCIPLES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
ｷ Type of people within a system
ｷ Hall and Hord (2006) and Rogers (2003) contend that there are groups of people within a system who vary in their level of willingness and ability to adopt specific innovations. They report that there is a widespread recognition of five categories of people: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. Innovators are a relatively small group who readily accept the desired innovation and lead the way in efforts toward adoption. Early adopters tend to be somewhat larger as a group, accepting the innovation quite readily and providing leadership in the change initiative, but only after reasoned consideration. Those in the early majority group tend to be more deliberative, investing more time in considering adoption of the innovation. The late majority group members are slow to adopt the desired innovation and do so only when a majority of stakeholders have accepted the change and continuing with the status quo is no longer considered viable. About one-third of the stakeholders are estimated to belong to each of the early majority and late majority groups; in other words, about two-thirds of the members of any system fall into one of these two groups. Laggards are considered to be those who will continue to resist the change effort. Rogers contends that innovation spreads through a system as increasing numbers of stakeholders begin using the innovation. Therefore, it is important to focus change efforts on those members who are interested or willing to consider change, rather than on those who are resistant.
ｷ Stages of concern
ｷ Hall and Hord (2006) argue that it also is important to understand how individuals’ levels of concern toward an innovation can affect their level of commitment to the procedures necessary to implement that innovation. They suggest that the stages of concern that individuals pass through begin with concern about how the innovation will affect oneself, then concern about how to implement the innovation, and finally concern about how the innovation will impact the system. How quickly individuals pass through levels of concern often will vary as a function of their willingness and ability to adopt innovations. Therefore, understanding individuals’ stages of concern will help in deciding what type of information to provide and how much effort to invest in those individuals.

11. Effective Consultation Skills Effective Communication Skills
3. Ability to use collaborative planning and problem solving procedures
Build Relationships
Effective Consultation Skills
Effective Communication Skills
Coordinate Power Status
Problem Solving Knowledge & Skills
characteristics of effective consultation
Interpersonal Relationships
Effective consultation
is based on mutual respect, trust, and coordinate power status among the participants.
ｷEffective communication skills are essential whether you are functioning as a consultant or as a member of a problem-solving/planning team.
listen, ask open-ended questions, paraphrase, and summarize and synthesize information, all within a nonjudgmental climate, are especially important.
ｷCoordinate status-group members are often not very tolerant of a member whose behaviors tend to alter the coordinate power status among members (e.g., by giving unsolicited feedback to the group or to individual members).
. Final words: Interpersonal skills: Curtis and Van Wagener (1988) demonstrated that despite highly effective interpersonal skills, consultation was not effective in resolving student-related concerns when systematic problem-solving procedures were not employed. Whether functioning as a consultant or as a member of the team, effectiveness in each area is necessary, but insufficient by itself.

13. Three Tiered Model of School Supports:
Example of an Infrastructure Resource Inventory
Academic Systems
Behavioral Systems
1-5%
Tier 3: Comprehensive and Intensive Interventions
Individual Students or Small Group (2-3)
Reading: Scholastic Program, Reading,Mastery, ALL, Soar to Success, Leap Track, Fundations
1-5%
Tier 3: Intensive Interventions
Individual Counseling
FBA/BIP
Teach, Reinforce, and Prevent (TRP)
Assessment-based
Intense, durable procedures
5-10%
Tier 2: Targeted Group Interventions
Some students (at-risk)
Small Group Counseling
Parent Training (Behavior & Academic)
Bullying Prevention Program
FBA/BIP Classroom Management Techniques, Professional Development
Small Group Parent Training ,Data
5-10%
Tier 2: Strategic Interventions
Students that don’t respond to the core curriculum
Reading: Soar to Success, Leap Frog, CRISS strategies, CCC Lab Math: Extended Day
Writing: Small Group, CRISS strategies, and “Just Write Narrative” by K. Robinson
Students
80-90%
Tier 1: Universal Interventions
All settings, all students
Committee, Preventive, proactive strategies
School 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 Training
80-90%
Tier 1: Core Curriculum
All students
Reading: Houghton Mifflin
Math: Harcourt
Writing: Six Traits Of Writing
Learning Focus Strategies

14. Step 1 - What’s the Problem?
In order to identify a problem, you’ve got to start with three pieces of data-
Benchmark level of performance
Student level of performance
Peer level of performance

15. Step 1 - What’s the Problem?
Is this an individual student problem or a larger systemic problem?
Are over 20% of
Are between
students
struggling?
5% and 20% of
Are 5% or fewer
students
struggling?
students
struggling?
Go to problem
definition
Examine
instruction,
curriculum, and
environment for
Develop small
needed
group
intervention
adaptations
and develop
group
intervention
adapted from:
Heartland AEA 11, Improving Children’s Educational Results
Go to
intervention
evaluation

17. B A S E L I N
Benchmark 75 % 35 %
= Peer Group
= Aim Line

18. Step 1 - What’s the Problem? (same data as previous slide)
Benchmark Level 75%
Current Level 20%
Peer Level 35%
Benchmark Gap 75/20=3.7X
Peer Gap 35/20=1.7X
Peer/Benchmark Gap 75/35=2+X
UNIVERSAL INTERVENTION FIRST

19. Step 2- Why is it occurring?
Goal: The development of hypotheses about probable causes for the identified problem.
Assessments are then conducted to gather information to determine which are most / least likely
Prediction statement:
The problem is occurring because ________________. If ____________ would occur, the problem would be reduced.

20. Assessment: How Do We Confirm Hypothesis?
Review
Interview
Observe
Test

21. Step 3- What are we going to do about it?
Effective teaching strategies consider both what to teach and how to teach it.
Making good decisions will increase student progress.
It is critical that the instruction be matched to the problem.
Howell & Nolet, 2000

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

23. Response to Intervention
Monitors Continuous Progress
Sensitive to Small Changes in Behavior
Repeatable
Informs Interventions

24. What is RtI?
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 to guide instruction.
National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005

25. RtI--Model 1) Multi-tiered 2) Problem solving approach
3) Providing instruction/intervention
4) Increasing levels of intensity
5) Based on data-based decisions
6) Progress monitoring

26. We Need A New Logic
Begin with the idea that the purpose of the system is student achievement
Acknowledge that student needs exist on a continuum rather than in typological groupings
Organize resources to make educational resources available in direct proportion to student need
David Tilly 2004

27. Guiding Principles
Effective instruction in general education is foundation for all decision-making
Data guide decisions regarding core, supplemental and intensive interventions
Therefore, good data must be available
Infrastructure for core, supplemental and intensive instruction must be:
Evidence-based
Integrated

28. Traditional vs. Response to InterventionJ
Consider ESE
Traditional
Intervention J L
Consider ESE If
necessary
Response to Intervention
Regular
Education
Monitor
Progress

29. PS/RtI Integrates Efforts

30. Change Model
Consensus
Infrastructure
Implementation

31. Stages of Implementing Problem-Solving/RtI
Consensus
Belief is shared
Vision is agreed upon
Implementation requirements understood
Infrastructure Development
Regulations
Training/Technical Assistance
Model (e.g., Standard Protocol)
Tier I and II intervention systems
E.g., K-3 Academic Support Plan
Data Management
Technology support
Decision-making criteria established
Implementation

32. UNDERSTAND WHY SCHOOL INNOVATIONS FAIL
PART 2
UNDERSTAND WHY SCHOOL INNOVATIONS FAIL

33. Story about water boiling in a Peruvian village
Problem
Proposed Innovation/Plan
Results
Reason for Failure
Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations, 4th ed. New York: Simon & Schuster.
SEE EXTRA NOTES

34. Why is change so hard? It’s not just educators. . .
Two more examples that affect you. . . And you can think about why you don’t want to change
Querty Keyboard (common keyboard)
Invented in 1873 in order to slow down typists because type bars on a type writer hung down in a basket and would get jammed if two keys were typed in succession too quickly
1932-August Dvorak created an improved design with the most commonly used keys along the home row where 70% of typing is done, and he engineered the keyboard so that successive strokes fall on alternative hands by putting the vowels on the left side and consonants on the right
-This keyboard has been approved but yet is impossible to find, where is this new keyboard? Do you want to learn how to type on a new keyboard?
2. Metric System-enough said. . .

35. Definitions
Innovation- “idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption” (Rogers, 1995, p. 11)
Diffusion- “process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system” (Rogers, p. 5)

36. Examples of School-Based Innovations
Service Learning
Cooperative Learning
Multicultural Education
Open schools
Competency Based Education
Peace Education
Character Education
Back to the Basics
What other ones can you think of?- most fix the parts approaches, target one specific aspect of a school
Many of these have been partially implemented, many not at all, many stopped being implemented after several years
Current innovations- of course, rti, problem solving, positive behavior support

37. Why have so many school-based innovations failed?
Take 30 seconds to jot down some ideas
Ask audience for answers?

38. Why school innovations fail?
Lack of concern about problem
(Hall and Hord, 2001)
Belief that the innovation will not meet the needs of the school (Ellis, 2001)
Competing initiatives or systems already in place (OSEP, 2004)
Dual system (old system + new system)
School personnel may not be concerned with the problem the innovation is intended to address (Hall and Hord, 2001)
School personnel may not believe the innovation will meet the needs of their school (Ellis, 2001)
There may be competing initiatives or systems already in place (OSEP, 2004)
Having a dual system (old system + new system) can create additional work for the people in the system

39. Why school innovations fail?
There may not be:
systemic support from persons in key leadership positions and/or policy makers
continuous communication
enough time to implement
ongoing training
on- site coaching
(Hall & Hord, 2001)
Often there is a sense of urgency to implement a new innovation immediately without taking the time to plan and include all the key and essential elements
For example, in my school, several tier 2 interventions were implemented this year, there was either no training or training occurred after the year began, no follow up coaching
Coaching has been found to increase implementation and transfer of new skills sig (10% of teachers vs 80% of teachers who were coached transferred new skills to classroom, Joyce and Showers)

40. Why school innovations fail?
It often is the implementation of the innovation that fails and not the innovation itself (Gresham, 1989)
Degree of treatment integrity--->
degree of treatment outcomes (Gottfredson, Gottfredson, & Skorban, 1998; Lipsey, 1982)
Lipsey-443 juvenile delinquency prevention programs, programs conducted by researchs had stronger implementation and larger effects than those conducted by subsequent researchers, gottfredsen-program to reduce dropping out of hs, set implemtnation standards, but they were not met, program was not implemented same way as original researchers and lacked training and consulatation by researcher

41. Why school innovations fail?
Implementers may lack a:
rationale for the new procedures
(Fullan, 1997)
commitment to new procedures (Fullan)
systems perspective
(Curtis & Stollar, 2002; Schmuck & Runkel, 1994; Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, & Smith, 1994)

42. IDENTIFY SYSTEMS CHANGE PRACTICES AND PRINCIPLES
PART 3
IDENTIFY SYSTEMS CHANGE PRACTICES AND PRINCIPLES

43. Systems Change On paper, participants should write a definition for:
A system
Systems change
System=orderly combination of two or more individuals whose interaction is intended to produce a desired outcome,
Key pts-more than one, desired outcome
Systems perspective=ability to understand how the various components of a system, the system itself, and the surrounding systems or environment influence one another

44. Stages of Systems Change
1. Planning for Change
2. Developing a Plan
3. Implementing a Plan
4. Evaluating the Plan
(Curtis & Stollar, 2002; Harvey & Brown, 2001; Valentine, 1991)
-Not unlike problem solving model that we use for individual students, can use problem solving (id, analysis, plan, eval)
-What do you need to think about when you are implementing a systems change in your school>?
-Could be that the district selected a new program that must be implemented or that you or your team is noticing a systems problem and would like to fix it
Planning-anticipating a need for change,
developing relationships with key stakeholders
Involving stakeholders
Conducting needs assessment
Establishing policies
Developing a plan
Missing, goals, objectiveves
Dev strategies, techniques
Implement plan
Eval plan
Monitor progress
Revise areas that need to be improved
Eval outcomes
Recycle process
***Begin with the end in mind. . . Stephen Covey. . . Plan evaluation ahead of time

45. Stages of Systems Change
1. Planning for Change
Developing relationships with key stakeholders
Getting buy-in/commitment
Conducting needs assessment
Time needed
2. Developing a Plan
3. Implementing a Plan
4. Evaluating the Plan
Not unlike problem solving model
Planning-anticipating a need for change,
developing relationships with key stakeholders
Involving stakeholders
Conducting needs assessment
Establishing policies

46. Purveyor
Individual or group of individuals representing a program or practice who actively work to implement that practice or program with fidelity and good effect
“change agent” “linking agent” program consultant””site coordinator”
a purveyor“recreates a complex, causally ambiguous set of routines in new settings and keeps it functioning.” (Winter & Szulanski, 2001, p. 741)
You are the purveyor!

47. Developing Relationships
6 Tips
Reciprocity
Consistency
Social Proof
Liking
Authority
Scarcity
(Cialdini, 1984)
Reciprocity- if you do something for someone, they feel obligated to return a favor
Big request, small request, they feel success
1-2 examples
Consistency
Social Proof
Liking
Authority
Scarcity

48. Developing Relationships
Reciprocity
We should try to repay, in kind, what another person has provided us
Consistency
The desire to be consistent motivates our behavior
Social Proof
The reliance on others to decide if an action is correct. The actions of those around us influence what we do
Liking
People are more likely to say yes to requests by someone they know and like
Authority
People have a deep seated sense of duty to comply with authority
Scarcity
Opportunities seem more valuable to use when their availability is limited
See attached

49. What can you do in your school?
Reciprocity
We should try to repay, in kind, what another person has provided us
Consistency
The desire to be consistent motivates our behavior
Social Proof
The reliance on others to decide if an action is correct. The actions of those around us influence what we do
Liking
People are more likely to say yes to requests by someone they know and like
Authority
People have a deep seated sense of duty to comply with authority
Scarcity
Opportunities seem more valuable to use when their availability is limited
See attached

50. Getting Buy-In
People tend to fall into five categories based on their level of willingness and ability to adopt specific innovations:
Innovators
Early adopters
Early majority
Late majority
Laggards
(Rogers, 1995)
See notes

51. % of each fall into a bell curve
Therefore, it is important to focus change efforts on those members who are interested or willing to consider change rather than on those who are resistant. To determine where people fall along the continuum,

52. Rate of Adoption
Rate of Adoption Rogers (2003) contends that innovations spread through a system as increasing numbers of stakeholders begin using the innovation. Therefore, it is important to focus change efforts on those members who are interested or willing to consider change rather than on those who are resistant. To determine where people fall along the continuum,
Length of time required for a certain percentage of the members of a system to adopt on innovation
S-Curve- result of the rate of adoption
At first, only a few individuals adopt the innovation and gradually more and more begin to adopt it
Source:

53. Activity Read through example
Describe a situation for change in your school, brainstorm some people you know that fall into each category
10 minutes to brainstorm
10 minutes to share examples of strategies

54. Key Concept
Most people do not evaluate the innovation based on scientific evidence, rather based on information from individuals like themselves (homophilious)
The promotor of the innovation is often heterophilious from the people who must use it

55. Conducting Needs Assessment
Need for Change --> More severe the problem, the higher teachers rate the acceptability of the treatment (Reimers, Wacker, & Koeppl, 1987)
Lewin Force Field Model

56. Stages of Concern
Levels of concern toward specific innovation  Level of commitment
Stages of concern:
How the innovation will affect me
How will I implement the innovation
How will the innovation impact the system
Individuals’ levels of concern toward the specific innovation can affect their level of commitment to the procedures necessary to implement that innovation.
Stages of concern range from concern about how the innovation will affect oneself, then concern about how to implement the innovation, and finally concern about how the innovation will have an impact on the system.

57. (Hall & Hord)
Stages of concern range from concern about how the innovation will affect oneself,
then concern about how to implement the innovation, and
finally concern about how the innovation will have an impact on the system.
Awareness
Information
Personal
Management
Consequence
Collaboration
Refocusing

58. Activity
Take Stages of Concern Questionnaire for an innovation in your school

59. Community Readiness Model
Stabilization
Initiation
Preparation
Preplanning
Vague Awareness
Denial
No Awareness
(Edwards et al.,2000)
Similar to stages of concern but for a whole community-another way of looking at it
No Awareness- no problem, to do-raise awareness in community
Denial- only small group recognizes problem, we are helpless anyway
Vague Awareness-some notion of doing something
Preplanning-clear rec of a problem, to do-raise awareness with concrete ideas, presentations, determine who would benefit
Preparation-active planning, focus on details ,
Initiation-prep has been done to justify efforts, actions are underway
Stabilization-programs are up and running, with support, staff trained
p. 10 nirn
Currently, no assessment of predictive validity for readiness, rel between meas of readiness and implementation is unknown

60. Stages of Implementation Process
Sustainability
Innovation
Full Operation
Initial Implementation
Program Installation
Exploration and Adoption
(Fixsen et al)
Exploration and Adoption-information gathering, determine link between needs and resources, at the end of this stage, a decision is made by which the org decides if they want to implement the program, we know about deciding to implement an innovation but not about what to do next
Program Installation-need to consider resources, structural supports, create funding streams, hr strategies, policy development, referral mechanisms, reporting frameworks, outcome expectations, start up costs need to be considered
Initial Implementation-these changes require skill devt, practice and time to mature
Full of challenges-fear of change, inertia, investment in status quo, in addition to a struggling program when confidence in the decision to accept the program is waivering
Full Operation-can occur once new learning becomes integrated into practices policies and procedures
Includes staffing, clients, and doing business as intended, innovation becomes accepted practice
Innovation-
First implement program with fidelity before beginning to innovate or drift from program
Sustainability- often 2 to 4 years needed, program must be sustained, replace staff with skilled practiioners and well trained staff
There is a shifting ecology of influence factors and orgs must adjust without losing functional components of the practice

61. Positive Implementation Outcomes
are linked to Factors during Exploration States when staff:
Sees advantages outweighing disadvantages
Have high expectations of benefits
Have a good relationship with purveyor
See outcomes that are demonstrable
Get good information about intervention
Have good organization leadership
Are involved in decision making
(Panzano et al in NIRN)

62. Time Full implementation  3-5 years Entry and acceptance phase 
Implementation with high accuracy and sustainability 
5-10 years (OSEP, 2004)
Full implementation of school-wide innovations often takes between 3-5 years
Examples of greenbriar, elementary school, year 5
Entry and acceptance phase alone can take 2-3 years
My school-year one
For some programs to be effective, they must be implemented with high accuracy and sustained for 5-10 years (OSEP, 2004)

63. Stages of Systems Change
Planning for Change
Developing a Plan
Develop a mission statement, goals, objectives
Develop/implement strategies & techniques
Implementing a Plan
Evaluating the Plan
Developing a plan
Missing, goals, objectives
Dev strategies, techniques
Implement strategies
What we will be talking about today. . . Hold this thought. . .more to come
Collaborative problem solving model
Eval plan
Monitor progress
Revise areas that need to be improved
Eval outcomes
Recycle process

64. Core Components
“The most essential and indispensable components of an intervention”
(Fixsen et al p.24)
Not knowing the core components leads to a waste of time and resources on non-essential components
Core components must be implemented yet flexibility must be built in to adapt the innovation to the specific setting
Ex. In NIRN
Bronchiolitis guidelines
Training for medical staff + daily rounds by clinical coordinator to prompt and reinforce the use of the guidelines
Clinical coordinator was well respected and had credibility and was dedicated to the new practice
(Perlstein, 2000 in NIRN)

65. Core Components of RTI Multitier Implementation
Student Assessment and decision making
Evidence-Based Intervention Provision
Maintenance of Procedural Integrity
Development and Sustainability of Systems-Level Capacity
(Glover & DiPerna, 2007)

66. Develop a mission statement, goals, objectives
Activity- Dissemination Working Group
Do you have a mission statement, goals, and objectives for the change you are trying to make?
Review handout, or have participants go through handout for their school

67. Develop/implement strategies & techniques
1. Describe the outcome in concrete, measurable terms
2. Identify resources and barriers to achieving the desired outcome
3. Select a barrier to achieving the desired outcome
4. Brainstorm ideas to reduce or eliminate the selected barrier
5. Design multiple action plans that include person(s) responsible, the action to be taken, and the timeline for completion
6. Develop a follow-up plan for each action plan
7. Develop an evaluation plan to assess reduction of the barrier and attainment of the desired outcome
8. Establish a timeline and criteria for determining acceptable organizational response to the intervention.
Will review later in the session

68. Stages of Systems Change
Planning for Change
Developing a Plan
Implementing a Plan
Secure resources
Ensure staff possesses necessary skills (i.e., Training, coaching)
Implementation Factors (Research)
Evaluating the Plan
Implement plan
Eval plan
Monitor progress
Revise areas that need to be improved
Eval outcomes
Recycle process

69. Securing Resources Financial resources Personnel resources
Staff training in core components
Staff training in planning/problem solving skills
Financial resources, such as federal, state, or district funding for implementation
Personnel resources, such as time and energy
Staff training in program
Training staff in planning/problem solving skills

70. Coaching/Training
“On-site assistance for a teacher who is attempting to apply a new skill” (Neubert, 1988, p. 7)
“The provision of companionship, the giving of technical feedback, and the analysis of appreciation”
(Joyce & Showers, 1982, p. 3)
See notes

71. Coaching/Training
Interventions often are not implemented with treatment integrity unless a consultant is continuously involved (e.g., Lewis & Newcomer)
Follow-up support can greatly increase the % of teachers who transfer the new strategies to their classrooms (Showers, 1984)
See notes Without coaching, teachers rapidly lose the skills they recently acquired and few teachers achieve transfer of training into their classrooms (Joyce & Showers, 1982).
Research has found that interventions are not implemented with treatment integrity unless a consultant is continuously involved (e.g., Lewis & Newcomer)
In one study, only 10% of teachers who attended a training without follow-up support transferred the new strategies to their classrooms while, 80% of teachers who received the training and coaching transferred the new strategies to their classrooms (Showers, 1984 cited in Showers, 1990).

72. “Implementation Dip” (Michael Fullan)
Small setback in implementation momentum in initial stages of implementation
When things get worse before they get better
Can occur because:
implementers begin to feel anxious, unskilled, overwhelmed, incompetent about using the new skills
participants are not seeing results of implementation
How do you resolve, educate implementers about process, show them data, even if negative, use to promote adherence to intervention, renewed dedication to make results more positive

73. Source: Phelps, http://www.dangerouslyirrelevant.org
An example in my own school
PST teams, last year, come and complain about problems
This year, forms guide process, emphasis on data, must go through whole process when talking about kids
A few months in, teachers start to feel resistance, too much work, too much time, not getting through enough kids,
So we start to back off a little, let them talk about kids, don’t use the forms as much, have some less structured discussion,
But the moment you do that, you realize it is unproductive, so have to tighten things up again
How do you resolve, educate implementers about process, show them data, even if negative, use to promote adherence to intervention, renewed dedication to make results more positive
Source: Phelps,

74. Stages of Systems Change
Planning for Change
Developing a Plan
Implementing a Plan
Evaluating the Plan
Monitor progress/revise areas that need improvement/ recycle process
Evaluate outcomes
Eval plan
Monitor progress
Revise areas that need to be improved
Eval outcomes
Recycle process

75. Program Evaluations What: Summative, Formative When:
Initial Stages
Full Operation Stages
Final Stages
Must consider what you are evaluating
For additional information, see Stuffelbeam’s CIPP model
What: Summative, Formative
When:
Initial Stages
Final Stages
Full Operation Stages
Evaluations can show poor results due to the fact the the evaluation was completed during the initial stages and not when all the components were in place
Must consider what you are evaluating
For additional information, see Stuffelbeam’s CIPP model

76. CIPP Model Context Input Process Product
cippchecklist.htm
roduction
1. Contractual Agreements
2. Context Evaluation-needs, assets, and problems within a defined environment. (what context was this intended)
3. Input-competing strategies and the work plans and budgets of the selected approach. (what resources were needed)
4. Process - monitor, document, and assess program activities. (was it implemented correctly)
5. Impact Evaluation
6. Effectiveness Evaluation
7. Transportability Evaluation
8. Sustainability Evaluation
9. Metaevaluation

77. Recycle process (Formative)
Monitor progress
Revise areas that need improvement
Data. . . Data. . Data. . .
Decision rules
Scheduled meetings to review data and to make decisions
Ex. ALP program, database, review, for pst individual and pst core

84. Evaluate Outcomes (Summative)
Factors that promote implementation:
Data related to problem
Knowledge to staff about the innovation/rationale
On going training and coaching
Good team functioning of implementing team
Administrative and District Support
Input from staff, parents, students
Using input to integrate the innovation into the current system (e.g., committee meetings)
Sharing data on evaluation
Collecting data related to the problem
Providing knowledge to staff about the innovation and its rationale
Providing on going training and coaching
Good team functioning of implementing team
Administrative and District Support
Soliciting input from staff, parents, students
Using input to integrate the innovation into the current system (e.g., committee meetings)
Evaluating the innovation, sharing data on evaluation
Where do you start-with any one of these
Collect data, convince your principle, focus on your team, educate your staff

85. Evaluate Outcomes (Summative)
Essential Implementation Outcomes
Changes In:
Adult professional behaviors (knowledge and skills of practitioners and key staff members)
Organizational structures and cultures
Relationships to consumers, stakeholders, and system partners
(Fixsen, Naoom, Blasé, Friedman, Wallace, 2005)
Collecting data related to the problem
Providing knowledge to staff about the innovation and its rationale
Providing on going training and coaching
Good team functioning of implementing team
Administrative and District Support
Soliciting input from staff, parents, students
Using input to integrate the innovation into the current system (e.g., committee meetings)
Evaluating the innovation, sharing data on evaluation
Where do you start-with any one of these
Collect data, convince your principle, focus on your team, educate your staff

87. The Bottom Line Good relationships Data
Define goals, objectives, key components
Training
Follow-up support/coaching
Information
Share results
Information alone is not effective, dissemination itself does not change behavior

88. UNDERSTAND SYSTEMS ISSUES RELATED TO IMPLEMENTING PS/RTI
PART 4
UNDERSTAND SYSTEMS ISSUES RELATED TO IMPLEMENTING PS/RTI

89. Core Components of RTI Multitier Implementation
Student Assessment and decision making
Evidence-Based Intervention Provision
Maintenance of Procedural Integrity
Development and Sustainability of Systems-Level Capacity
(Glover & DiPerna, 2007)
Next slides will discuss some key points and issues from the article

90. Systems issues related to implementing PS/RTI
1. Research on Multitier Model is inconclusive
2. Results of varying, individualizing, and/or intensifying treatment components at each tier
3. Standard protocol approach (predetermined plan) vs. Individualized approach (customized practices)
4. School personnel's ability to monitor implementation of applied interventions
1. Research on Multitier Model-Inconclusive 121 Iowa schools using a 4-tier model of levels of consultation (Tilly)
Essentially is still a lack of research on the outcomes of this model
Despite its intuitive appeal
Growth in early reading performance (Tilly, 2003)
Reductions in special education referrals in k-3 grades over 4 years (I.e., 19-39%) (Tilly, 2003)
2. Outcomes of varying, individualizing, and intensifying treatment components at each tier
3. Standard protocol approach (predetermined plan) vs. Individualized approach (customized practices)
Primary=90 min universal reading instruction
Secondary=small group instruction targeting reading skills for additional min a day for weeks
Tertiary=more intense variation of the small group for only 2-4 students
Results: 20/45 students who received secondary intervention reached benchmark goals within 20 weeks
Reduction in grade retentions and special ed referrals(e.g, Hartman & Fay, 1996; Kovaleski, Gickling, Morrow, & Swank, 1999)
However, no reduction in special ed referrals or performance growth rates were found by Marston, Meuystens, Lau, and Canter (2003) or Reschly and Starkweather (1997)
4. Ability to monitor implementation of applied interventions
Acceptability (treatment is approp., fair, reasonable)
Training (best results with modeling and rehearsal/feedback)
Support (Best results with performance feedback including briefly meeting on regular schedule, examining permanent products, graphing, reviewing student outcome and implementation integrity)
Ex. Of Julie, weekly PST meetings, integrity check in, did this happen, data collection each week
Treatment monitoring interview
where initial implementation would be discussed to identify any unanticipated barriers and to review data of target behaviors or skills, consultees should collect data with regard to treatment integrity

91. Major Organizing Concepts
Consensus
Infrastructure
Implementation

92. Challenges Professional Training
Masters level gen & spcl ed teacher candidates
Reasons for lack of training in testing, measurement, behaviorism, and even scientific evidence
School Psychologists lack training in evidence-based prevention and intervention
Faculty of School Psychology Programs
(Kratochwill, Volpiansky, Clements, & Ball, 2007)
Masters level gen & spcl ed teacher candidates
Little training in behavioral-based instructional practices (e.g., reinforcement, graphing, progress monitoring)
Reasons- Teachers often are not trained because some programs are opposed to testing, measurement, behaviorism, and
even scientific evidence
Lack of training of School Psychologists in Evidence-based prevention and intervention
Faculty of School Psychology Programs are inadequately prepared in prevention and intervention programs
(Kratochwill, Volpiansky, Clements, & Ball, 2007)
Kratochwill, T.R., Volpiansky, Pl, Clements, M., & Ball, C., 2007, Professional development in implementing and sustaining multitier prevention models: Implications for response to intervention. School Psychology Review, 36,

93. Challenges Home/Teacher Factors
Home-related factors
Teacher factors vs. School factors
Teacher skill
Home-related factors have more influence on student outcomes than teacher factors
Teacher factors have more influence than school factors, such as school climate, schedule, administrative, pressure to achieve
Teacher skill accounted for increased in student performance on CBA by percentage points (Marzano, 2000)
These factors are out of our control unless we work with good parents and good teachers
Hiring/firing of teachers

94. Need for High Quality Professional Development
National Staff Development Council
NSDC
12 standards (SPR)
3 categories: Context, Process, Content
Examples of RtI models
Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin
How do we train people on rti, do we have a curriculum? Direct instruction?
Assessments
Such as the one we are providing today
Structural features (context) vs. Core features (content)
Structural:
Embedded professional development structures (e.g, teacher networks, study groups) were more effective in changing teacher practice than traditional workshop or conference formats (Porter et al., 2000)
Training was more effective when it included groups of teachers from same school rather than individual teachers from different schools
Core:
Building opportunities for active learning resulted in greater change in practice
Strong content area focus trainings were more effective
Training more directly aligned with teacher goals and state standards were more effective

95. Case Example Small district in north suburb of Chicago
11 schools: 8 elementary, 3 middle
2 school psychologists in 3 middle schools ( students each)
Supported by NSSED, a special education cooperation that provides training and programs to 20 school districts

96. Systems Change in My Schools/District
District personnel support and promote problem solving and RTI
Building administrative support
Role shift of school psychologists
Weekly mandated problem solving meeting for all staff (in contract)
Shift in philosophy and instruction for Academic Enrichment class (from HW help to Reading and Math Intervention)
District personnel support and promote problem solving and RTI
District provided training to a problem solving team in each school, school-based coach
Building administrative support
Constant communication, weekly admin meetings
Problem solving team became a committee (integrated into system)
Role shift of school psychologists
File review/data brought to initial meeting for special education re-evaluation meeting, less data needed following meeting
Special Education teachers conduct file review and additional testing for re-evaluations
Mandated weekly meeting devoted to problem solving individual student concerns

97. Challenges in My Schools/District
School Psychologists’ time in each building
Teachers’ resistance to collecting data
Teachers’ prior knowledge about problem solving
Teachers’ lack of knowledge about RTI
Scheduling (Foreign language, math, reading concerns, and organization concerns)
Correct administration and use of assessment data, implementation of research-based programs
Parental refusal of interventions

98. Systems changes and challenges in your school/district
Consensus
Infrastructure
Implementation
- Have participants write down top 3 issues facing schools/districts implementing PS/RtI model