Intervention & Strategies Support Program Professional Development RTI Problem Solving Model Tiered Interventions Universal Screening Data Driven Decision Making Research Based Programs

Multi-tier Intervention Model Intensive Interventions Intensive remediation In-depth assessments Intense progress monitoring All decisions are data driven Consideration to referral for SpEd. Refined Individualized Instruction 5% Student Population Tier 2: Targeted Interventions Interventions tailed to student needs Increased learning time Targeted Progress Monitoring Focused small grp & 1:1 learning Problems solving process & data analysis 15% Tier 1: Performance Based Instruction for ALL Students Strategies Instruction Universal Screenings Differentiated Instruction Standards based curriculum Curricula offers Universal Design for Learning features Instruction is guided by progress monitoring & assessment 80%

Data Driven Decision Making Tier 3 Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual students Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures Tier 2 Targeted Grp Interventions Some students (at-risk) High efficiency Rapid response Tier 1 Core Instructional Interventions All settings, all students Preventive, proactive

Universal Screening Sample Screening for Possible Reading Risk Grade CBM Probe Cut-off Kindergarten Letter Sound Fluency < 10 letters/minute Grade 1 Word Identification Fluency < 15 words on list/minute Grade 2 Passage Reading Fluency < 15 words in text/minute Grade 3 < 50 words in text/minute Grade 4 Maze Fluency < 10 Maze replacements/ 2.5 minutes Grade 5 < 15 Maze replacements/ Grade 6 < 20 Maze replacements/

Research Based Programs Things to consider in new intervention programs 1. Is the Intervention backed by “strong” evidence of effectiveness such as pre-post studies. 2. If the intervention is not backed by “strong” evidence, is it backed by “possible” evidence of effectiveness 3. If the answer to both questions are NO then the intervention is not supported by meaning full evidence. What do researchers in the field say? Catts, H.W., Fey, M.E., Zhang, X., & Tomblin, J.B. (2001). Estimating risk for future reading difficulties in kindergarten children: A research-based model and its clinical implications. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the Schools, 32, 38-50. Compton, D.L., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., & Bryant, J.D. (2006). Selecting at-risk readers in first grade for early intervention: A two-year longitudinal study of decision rules and procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 394-409. O’Connor, R.E., & Jenkins, J.R. (1999). Prediction of reading disabilities in kindergarten and first grade. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3, 159-197. Severson, H.H., Walker, H.M., Hope-Doolittle, J., Kratochwill, T.R. & Gresham, F.M. (2007). Proactive, early screening to detect behaviorally at-risk students. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 193-223. Commissioned Reports and National Centers such as www.studentprogress.org

RTI Problem Solving Model RTI model vs Stat Model Nebraska Dept of Ed.

Professional Development Cycle