Presentation on theme: "Michelle Avila Bolling, Ed.S. Lisa Sirian Stear, Ph.D."— Presentation transcript:
1 Evaluating District-Wide Professional Learning to Build Capacity for RTI Michelle Avila Bolling, Ed.S.Lisa Sirian Stear, Ph.D.Sharon Rinks, Psy.D.Danny Hicks, Ed.S.Cindy Jenik, Ph.D.
2 Goals for Today’s Session Establish the contextProject conceptionSystem supportFormat for trainingEnabling and disabling factorsOutcome dataFuture plansQuestionsExplore the CD of materials
3 Carroll County West central GA On GA/AL state line 50 miles from Atlanta503 square milesPopulation 109,965(2006 census)Cost of living93% of U.S avg.
4 District Enrollment 23rd largest school system in Georgia 14,800 students inPre-K through 12th gradeEthnicity:68% White18% African-American7% Other
5 Personnel 2,225 total staff members 99.25% “Highly Qualified” teachers 1,261 certified964 classified99.25% “Highly Qualified” teachers62% of certified staff members hold masters degree or higherPsychological Services4 doctoral, 4 educational specialist3 licensed, 5 certifiedAPPIC training program
7 Project Timeline Spring 2007 Summer 2007 Spring/Summer 2008 Fall 2008 Georgia mandated RTI to begin Fall 2007Summer 2007District RTI Manual introduced to principalsEvery school provided a copySpring/Summer 2008Conceptualized the RTI InstituteCreated training materialsFall 2008Conducted trainingSpring 2009School teams redeliveredFall 2009/Spring 2010Evaluated progress
8 The Problem Frustration from implementation or lack thereof Need for training othersLack of district resources and fundsLack of state-level guidanceConfusion regarding the 4-tier pyramid
9 The Problem: Referral Data Manual ReleasedTraining Occurred
10 Project Conception Seeking System Support Met with our supervisor Met with the district PD coordinatorMapped out a blueprint for trainingArranged for leadership module
11 Project Conception District Enabling Support Extra work days over the summer to develop modulesTime commitmentExtra support from graduate student interns and practicum studentsProvided materials, meeting space, and snacksPaid for substitutes for teacher participants
13 Leadership Module Leadership and administrative support Important for any innovation and essential if you want it to workAdministrators control resourcesTimePersonnelMaterials/resourcesAdministrators outline duties and expectations for personnelEndorsement in the face of possible resistance to change
14 Unless commitment is made, there are only promises and hopes Unless commitment is made, there are only promises and hopes... but no plans.- Peter Drucker
15 The Professional Learning Model Voluntary participationDistributed learning over timeMeaningful choicesOpportunities for practiceAuthentic casesLearning communities/teamingResponsive to participants’ needsTailored feedback
17 Selecting Team Members Voluntary participationAdministrative representation3-4 other individualsCurriculum specialistsGrade-level teacher leadersCounselorsPsychologistsGraduation coachesSpecial education teachersAll team members had to commit to completion of the entire training.
18 I start with the premise that the function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers.- Ralph Nader
22 Reading Module Agenda Process the Application Activity Evidence-based RTI practices in readingPractice progress monitoring administrationOral Reading FluencyMazeProgress monitoring & data entryPractice data entryReview decision making for each caseCase studiesDiscuss Application Activity
23 Interventions Five areas Phonemic Awareness Phonics Vocabulary Fluency Comprehension
29 Math Module Agenda Round robin problem solving for RTI Evidence-based RTI practices in mathUniversal screeningInterventionIntervention fidelityProgress monitoringEstablishing goals challenge activityMath case studiesDiscuss Application Activity
30 Interventions Whole Group Strategies for Tiers I & II Six Areas Number senseArithmeticFluencyProblem SolvingReasoningMnemonic Strategies
35 Wrap-Up Agenda SARTII Case Presentations Forms and Documents Planning Discussion
36 Researching the Program Participant PerceptionsResearcher PerceptionsSchool Readiness RatingsRubric Evaluation of Permanent ProductsTeam Interview Data
37 Course ParticipantsTotal Number of Participants Who Completed Course N=58Elementary Participants N=36Middle & High Participants N=22
38 Outcome Data – Self-Report Ratings Prior to training, only 20.6% of participants reported at least a competent level of understanding of RTI.Post-training, 89.7% reported a competent level of understanding.Significantly higher rates of understanding found (t= , p<.001)
39 Outcome Data – Self-Report Ratings Prior to training, only 15.5% of participants felt competent to implement RTI.After the training, 82.8% of participants felt competent.Significantly higher rates of skills reported (t= , p<.001)
40 Outcome Data – Self-Report Ratings Prior to training, only 13.8% of participants felt competent to act as a resource to others.After the training, 81% felt competent.Significantly higher rates reported (t= , p<.001)
43 Outcome Data – Self-Report Ratings Participants reported significantly higher agreement that the RTI model will help children in their school be more successful (t=-8.045, p=.016).
44 Outcome Data – Redelivery (2/2009) Format of RedeliveryPercentage of SchoolsSchool-wide whole-group training31%Grade-level team trainings77%Individual consultationPosting on intranet or distributing handoutsOther: Weekly RTI support meeting7%87% of schools (13/15) did some form of redeliveryOne additional school had 100% participation
45 Researcher Perceptions Enabling Factors District & principal supportGroup discussion opportunitiesApplication activitiesCase studies – saw improvementConsistent team membershipThoughtful selection of team membershipCollaborative nature of the teamTechnology supportVoluntary participantsFlexibility of implementation
46 Researcher Perceptions Disabling Factors Participants were “voluntold”Teams had limited administrative supportResistance to change/inflexible structuresToo much content, too little timeCompeting district initiativesLocation of trainingLack of resources and information for high school students (only 1 of 5 high schools completed training)Flexibility of implementation – looking for district-wide guidance
47 Outcome Data - SARTII Self-Assessment of RTI Implementation (SARTII)* Status Ratings:Not Started (The activity occurs 0% of the time)Just Started (The activity occurs 1 to 24% of the time)In Progress (The activity occurs 25 to 74% of the time)Achieved (The activity occurs 75 to 100% of the time)Maintaining (continues to occur 75 to 100% of the time)*Adapted from the IL-ASPIRE SAPSI v. 1.6Center for School Evaluation, Intervention and Training (CSEIT) Loyola University Chicago, Florida Problem Solving/Response to Intervention Project (SAPSI Fall, 2007),& North Carolina Comprehensive Assessment of Need (NCCAN)
48 Outcome Data – SARTII Consensus MaintainingAchievedIn ProgressJust StartedNot Started
49 Outcome Data – SARTII Infrastructure MaintainingAchievedIn ProgressJust StartedNot Started
50 Outcome Data – SARTII Infrastructure MaintainingAchievedIn ProgressJust StartedNot Started
51 Outcome Data – SARTII Infrastructure MaintainingAchievedIn ProgressJust StartedNot Started
52 Outcome Data – SARTII Infrastructure MaintainingAchievedIn ProgressJust StartedNot Started
53 Outcome Data – SARTII Infrastructure MaintainingAchievedIn ProgressJust StartedNot Started
54 Outcome Data – SARTII Implementation MaintainingAchievedIn ProgressJust StartedNot Started
55 Outcome Data – SARTII Implementation MaintainingAchievedIn ProgressJust StartedNot Started
56 Outcome Data – SARTII Implementation MaintainingAchievedIn ProgressJust StartedNot Started
57 Outcome Data – SARTII Growth over time in all areas, except… Perception of district level support initially increased, but has since decreasedChange in personnelFundingLess growth in involving parentsSchools reported collecting data on consensusUnsure of the means of data collection – survey?
60 Rubric Ratings Over Time Though the participant schools began at a higher level of competency, their rate of growth significantly exceeded that of nonparticipating schools, F(1,23)=14.81 , p<.005.
61 Rubric Analysis Strengths Weaknesses Tier II intervention plans Universal screeningTier III intervention plansForm is presentThe target is identifiedBaseline is appropriateClearly identified appropriate interventionsInterventionist identifiedResults reportedWeaknessesTier II intervention plansFormBaseline dataProgress monitoring planGoal Setting (Tiers II & III)Sticking to review datesFidelity reviewDocumentation of referral for evaluationIntervention Review TeamRubric range 0-56
62 Interview Data: Team Members Assistant PrincipalCounselorSchool PsychologistSpecial Education Teacher(s)Regular Education Teacher(s)EIP Teacher(s)
63 Interview Data How did everyone in your school become knowledgeable about the RTI process? RTI InstituteRedelivered trainingTo the entire faculty and staffIn smaller groups“On-the-job training… learn while you work the process!”School-based RTI teams (composed of reps from each grade)Monthly grade-level meetingsInformation provided through s and online
64 Interview Data How on board with RTI would you consider your faculty and staff? “I’m not sure that they like it, but they’re doing it”(1st grade teacher)More on board with certain tiers than othersConsensus is increasingAs they see the process workBy finding ways to make the whole process more “doable” and, thus, acceptableBy requiring staff members to present students who were in need of help to the RTI committee (e.g., their “two lowest in the class”)Ways consensus could be improvedIf there were explicit rules from the county about what to doIf there was more accountability; administration could help with this
65 Interview Data Are the right personnel involved with RTI? YesEvery grade-level/subject area is representedEvery “area” (e.g., counselors, EIP teachers, psychologists)Diverse membership helps in the problem-solving processPrevious years’ teachers provide history and contextDecisions can be made because the right people are at the meetingNoNot all schools have a regular education teacher from each grade-level involved with RTI
66 Interview Data Describe Any Changes You’ve Seen in How Your School Looks at Tier I Data. Data are accessible to teachersData are available in a timely manner“We now look at data from more than one program, including benchmarks, STAR, GRASP, and DIBELS, at regular intervals and move students up to Tier II when needed.” (5th grade teacher)“Progress monitoring data is used to direct and reform instruction.” (Assistant Principal)
67 Interview Data Describe Any Changes You’ve Seen in How Your School Looks at Tier II/III Data. Don’t just go by teacher opinion anymoreMeetings occur at regular intervalsData are analyzed at each meetingModifications to goals are made as neededInterventions are modified/changed if they are not working“We have more tools to use as interventions so that we have better data” (4th grade teacher)
68 Interview Data What Noticeable Changes in Classroom Practices Have There Been Since RTI Was Implemented?Frequent progress monitoringMore interventions to address specific deficitsMore creative use of time- finding time during the day for interventionAltered schedules to create an extra class periodTeachers provide intervention in their areas of strengthIncreased awareness of behavioral difficultiescollecting behavioral datafiguring out the reasons behind behaviormore aware of and involved in creating BIP’s
69 Interview Data What keeps the RTI process from functioning optimally at your school? Not enough…Time (also, time management issues)MoneyManpowerResources or identified strategiesPeople who have knowledge and/or experience with the RTI processStaff development time/dayAccountability
70 Interview Data What Keeps the RTI Process from Functioning Optimally at Your School? Student absences/transiencyGroup management issuesindividuals in each group progress at different rates which often results in the need for changes in groups and creation of new groupsThe time it takes to get a student into tier III or IV,especially for students who have significant issuesLack of increased/intensive intervention once the student moves into Tier III
71 Interview Data What Would Help Your School Do RTI Better? More…Time for the 3 P’s: planning, providing interventions, and progress monitoring!Money: to purchase resources/interventions and to fund interventionistsManpower: people to provide and monitor interventionsExperience in actually implementing the processIntervention resources/updated intervention bankStaff development: days and trainingsPsychologist involvement: time to observe, test, and offer suggestions, support, and interventions
72 Interview Data What Would Help Your School Do RTI Better? Better support system overallA person at each school whose sole responsibility is RTIA person at each grade level who has the time to be primarily responsible for RTI at that grade levelBetter communicationabout available resourceswith other schools in the countywith school systems who are doing RTI wellExpanded use of certain programs (e.g., Orton-Gillingham for groups in all grade-levels)Explicit guidance from the county office
73 Moving Forward Plans Obstacles Continue to support school efforts Share our assessment results with the DistrictEstablish a collaborative relationship with new district personnelObstaclesBalancing individual teacher needs with collective goals of the school/districtNonparticipating teams are at a disadvantageConsensus in some schools has been hard to establishNew district personnel assigned to RTI
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.