Accelerating Achievement in Boston Public Schools: Academic Achievement Framework

Potential AAF Student Outcomes 1. Improve academic and social competence 2.Increase academic proficiency on statewide assessments 3.Increase graduation rates 4.Improve post-school outcomes 5.Increase attendance rates 1.Decrease problem behavior 2.Reduce dropout rates 3.Reduce inappropriate referrals to Special Education 2

Principles of the Academic Achievement Framework Personal Professional Responsibility Differentiated Instruction and Services Collaborative Approach Problem-Solving Orientation Data-driven Decision Making

RTI Academic Conceptual Model of the AAF -- An Overlay for ELD -- 4 PBIS Soc / Emo / Beh Tier 3 - Intensive (5-15%) Tier 2 - Strategic (10-15%) Tier 1 – Universal Core (75-80%) Intervention Levels 1 & % Level % Levels 4, 5 & FLEP 5-15% RTI Academic PBIS Soc / Emo / Beh English Language Development Services

Who does what in AAF? 5 Service Team (ST) –Problem-solving at the student level –Focus: Process –Support: Internal Consultant (IC) –Membership: Facilitator, direct service providers (e.g., faculty, paraprofessionals, partner site-based staff) School Management Group (SMG) –Problem-solving at the building level –Focus: Implementation Fidelity –Support: External Consultant (EC) –Membership: Principal/Headmaster, all Service Team Facilitators, AAF Site Leader, partner leadership Cross-Functional Rapid Support Team (C-FRST) District Design Team (DDT) Student ICs ECs Claudia Rinaldi David Riley Draft, Nov. 15, 2010

School Management Group Once the universal screening & identification of students needing Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 supports is completed by grade, all summaries are sent to the SMG SMG provides a school wide view and develops a projected SMART goal –Specific –Measurable –Attainable –Responsive –Timely

School Management Group Evaluates the data and general plans for intervention including: 1.schoolwide needs 2.Grade level needs 3.Allocation of resources (materials, human capital, scheduling, etc) 4.Removes barriers to learning –Ex. Teachers are not able to provide the intervention for a particular reason –Teacher need professional development

3. Implement the Plan (Ensuring Integrity) How should we carry out the intervention? Who will do what, where, when, and how often? How often should we monitor? At what level should we monitor? How will fidelity of implementation be determined? 4. Evaluate (Progress Monitoring) Did our plan work? What do the data show? Is the growth as expected? Do we need to maintain, adjust or decrease support? 1. Define the Problem (Identifying Areas of Concern) What do the data show? What are the expected outcomes? 2. Develop a Plan (Goal Setting and Planning) What do we want the student to do? Long-term and short-term goals? What are we going to do? What is needed to carry out next steps? What indicators will we use? Adapted from Ernst, L., Miller, B., Robinson, W., & Tilly, W. D. (2005). Response to Intervention: A Case Illustration. Presentation at the National Association of State Directors of Special Education Satellite Series. The AAF Problem-Solving Process Universal Screening & Diagnostic Data

What do SERVICE TEAMs do? STEP 1- DEFINING THE PROBLEM Student not making progress/ not at benchmark 1.Academically (ELA or MATH) 2.Behaviorally Identify cut-off scores in each –ELA- use MCLASS & Predictive or other comprehension data school has available –MATH- predictive or other math data available –Socio-emotional- explore attendance, tardiness, office discipline referral and get a baseline Identify Students needing Tier 2 and Tier 3 supports –Assist facilitators in making a list of students 9

What is data in AAF? What is Universal Screening? –Quick assessment indicator conducted 3 times per year to identify which students are at grade level (benchmark), which need additional tier 2 and tier 3 support. –Indicator sensitive to change –In the academic areas: reading, English language arts, math, oral language proficiency, writing, social emotional and behavioral areas –Decision Rules that help you identify who needs Tier 2 and Tier 3 Supports –Identify the schedule for progress monitoring for students receiving tier 2 and tier 3

How do you arrive to cut scores decision points? Decision points or cut scores allows teachers to identify students at risk for needing Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions It can be with 1 or more screening tools /and or diagnostic tools It can be a combination of a curriculum-based measurement and diagnostic tools It is important the schools follow the SAME decision points/cut score/ for all grade levels –sensitive to improvement in brief intervals of time –short as possible to ensure its do ability –linked to decision making for promoting positive achievement and Problem-Solving

Universal Screening & Progress Monitoring Grade s Universal ScreeningProgress Monitoring K-3M-CLASS DIBELS Benchmark Probes (Fall, Winter, Spring) 3 rd grade A-NET M-CLASS DIBELS- Progress Monitoring Probes or oral reading fluency (ORF) probes (monthly or weekly depending on tier level of each student) 4-5DIBELS Benchmark Probes (paper & pencil) (Fall, Winter, & Spring) A-NET DIBELS Progress Monitoring Probes/ORF (paper & pencil) (monthly or weekly depending on tier level of each student) 6-8MCAS cut scores Proficient & above (240 and up) Needs Improvement ( )- Tier 1 + PLUS Tier 2 intervention Warning ( ) Tier 1 + PLUS Tier 2 + PLUS Tier 3 ORF A-NET ORF Probes (paper & Pencil) (monthly or weekly depending on tier level of each student) A-NET 12

Example DIBELSComp. Reading Level Tier 1 strong instructional core At grade level Tier 2 interventions & supports Below grade level Intervention & supports in fluency, phonics, phonemic awareness At grade level Intervention & supports in comprehension, vocabulary Tier 2 interventions & supports At grade levelBelow grade level Intervention & supports in comprehension, vocabulary Tier 3 interventions & supports Below grade level Intervention & supports in fluency, phonics, phonemic awareness Below grade level Intervention & supports in comprehension, vocabulary

What do we use the data for? School-wide Data Meetings Grade level Data meetings Individual Student Data Monitoring …..ALL SUPPORT Service Team Data-based instructional problem solving 14

Service Team Role in AAF Evaluate grade level needs of students by doing –Universal screening 3 times per year –Progress monitoring 1/month or weekly depending on the need of each student Set the students needing Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions in a cycle of progress (4-6 weeks) monitoring early in the year Monitor individual student progress on the progress monitor schedule Data-driven problem solving that address student potential for continues growth & move across tiers

3. Implement the Plan (Ensuring Integrity) How should we carry out the intervention? Who will do what, where, when, and how often? How often should we monitor? At what level should we monitor? How will fidelity of implementation be determined? 4. Evaluate (Progress Monitoring) Did our plan work? What do the data show? Is the growth as expected? Do we need to maintain, adjust or decrease support? 1. Define the Problem (Identifying Areas of Concern) What do the data show? What are the expected outcomes? 2. Develop a Plan (Goal Setting and Planning) What do we want the student to do? Long-term and short-term goals? What are we going to do? What is needed to carry out next steps? What indicators will we use? Adapted from Ernst, L., Miller, B., Robinson, W., & Tilly, W. D. (2005). Response to Intervention: A Case Illustration. Presentation at the National Association of State Directors of Special Education Satellite Series. The AAF Problem-Solving Process Universal Screening & Diagnostic Data

STEP 2 Develop a PLAN Record of Problem Solving and Progress Monitoring 17

Step 3: Implement the Plan Record of Problem Solving and Progress Monitoring 18

STEP 4 Evaluate- Progress Monitor Did our plan work? –What do the data show? –Is the growth as expected? –Do we need to maintain, adjust or decrease Tier 2 or Tier 3 Interventions & Supports? Restart the Cycle of Problem Solving in the next Progress Monitoring Cycle (4-6 weeks) 19