1. Response to Intervention/Instruction An overview of RTI by Julie Benay Julie Benay, Fall 2011

2. National Center on RtI Julie Benay, Fall 2011

3. National Center on RtI “If less than 80% of students are benefiting from the primary prevention system, consider focusing school improvement efforts on improving core instruction and curriculum. If there is a large percentage of students in the tertiary level, consider implementing large group instructional activities and system changes to address the needs of these students within the primary level. Typical ‘tertiary’ interventions will not be cost effective or address the overall problem that led to the large number of students needing tertiary support.” Julie Benay, Fall 2011

4. A Short History Of “RtI” RtI first came on the radar in 2004 as part of the reauthorization of the law guiding the education of students with disabilities It was based on the “well child” model implemented through the public health system and was designed to be preventative in nature and data driven RtI was created in response to the “wait to fail” problem that is clearly evident if schools use a discrepancy model to determine eligibility for special education Julie Benay, Fall 2011

5. RtI As Prevention “In summary, RTI is a preventive framework. RTI is not the name for a pre-referral process. The intent of RTI is to improve outcomes for all students while providing immediate supplemental supports for students at risk for poor learning outcomes. RTI may be a component of a comprehensive evaluation for SLD determination but that is not why we implement RTI.” – National Center on RtI Julie Benay, Fall 2011

6. The Big Ideas of RtI High quality instruction Frequent Assessment Data Based Decision Making Julie Benay, Fall 2011

7. Key Components to RtI High quality, research based core instruction Universal screening and benchmark testing Continuous progress monitoring Research based interventions Interventions adjusted based on data, including: frequency, intensity, fidelity Collaboration, teaming, shared responsibility Julie Benay, Fall 2011

8. RtI: Procedures Universal benchmark screening Ongoing progress monitoring Interventions provided with sufficient frequency, fidelity and intensity Instructional adjustments made based on data Julie Benay, Fall 2011

9. Why Universal Screening and Benchmarks? Universal screening in the fall provides a quick measure of gains or losses over the summer months Winter benchmark prevents students from “falling through the cracks” while there is still time to intervene Spring benchmark provides picture of annual growth; useful information for summer programming; and a starting point for comparison in the fall Julie Benay, Fall 2011

10. Research on “Curriculum Based Measures” 30 years of strong research indicate the reliability and predictive value of CBM (Fuchs and Fuchs) More than 200 empirical studies published in peer- review journals (a) provide evidence of CBM’s reliability and validity for assessing the development of competence in reading, spelling, and mathematics and (b) document CBM’s capacity to help teachers improve student outcomes at the elementary grades. Julie Benay, Fall 2011

11. Mastery Measurement With mastery measurement, teachers test for mastery of a single skill and, after mastery is demonstrated, they assess mastery of the next skill in a sequence Scores in mastery measurement cannot be compared over the course of a year, making it impossible to quantify rates of progress Many tests of mastery are teacher designed and lack validity and reliability Julie Benay, Fall 2011

12. Curriculum Based Measures Each CBM test assesses all the different skills covered in the annual curriculum. CBM samples the many skills in the annual curriculum in such a way that each weekly test is an alternate form (with different test items, but of equivalent difficulty). Therefore, scores earned at different times during the school year can be compared to determine whether a student’s competence is increasing. Julie Benay, Fall 2011

13. Curriculum Based Measures CBM makes no assumptions about instructional hierarchy for determining measurement CBM incorporates automatic tests of retention and generalization CBM is distinctive: Each CBM test if of equivalent difficulty Samples the year-long curriculum CBM is highly prescriptive and standardized Reliable and valid scores Julie Benay, Fall 2011

14. CBM Basics CBM monitors student progress throughout the school year Students are given probes at regular intervals depending on the intervention Weekly, bi-weekly Teachers use CBM data along with other data to quantify short- and long-term goals that will meet end-of-year goals Julie Benay, Fall 2011

15. Using CBM CBM tests are brief and easy to administer All tests are different, but assess the same skills and the same difficulty level CBM scores are graphed for teachers to use to make decisions about instructional programs and teaching methods for each student CBM data management solutions are available commercially Julie Benay, Fall 2011

16. Taking the Temperature CBMs are highly sensitive to learning but they are not perfect assessments They do one thing, and they do it well. They take the temperature of student learning A value in CBM is that they can be given again if the student had a bad day or testing procedures were invalidated Results of CBM should be triangulated with other forms of assessment to develop a well rounded approach to making instructional decisions Julie Benay, Fall 2011

17. CBM Results False Positive Student CBM score indicates a learning problem, but all other data sources provide the team with confidence that no problem exists False Negative Julie Benay, Fall 2011

18. Using CBMs: Devil in the Details Determine who, what, where, and when to administer Train staff to administer and prepare to monitor fidelity (less of an issue with computer based administration such as Renaissance) Decide how to organize and access data Establish times to meet as teams to discuss data Trained leaders to guide discussions Julie Benay, Fall 2011

19. Decision Rules We need guidance in regard to decision rules. We should NEVER be encouraged to use one source of data, and we need to ask: What measures are you using and what information are you getting from that data? What source of data did you examine first? What was the target and who established it? When you make a decision about who will be with an intervention teacher, how did you decide? Think about how you considered your boundaries (eg group size) and how you prioritized the needs of the learners. Julie Benay, Fall 2011

20. Challenges in Creating Cohesive, Responsive Instructional Plans Creating learner profile Matching intervention to profile Making “tier one” adjustments consistently and reliably Providing second tier instruction aligned with tier one instruction and adjustments Involving families but avoiding blame or lamentations Choosing length of time before re-examining or adjusting instructional plan Avoiding fragmentation and confusion Julie Benay, Fall 2011

21. The Russian Chauffeur Shared responsibility is difficult. Language matters – if supplemental instruction is considering being “picked up” for “services,” who has dropped the student? The tricky part of providing additional resources at “tier two” is avoiding the “pick up and dropoff” syndrome. Looking at system data in addition to student data can monitor the change process. Julie Benay, Fall 2011

22. Five Nice Ladies: Instructional Chaos Another danger point is instructional chaos. With many supports (Tier II intervention, homework club, Supplemental Educational Services required under NCLB, parent support), there is a real danger in providing fragmented, incoherent instructional support to striving learners. Julie Benay, Fall 2011

23. What Do We Know? School improvement literature and the most recent neuroscience points us in the direction of what works: 1. Professional/teacher learning communities are effective when implemented with clear focus and support 2. Fluency matters and cognitive fluency is impacted by sequential, systematic instruction implemented with frequency and fidelity 3. Instruction at Tier One strongly influences student outcomes, and is improved through a focus on formative assessment 4. Frequent opportunities to write in all areas of the curriculum, supported by quality instruction in writing, influences cognitive processes and student achievement outcomes across all curricular areas 5. Students learn best when there are consistent and positive approaches to guiding behavior supported by strong social skills and character education programs Julie Benay, Fall 2011

24. What is a leader to do? Don’t let the schedule be an excuse. Pick it up, shake it out, and find time for additional instruction and time for teacher learning communities. Know the research. If you haven’t read the 90/90/90 Study (Center for Performance Assessment), read it. Read “How People Learn” for the most up to date neuroscience as it relates to learning. Use the National Center on RtI as a resource for evaluating possible screening and progress monitoring products. Hold high expectations, and provide support. Use “loose/tight” management – support your principals and your IST chairs. Help your teachers who are funded through Title I to learn collaborative teaming skills. Simplify the message and stick to it. Connect all professional development to the same broad goals – consistency, coherence, and connections. Julie Benay, Fall 2011

25. From Good to Great Rti has tremendous potential for engaging a school in the process of reform that will result in improved student success for all learners. As with all sustained initiatives, however, it takes a lot of time and a lot of work. Jim Collins (2001) wrote, “Good to great transformations never happened in one fell swoop. Good to great comes by a cumulative process – step by step, action by action, decision by decision, turn by turn of the flywheel – that adds up to sustained and spectacular results.” Good to Great Julie Benay, Fall 2011

26. A few key references www.rti4success.orgwww.rti4success.org (Gateway site for many RtI resources) www.allthingsplc.info (Regarding Professional Learning Communities) www.allthingsplc.info http://www.leadandlearn.com/ (Regarding data team work and the 90/90/90 study) http://www.leadandlearn.com/ http://www.nap.edu (Regarding National Research Council “How People Learn) http://www.nap.edu http://www.ets.org (Regarding “Keeping Learning On Track” professional development program for formative assessments) http://www.ets.org Julie Benay, Fall 2011