Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Addressing the Needs of Students with Disabilities through the RtI Process Presented by: Judy Hackett, NSSEO Kathryn Cox, ISBE ISBE Special Education Directors.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Addressing the Needs of Students with Disabilities through the RtI Process Presented by: Judy Hackett, NSSEO Kathryn Cox, ISBE ISBE Special Education Directors."— Presentation transcript:

1 Addressing the Needs of Students with Disabilities through the RtI Process Presented by: Judy Hackett, NSSEO Kathryn Cox, ISBE ISBE Special Education Directors Conference August 6, 2009

2 Session Objectives This session will: Describe how RtI addresses the needs of all students Provide examples of how the needs of students with identified disabilities can be addressed through RtI Provide examples and facilitate discussion among participants on best practices for incorporating RtI into the IEP process Provide additional insight into how state/local RtI plans and professional development should articulate how the needs of all students are addressed effectively 2

3 Addressing the Needs of All Students 3

4 Intensifying an intervention for a student with an identified disability through PS process and progress monitoring Grouping students in a classroom for efficient instruction Developing an intervention for the entire special education class Reviewing assessment results to help plan and/or adjust small group instruction Determining if a student is eligible for special education Developing a behavior support plan based on problem analysis Does RtI mean … ? 4

5 Intensifying an intervention for a student with an identified disability through PS process and progress monitoring Grouping students in a classroom for efficient instruction Developing an intervention for the entire special education class Reviewing assessment results to help plan and/or adjust small group instruction Determining if a student is eligible for special education Developing a behavior support plan based on problem analysis These are all examples of RtI… 5

6 The Illinois State RtI Plan ISBE believes that increased student learning requires the consistent practice of providing high quality instruction matched to student needs. The success of all students toward the Illinois Learning Standards is improved when instructional and behavioral goals are frequently monitored. …it is through the continuous use of progress monitoring and analysis of student academic and behavioral growth that proper instructional and curricular responses may be made. 6

7 The Illinois State RtI Plan RtI means: – Using differentiated instructional strategies for all learners, – Providing all learners with scientific, research-based interventions, – Continuously measuring student performance using scientifically research-based progress monitoring instruments for all learners and – Making educational decisions based on a students response to interventions RtI has three essential components: 1.A three-tier model of school supports 2.A problem-solving method for decision-making and 3.Integrated data collection that informs instruction 7

8 Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions 1-5% Individual students Assessment-based High intensity 1-5%Tier 3/Tertiary Interventions Individual students Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures Tier 2/Secondary Interventions 5-15% Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small group interventions Some individualizing 5-15%Tier 2/Secondary Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Small group interventions Some individualizing Tier 1/Universal Interventions 80-90% All students Preventive, proactive 80-90%Tier 1/Universal Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive School-Wide Systems for Student Success: A Response to Intervention (RtI) Model Academic Systems Behavioral Systems Illinois PBIS Network, Revised May 15, Adapted from What is school-wide PBS? OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Accessed at 8

9 Problem Solving Process A reflective, collaborative problem solving framework is implemented to determine effectiveness of instruction and used to make decisions within a multi-tier model: 1. Is there a problem? What is it? 2. Why is it happening? 3. What are we going to do about it? 4. Is it working? 9

10 Collect Data Plan Instruction Write Goals Implement Program Determine Effectiveness THE BIG PICTURE Global Perspective on the Educational Process for Students with Identified Disabilities 10

11 Effective Response to Intervention implementation is… …based on having an effective core program The key to RtI is to develop a comprehensive system of instruction with a research- based core curriculum and enhancement programs, and interventions designed to address the needs of all learners. 11

12 1. UNIVERSAL SCREENING AND BENCHMARKING: EARLY LITERACY MEASURES, SUCH AS DIBELS OR AIMSweb CBM (KEY CRITICAL INDICATORS) FRAMEWORK FOR READING ASSESSMENT STRATEGIC MONITORING (ROI) PROGRESS MONITORING (ROI) SYSTEMATIC PROBLEM SOLVING PINPOINTING THE SPECIFIC AREA OF DIFFICULTY, DIAGNOSTIC INFORMATION TIER III 3 X PER YEAR TWICE MONTHLY WEEKLY TIER I 12

13 Schools/Programs need to identify specific tools for specific assessment purposes TypePurposeFor Tier(s)... Universal Screening Problem Identification for Systems & Groups Whats the problem? Tier 1 (core instruction needs?) Tier 2 & 3 (who are students at-risk?) Diagnostic Problem Analysis Why is the problem occurring? Primarily Tier 3 Progress Monitoring Plan Development/Evaluation What are we going to do?/Is it working? Tier 1, 2 & Tier 3 Program Evaluation Plan Evaluation Is it working? Primarily Tier 1, but 2 and 3, too 13

14 14 High School Question: Basic Skill Discrepancy? Or Content Enhancements What Service? How? Goal? Evaluation Tool? Instruction in Basic or Literacy Skills Instruction in Content Area Knowledge Direct Service in Special Education SIM CRISS STRATEGIES Master Basic or Literacy Skills CBM Master Content Area Knowledge Common Assessments YESNO

15 Addressing the Needs of Students with Identified Disabilities through RtI 15

16 3/2/ Example Data-Driven Decision Making For: Behavior Change

17 17 3/2/2014 Current Level of Performance/ Baseline Data: Behavior plan positively reinforces appropriate behaviors: -- keeping his body to self, -- following directions, --staying in his seat and --using appropriate words. Student X was following plan at average rate of 73% of time but continued to engage in inappropriate touch (significant incidents of hitting others, touching others without their permission and throwing objects) at an average rate of 32 times per month. Inappropriate touch became the targeted behavior. The IEP GOAL: Given interventions as outlined in Student Xs Behavior Plan, inappropriate touching will be reduced to no more than 10 times per month with quarterly benchmarks at 25, 20, 15, and finally 10.

18 18 3/2/2014 Intervention & Progress Monitoring Intervention Plan Student X follows a Green and Red Plan in which his behavior is rated for each activity throughout the day in four categories (Body to Self, Follow Directions, Stay in Seat, Use Appropriate Words). Student X makes basketball shots at the end of the day to correspond with the number of activities in which he has received all green checks. Progress Monitoring Data provided the following information: Student X hit 41 times in Sept 08 and 186 times in Oct. 08 In Sept, 58% of those incidents occurred during exploratory times outside of the self contained classroom and in Oct., the percentage rose to 74%. Based upon analysis of time of day, class period and the behavioral antecedent and consequences changes were made to the behavior plan.

19 3/2/ Insert Chart Here Based on the intervention and the data analysis, the inappropriate touching behavior was reduced after the intervention was revised. Further data analysis by the team indicated the student will work on following directions for the school year. Student X will increase his ability to follow directions at a rate of 86% of the time with quarterly increases of 80%, 82% and 84%.

20 3/2/ Example Data-Driven Decision Making For: Reading Instruction

21 21 Baseline Data: Student is an 8 th grader with significant learning and emotional needs. He has demonstrated an unstable pattern of progress from September through January of the current school year. Baseline reading fluency at the start of the year was 35 words read correctly at grade 1. Previous reports indicate that he was reading between 7-11 words at a 2 nd grade level, making limited progress on basic sight words. Goal: Given a reading passage at the 1 st grade (instructional) level, Student will increase reading rate and fluency to 60 words read correctly.

22 22 Intervention: This student was one of 22 who participated in a school-wide pilot program using SRA Corrective Reading. Students were assessed prior to beginning the intervention in January. Progress Monitoring: All students were progress monitored using AIMSweb probes for Reading Fluency along with curriculum based measures within the SRA program. Teachers and Psychology interns assisted with the monitoring and the analysis of the data (see artifacts). Insert Chart Here Progress Monitoring errors

23 23 Data Analysis: Following the implementation of the SRA Corrective Reading program, student made steady progress throughout the remainder of the school year. Student ended the year with 51 words read correctly on a 1 st grade reading passage. Based on the students response to this intervention, he will continue in the SRA Corrective Reading program. Based on observational data, students self-esteem improved significantly over the course of the school year. This was noted by his willingness to read aloud in class, his desire to attempt reading tasks independently and his success on independently reading his 55 question Constitution exam and earning 100%.

24 Incorporating RtI into the IEP Process 24

25 Specify timeframe Specify desired behavior Specify measurement condition Specify criterion for success Check: Can you graph this goal? Writing OBSERVABLE and MEASUREABLE Goals 25

26 Essentials for Writing Strong Goals Present Level of Performance Benchmarks (Short-term and Long-term) 1-2 Goal Areas (Prioritize!) Written in Observable and Measurable terms (It can be graphed) Written as Outcome-Based (GOM) Realistic, yet Ambitious 26

27 In (number) weeks, when (condition) occurs, (learner) will (behavior) to a (criterion). Example: In 6 weeks, when given a 4 th grade reading passage, Bradley will read 100 WRC with 6 or less errors. Nonexample: Katrina will answer comprehension questions regarding the main idea and supporting details in age appropriate materials. 27

28 Realistic and Ambitious Reading Goals Based on Normative Sample of Student Receiving Standard Reading Instruction Fuchs, Fuchs, Fernstrom, Germann, and Hamlett (1993) Grade Level PassagesRealistic GoalAmbitious Goal WRC per week.65 WRC per week 5.5 WRC per week.8 WRC per week 4.85 WRC per week1.1 WRC per week 31.0 WRC per week1.5 WRC per week WRC per week WRC per week Goal= Current Performance + (Rate of Growth X Number of weeks) Lilys Goal= 42 words read + (1.5 WRC per week X 33 weeks)= 91.5 WRC 28

29 Consider the Severity of the Discrepancy Consider the Intensity of the Program At Tier 3, when Grade-Level Expectations are not appropriate, use a Growth Rate to Set the Goal 29

30 Logical Task-- – Grade 4 Student getting Tier 3 interventions without an IEP: Wed set our goal for Grade Level Material (Grade 4) – Grade 4 Student with Severe Educational Need getting Tier 3 interventions who has an IEP: May not be Grade Level Material 30 Setting the Goal Material

31 With Severe Discrepancy, we recommend using an Ambitious Growth Rate Method to set goals Identify Growth Rate for Typical Students and Expect FASTER Rate of Improvement 2.0 WRC * 6 Weeks = 6 + Current Performance = Goal WRC 31

32 32 Writing a Goal is Straightforward with Good Data We Start with a Survey Level Assessment (SLA)

33 TierGoal MaterialTime Frame and Frequency Criterion for Success Tier 1: BenchmarkGrade-Level Materials Benchmark to Benchmark, 3 Times per Year Adequate Progress and Meeting Benchmark Tier 2: StrategicGrade-Level Materials Benchmark and MonthlyAdequate Progress and Meeting Benchmark Tier 3: Frequent PM Individualized Based on Severity of Need WeeklyProgress and Reduce the Gap 33 Summary Chart for Goal Setting in 3 Tiers and RTI

34 Other Connections to the IEP The IEP must provide for: – Frequent (weekly) student progress monitoring using scientific, research-based tools – Use of progress monitoring data to determine the effectiveness of the interventions and any needed changes – Evaluation of implementation integrity The student needs to receive: – Instruction in the big ideas of grade placement curriculum – More allocated instructional time than peers without IEPs in area(s) of concern – Additional instructional time that includes direct, explicit instruction in skill deficits 34

35 RtI Planning & Training – Building on ongoing system to address student needs 35

36 36 3/2/2014 Eligibility Process Building upon district RtI planning/criteria/document of evidence of need Overview & Basics Philosophy/Framework Common Language Implementation Use of interventions tied to need Integrity/fidelity of tools Plan Review & Revisions Ongoing cycle of planning and review of data Team Building & Coaching Includes role flexibility/technical expertise Sustainability Critical review of comprehensive plan, stakeholder perspectives, phases of development, next level of sophistication in implementation RtI Professional Development Training Blocks

37 Special Education Eligibility/Entitlement 37

38 Response to Intervention (RtI) is the practice of providing 1) 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 (Batsche, et al., 2005). This means using differentiated instructional strategies for all learners, providing all learners with scientific, research-based interventions, continuously measuring student performance using scientifically research-based progress monitoring instruments for all learners and making educational decisions based on a students response to interventions. RtI has three essential components: 1) using a three tier model of school supports, 2) utilizing a problem-solving method for decision-making, and 3) having an integrated data system that informs instruction. RtI and Eligibility? The Illinois State Response to Intervention (RtI) Plan January 1, 2008 It is important to note that RtI within a three-tier intervention model is also a part of special education eligibility decision-making required by 34 CFR and 23 IAC By the school year, documentation of the RtI process shall be a part of the evaluation process for students when a specific learning disability (SLD) is suspected. After [emphasis added] implementing an RtI process, a district may [also] use a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement as part of the evaluation process for determining whether a child has a specific learning disability. 38

39 Basic Purpose of Special Education Eligibility Significant gap exists between student and benchmark/peer performance Response to Intervention is not sufficient to predict student attainment of set benchmark Student is not a functionally independent learner Student demonstrates a NEED for special education services based on level of intensity 39

40 Discrepancy Educational Progress Instructional Needs Entitlement Decision Tells us whether or not interventions require special education. Entitlement Decision Tells us how unique the student is com- pared to peers. Tells us what accelerates learning. Tells us what and how to teach. 40

41 Presentation Summary RtI is applicable to all students, students with and without identified needs. It is neither a general education nor special education process – it is a process to improve student outcomes. RtI is a framework and a process that is data-driven and effective in identifying student needs/developing plans and evaluating effectiveness of IEP plans/special education programs and interventions. RtI requires intensive, ongoing professional development, training and supports for staff in data collection and analysis, determining what interventions are effective for what students need and how to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention plan or IEP. RtI embedded in the IEP process is a work in progress – in terms of eligibility, goal/plan development and a more global application and implementation across educational settings. 41

42 If you want to feel safe and secure, Continue to do what you have always done. If you want to grow, go to the cutting edge Of our profession. Just know that when you do, there will be a Temporary loss of sanity So know when you dont quite know what you are doing You are probably growing! Madeline Hunter 42

43 Contact Information Dr. Judy Hackett Superintendent NSSEO 799 West Kensington Mt. Prospect, IL Phone: Kathryn Cox Principal Ed. Consultant & I-ASPIRE Proj. Director ISBE 100 N. 1 st Street Springfield, IL Phone:


Download ppt "Addressing the Needs of Students with Disabilities through the RtI Process Presented by: Judy Hackett, NSSEO Kathryn Cox, ISBE ISBE Special Education Directors."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google