Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Using Response to Intervention for Washington’s Students

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Using Response to Intervention for Washington’s Students"— Presentation transcript:

1 Using Response to Intervention for Washington’s Students
Paul Alig       OSPI, Special Education Program Supervisor Tonya Middling SEAC September 27, 2006 This powerpoint was originally presented at the 2006 OSPI/WASA special education administrators conference in a panel format. It may be modified for presentations at the ESD and school district level. [change presenter names]

2 Overview Defining RTI Where did it come from and why do we need it?
Support for RTI in federal law Core principles Special education eligibility considerations Policy issues Professional development issues

3 Defining RTI RTI is a general education approach that aligns resources from general, remedial and special education through a multi-tiered service delivery model in order to provide scientific, research-based interventions to struggling students.

4 Defining RTI, con’t. RTI includes making data-based decisions based on curriculum based measurements (CBMs) through problem-solving or standard protocol measures Uses progress monitoring (formative assessments) Specific Learning Disability Identification

5 Where did it come from and why do we need it
Where did it come from and why do we need it? Background and Research Support The idea of using CBMs to identify student needs is not new. Stan Deno’s data-based decision program modification model (Deno, 1985; Deno & Mirkin, 1977) Bergan’s behavioral consultation model (Bergan, 1977) Problems in the traditional system (Wait to fail) Integration between general and special education Undocumented benefits of special education Variability and accuracy of eligibility determination Integration of eligibility determination with instruction Work of Jack Fletcher, Dan Reschley, Fuchs and Fuchs, Sharon Vaughn, Ken Howell. Work shows that students that receives strategic or intensive interventions delivered through a multi-tiered service delivery model and CBMs assist in identifying specific student needs at an early level. Fletcher et al also outline how IQ based severe discrepancy models provided very little information regarding student learning needs. Howell helped to show how to evaluate students using curriculum based assessments as opposed to IQ testing.

6 Support for RTI in federal law
Provisions of IDEA 2004 allow school districts to use scientific, research-based interventions as an alternative method for identifying students with SLD. Aligns with No Child Left Behind (2001)

7 RTI Manual Introduction
Outlines principle components of RTI Guidance on RTI decision making Recommendations on using RTI data to identify specific learning disabilities (SLD) Answers common questions Includes additional resources and practical appendices The first part of the manual discusses the “core principles” that must be in place to effectively implement RTI and provides an in-depth description of each of those principles as they apply in to a school setting (i.e., SRBI, 3-Tiered service delivery model, progress monitoring) RTI applies to all academic areas and behavior The second part of the manual provides tools and resources schools can use to get started with implementing RTI practices The manual also includes important commonly asked questions and a list of resources. How this manual came about: Early Intervening Services and RTI committee SLD committee Other sources (in and outside OSPI) In the summer of 2005, 2 committees were formed to review the proposed regulations on EIS, RTI and SLD changes. The committee members represented a wide variety of personnel, including special education directors, school psychologists, special education teachers, higher education professors, title 1 teachers, assessment coordinators, and early childhood staff. In developing the manual, the committees also consulted with outside experts, such as Dr. Wayne Callender, Dr. Randy Allison, and Dr. Jack Fletcher, and also worked with OSPI program supervisors in Curriculum and Instruction, Title 1, and Reading First. Other state models, such as Iowa, Idaho and Oregon were also studied in preparing the manual. Outside sources: Why RTI? Recommendations from the President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education; research on use of IQ tests.

8 How to use the manual Recommendations NOT regulations
Readiness checklist Each district and school design their own RTI system depending on curriculum decisions and resources NOTE: An RTI system is a combined general education and special education approach OSPIs RTI manual is aligned with OSPIs K-12 Reading Model This manual was published prior to the publication of the final federal regulations, so the accompanying hand-out is included to capture the final federal regulations relative to RTI. The hand out should be used as an insert to the manual. The handout includes the definition of Scientific Based Research, progress reporting requirements to parents, and other information regarding using RTI for SLD eligibility purposes. A “readiness” checklist to assess the current status of school or district to determine the systems that are already in place, or that need to be established is included in the manual. District, or building level teams should complete the checklist together. It should not be completed in isolation (ie. By the sped director; by a principal).

9 Response to Intervention: Core Principles
Use all available resources to teach all students Use scientific, research-based interventions Monitor classroom performance Conduct universal screening/benchmarking Use multi-tier model of service delivery Make data based decisions using a problem solving/standard protocol Monitor progress frequently Fidelity RTI includes core principles and here they are. Each principle will be talked about in more depth.

10 Use all available resources to teach all students
RTI practices are built on the belief that all students can learn and everyone supports all students RTI focuses on student intervention need and not “What is wrong with the student?” Systems Change: Integrated approach No one building/district will look the same Bullet 2: Requires teams to examine curricular, instructional and environmental variables that can be addressed through the school to change inadequate learning

11 Use all available resources to teach all students, cont.
Basic Education LAP/Title Reading First (NCLB, 2001) School Improvement Plan Student Learning Plans Special Education (IDEA 2004) Other resources available to the building/district First bullet: Restructure allocation systems to support RTI practices, including financial, staffing Second bullet: Discussion of Title 1 funding restrictions dependent upon expertise of presenter/audience. School-wide schools are allowed to blend funds and Title 1 schools target the lowest performing students for remedial instruction. Third bullet: For reading first sites, resources could be aligned to further implement RTI practices beyond 3rd grade Fifth bullet: Align resources to support student learning plans at the secondary level. Sixth bullet: EIS funds and special education personnel expertise used in a pre-eligibility model

12 Use scientific, research-based interventions
Curriculum and instruction approaches must have a high probability of success for the majority of students Offer as soon as it is clear the student is lagging behind Increase intensity of instruction and practice Opportunity for explicit and systematic instruction/practice and cumulative review Provide skillful instruction with good error correction, immediate feedback Guided by and in response to progress monitoring data Must provide a supportive atmosphere for learning New IDEA regulations adopt the NCLB definition of scientifically based research

13 Monitor classroom performance
General education teacher play a vital role in designing and delivering high quality instruction General education teachers also monitor student progress through CBMs Student performance in relationship to state standards (GLEs) GE teachers are in the best position to assess students’ performance and progress against grade level standards This includes the implementation of instruction with fidelity

14 Universal Screening School staff conduct universal screening in all academic areas and behavior to all students three times/year to identify students at risk Benchmarks document whether a child is on track compared to peer group and/or state standards The student’s data at benchmark testing periods can be utilized to validate the effectiveness of intervention. Is the gap closing? Universal screening in behavior examines data from discipline referrals, attendance records, cooperation, tardiness, truancy, suspensions, observations and interactions with peers and adults.

15 This graph illustrates that more than half of 3rd grade students are not meeting grade level standards on number or correct math digits in one minute. This demonstrates that the core curriculum is in need of improvement. It may also mean there is a problem with the implementation of the core curriculum.

16 This graph reflects scores that represent the core curriculum is working for the majority of students. The core curriculum may not be a concern based on this data. Students performing below the benchmark will require strategic interventions.

17 Features of a Multi-Tiered Model
Each tier represents increasingly intense level of services associated with increasing levels of learner needs All students, including those with disabilities are found in Tiers I, II, and III The nature of the academic or behavioral intervention changes at each tier, becoming more rigorous as the student moves through the tiers Students move up and down the tiers depending on need

18 Three-Tier Model of School Supports
5% of your students should be here 15% of your students should be here 80% of your students should be here

19 Use multi-tier model of service delivery: Tier I
Tier I: ALL Students All students receive high quality scientific research based instruction in the core curriculum in all areas Core curriculum provides the foundation for instruction upon which all strategic and intensive interventions are formulated Serves 80-90% of the student body Some Tier 1 interventions may be applied to at risk students followed by progress monitoring

20 Use multi-tier model of service delivery: Tier II
Tier II: Some Students Strategic interventions supplements instruction to students who are not achieving standards through the core curriculum alone Consists of 5-10% of the student body Occurs in small groups of 3-6 students Short-term in duration [9-12 week blocks] Recommended 3-4 sessions per week at minutes per session Students progress is monitored more frequently at Tier II, usually every 2 weeks

21 Use multi-tier model of service delivery: Tier II, cont.
Tier II: Some Students Students may receive more than one block of Tier II interventions if progressing but who have not yet reached the goal Students who reach goal would be reintegrated into Tier I Students who do not progress in Tier II may require more intensive interventions

22 Use multi-tier model of service delivery: Tier III
Tier III: Few Students Intensive interventions are designed to accelerate a student’s rate of learning by increasing the frequency and duration of individualized interventions based on targeted assessment data. Students at Tier III are those performing significantly below standards and have not adequately responded to Tier I or Tier II interventions Consists of less than 5% of student body Occurs in groups of no more than 3 ideally May occur longer than 9-12 weeks Students progress is monitored on at least a weekly basis

23 Use multi-tier model of service delivery: Tier III, cont.
Tier III: Few Students Students who are successful at Tier III reintegrate to Tier I with Tier II support If not successful at Tier III, consider referral for special education and/or other long-term planning [504 plan, additional Tier III cycle]

24 Data-Based Decision Making
The purpose of using data based decision making is to find the best instructional approach for a student with an academic or behavioral problem Decisions are made by teams consisting of professionals knowledgeable about the student, and the parent Decisions are made through the problem solving process or standard protocol

25 Designing Instruction to Meet Student Needs
Standardized Assessments Benchmarking or Screening Instructional Problem Solving Requires taking multiple sources of evidence and selecting appropriate instructional interventions based on identified student needs Performance or Criterion Assessments Progress Monitoring

26 A Problem Solving Process
Develop a Plan Decide on the intervention, timeframe, frequency and intervention provider Define the Problem Clearly identify the deficit area Analyze the Cause Develop a hypothesis: Why is the problem happening? Implement the Plan Carry out the intervention as planned Evaluate the Plan Compare progress to the aimline. Did it work?

27 I.nstruction C.urriculum E.nvironment L.earner Domains of Influence
How we teach C.urriculum What is being taught E.nvironment Context where learning is to occur L.earner Characteristics that directly relate to the area of concern

28 R.I.O.T. Review Interview Observe Test Work Samples Cumulative Folders
Health Records Interview Teachers Parents Student Significant Others Observe Student-teacher Student-peer Test Curriculum based Norm referenced Criterion referenced Rating Scales

29 Evaluation Planning Relevant KNOWN UNKNOWN Instruction Curriculum
(R.I.O.T.) Curriculum Environment Learner See Appendix B, C, D, and E for examples of using the problem solving steps

30 Standard Treatment Protocol
Process where student decisions are made using an established response to regular occurring circumstances [e.g., Read Well] Implementation involves a trial of fixed duration [e.g., 9-12 weeks] Emerging research is showing success implementing this approach at Tier I and Tier II in the area of reading

31 Progress Monitoring Documents student growth over time to determine whether the student is progressing as expected in tiers CBMs are primarily used as a method for progress monitoring because they are brief, easy to administer and score, and are good predictors of student ability Progress monitoring data provide a picture of the student’s performance and rate of growth to inform instructional and curricular changes so that every student reaches proficiency on targeted skills

32 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Words Read Correct X X X This graph represents an aimline for a particular student after obtaining three data points from a curriculum-based measure and developing an intervention plan. Second grader. Ambitious = 2. Baseline median = 43. Goal = 74. B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

33 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Words Read Correct
100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 X X X X X X X Words Read Correct X X X X X X X X X This graph demonstrates the student is not progressing at a rate required to reach the goal after the first intervention was applied based on four data points over a five week period. The second red line reflects the intervention was changed to address the student’s lack of progress. Second grader. Ambitious = 2. Baseline median = 43. Goal = 74. B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

34 Lack of Responsiveness to Interventions
Defined as rate of improvement, or progress slope that is not sufficient for the student to become proficient with state standards without more interventions Decisions to advance students from one tier to another is based upon analysis of the progress monitoring data to determine if the student is responsive [e.g. 4-6 data points below the aimline after interventions have been altered may show a student is non-responsive]

35 Targeted Assessment Targeted assessment means shifting to evaluations that are designed around the specific “targeted” concerns of the student. In other words, we select assessments that measure the area of concern rather than administering an assessment and then trying to determine what it means. Usually conducted when student enters Tier III, but may be conducted earlier

36 Fidelity Fidelity refers to the degree to which RTI components are implemented as designed, intended, and planned. Fidelity is achieved through sufficient time allocation, adequate intervention intensity, qualified and trained staff, and sufficient materials and resources. Fidelity is vital in universal screening, instructional delivery and progress monitoring.

37 Intervention Plan Documents analysis of student data and outlines interventions and evaluation of progress Also documents implementation of interventions with fidelity [See appendix F]

38 RTI and Child Find Anyone, including parents and teachers, can make a referral at any time in a RTI system. A student cannot be required to go all the way through Tier III before being evaluated if evidence exists to suspect a disability. WAC ; 102. District must act promptly on a referral. 34 CFR Sec (c).

39 When should a student be suspected of having a disability due to a lack of responsiveness?
Students who are performing significantly less than their peers and have been provided two or more Tier III interventions that did not significantly decrease the gap in achievement should be suspected as having SLD and evaluated absent other evidence. This guidance creates a baseline for non-responsiveness within a RTI system for when a disability should be suspected. If a disability is suspected before that baseline then referral should be initiated. Reference new 34 CFR sec (c) – adequate progress over an appropriate period of time w/ appropriate instruction in general education setting delivered by qualified personnel and formal assessment of student progress during instruction through repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals.

40 Parent Involvement in RTI
In a RTI system parents must be provided progress monitoring data. 34 CFR Sec (b)(2). Parents must also be informed of: State policies regarding the amount and nature of student performance data that is collected and the general education services that are provided; The strategies for increasing the student’s rate of learning; and Their right to request an evaluation. 34 CFR Sec (a)(7). Parent involement section of manual

41 Is consent required before conducting screenings or CBMs?
Teachers or specialists do not need to obtain consent to evaluate when administering universal screening, CBMs, or targeted assessments to a student in order to determine appropriate instructional strategies for curriculum implementation. 20 USC Sec. 1414(a)(1)(E). 20 USC 1414(a)(1)(E). When developing screening measures should also consider the parallel measures that may be used in an evaluation/diagnosis.

42 Using RTI data to identify SLD
District procedures set out criteria for using RTI data to establish SLD. District criteria must incorporate new federal regulations on SLD. 34 CFR Sections through Federal Regulations relative to RTI are summarized in the accompanying hand-out. Note: See page 14 through 17 on SLD identification using RTI data. 34 CFR Sec (a)

43 Adopt an established approach for using RTI data to identify SLD
Districts are strongly encouraged to use established approaches for using RTI data to identify SLD. Criteria determines if a student is not making sufficient progress to meet age or State-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the SLD areas. 34 CFR Sec (a)(2)(i).

44 Recommended criteria for identifying SLD using RTI: Question 1
Where at least two phases of intensive interventions implemented in the general education curriculum with fidelity, which did not affect the student’s achievement and does evidence of the student’s non-responsiveness at Tier III reflect that he or she is learning at a rate significantly less that her or his peers? Note: See page 14 through 17 on SLD identification using RTI data.

45 Recommended criteria for identifying SLD using RTI: Question 2
Do RTI and other existing data (including observation) meet at least two of the following four criteria: 1)CBM scores showing the student is performing at or below the 7th percentile of current grade-level or at or below the 16th percentile of a previous grade-level; 2)A standardized assessment score that is 1.75 standard deviations below the mean (within test protocols); 3)CBM scores and other data demonstrate the student’s median performance is at or below his or her grade placement peers by a discrepancy ratio of at least 2; 4)The student’s instructional performance level is two or more grade levels below her or his current grade placement determined by CBM scores, classroom performance, observation and, if appropriate, standardized assessments? For #1 – looking for cut score based on CBMs For #3 – the discrepancy ratio is calculated by dividing the peers’ median performance by the target students’ median performance. Caution should be exercised when applying the median criteria to both younger and older students (explained in manual) For #4 – targeted assessment may be helpful b/c specific to student weaknesses

46 Recommended criteria for identifying SLD using RTI: Question 3
Does the evaluation group (including the parent) believe the student requires resources that are not available in the general education setting, with or without accommodations, in order to participate or progress in the general education curriculum at a level equal to his or her peers? Evidence of this criterion would show that the student requires specially designed instruction or Tier III interventions for an extended period of time that is not available in the general education curriculum.

47 Evaluation Report To establish SLD, under recommended approach, the report must reflect a “yes” to all three questions (sample in Appendix H). Also need to rule out: (1) visual, hearing , or motor disability; (2) mental retardation; (3) emotional disturbance; (4) cultural factors; and (5) limited English proficiency. 34 CFR Sec (a)(3). Must have data to show the student received appropriate reading and mathematics instructions. 34 CFR Sec (b). Note: See page 14 through 17 on SLD identification using RTI data. 34 CFR Sec (a) and (b)

48 Special Education Eligibility
To be eligible for special education, the evaluation group for students with SLD must find an adverse educational impact and the need for specially designed instruction (SDI). The evaluation report for eligible students should include recommendations about the SDI and any related services, program modifications, accommodations and other supports the student needs with enough specificity to develop an IEP. In a RTI system, the SDI provided should supplement the scientific-based interventions and high quality instruction the student was already receiving in general education.

49 Same players; new roles I
The New Psychologist Role Data Manager Data Analyzer Data Synthesizer Detective Extraordinaire Progress Monitoring? The New Sped Teacher Role Data Provider Targeted Assessment Progress Monitoring Intervention opportunities Note: See Changing Roles and Responsibilities section of the RTI manual on page 13.

50 Same players; new roles II
The New Parent Role Data Provider (FAAB) Interventionist Progress Monitoring The New General Ed.Teacher Role Tier 1 & Tier 2 interventions Data provider (FAAB) for Learning Env. Be ready for intervention Note: Roles should be designed to the strengths of the personnel within the district. Some districts may have teachers with data analysis/management skills in addition to intervention delivery, etc.

51 Same players; new roles III
The New Principal Role As goes the principal’s attitude, so goes the team Providing for the assessment of intervention fidelity The New Attitude We are not looking at the child as broken Focus is on “Why isn’t the general education curriculum working for this child?” Note: Principals often play a critical leadership role in addition to other teachers and staff. Principals must understand and be active in the change process and have a hands-on roll in the process. Other ESA staff (i.e., SLPs, behavioral interventionists) and paraeducators role and/or contributions to a RTI system

52 EIS Early Intervening Services are:
Activities to support students in grades K-12 who are not currently identified as needing special education, but who need additional academic and behavioral support to succeed in the general education curriculum District’s may not use more than 15% of IDEA Part B funds for EIS activities, less any amount reduced by MOE 34 CFR § See Appendix D of Federal Regulations to see how EIS and MOE affect one another.

53 EIS Allowable Activities
EIS activities may include: Professional development for teachers and other school staff to enable such personnel to deliver scientifically based academic and behavioral interventions; Instruction on use of adaptive and instructional software; and Educational and behavioral evaluations, services and supports There are reporting requirements associated with use of EIS funds including identifying the number of students that received early intervening services and the number of students who received EIS and subsequently received special education and related services EIS is not the same as Early Intervention under Part C of the IDEA

54 How districts may use EIS funds
During the school year, 15 school districts set aside EIS funds for a variety of activities, including: Offering extended Kindergarten for at-risk students Behavioral evaluations, including FBAs, and behavioral services to general education students to improve students’ school-socialized behaviors PD on delivery and implementation of SRBI Math interventions for students in grades 1-6 High school academic and behavioral services for students who did not qualify for special education. Goal was to reduce the number of referrals to special education at the high school level; and to match services to student needs This list is not exhaustive, however, districts need to make clear in their plans what they will be doing to target at risk students and how the EIS funds will be spent. Districts may pool EIS funds together to access services with other agencies, (ie. Mental Health) or may combine funds with other funds to implement EIS (ie. Reading First, Title 1 school wide, etc.) RTI activities Split funding of sped personnel to deliver interventions to at risk students, provide PD to general education teachers on SRBI

55 Disproportionate Representation
States must require LEAs to reserve maximum amount of EIS funds to address any issues of disproportionate representation of minority students in special education Currently, LEAs are identified through the state monitoring system (routine, focused, targeted) looking at both numerical data and policies and procedures (may change with final federal regulations which allow states to require EIS set aside based on disproportionate numerical data only 34 CFR § Just a note on disproportionate representation that the SEA must require LEAs to reserve the maximum amount of EIS funds to address any issues of disproportionate representation OSPI also has data tables from the special education web site that districts can review comparison data.

56 Statewide Efforts Implementation through each ESD for professional development District RTI pilot sites statewide Technical assistance SIG grant Coordination with OSPI C&I, Reading First, School Improvement, Title 1, ELL OSPI January and summer institutes Stakeholder Conferences [WSASP, WERA, I.D.E.A.S., etc.] Other resources: WEA, Wayne Callender and other experts Other ideas? Note: Presenter may want to poll audience to see who is implementing multi-tiered service models, CBMs and scientific-based interventions

57 Questions? RTI Manual:
Additional Resources available at same website

Download ppt "Using Response to Intervention for Washington’s Students"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google