1. Data-Driven Decision Making and the RTI Process
Kathleen Maxwell
Instructional Research & Data Analysis
Capital Region BOCES

2. IDEA 2004 Changes Procedures for Evaluating a Child Suspected of Having a Learning Disability
“An LEA shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension, mathematical calculation, or mathematical reasoning.
An LEA may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as a part of the evaluation procedures.”
Previous regulation was relatively hazy to practitioners in that it was not explicitly stated that a student shall not be determined eligible for special education if the determinant factor is “lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including explicit and systematic instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary development, reading fluency (including oral reading skills) and reading comprehension strategies” (from Commissioner’s Regs)

3. Rationale for RTI
“…an at-risk child’s initial response to remedial intervention can be a reasonably good barometer of whether that child will be readily remediated or difficult to remediate, and…the profile developed from this and subsequent work with the child can aid as a “first-cut diagnostic” in determining whether his or her reading difficulties are caused primarily by experiential and instructional deficits or by cognitive deficits of biological origin.”
However, RTI alone is not sufficient to identify a learning disability. (NJCLD)
(Vellutino, Scanlon, Small, &
Fanuele, 2003)

4. RTI has three core concepts:
Application of scientific, research-based interventions in general education;
2) Measurement of a student’s response to these interventions; and
3) Use of the RTI data to inform instruction.
A key element of an RTI approach is the provision of early intervention when students first experience academic difficulties (NJCLD)
Student performance data are gathered frequently and are immediately available to teachers, psychologists and others. The data are then available to help evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction strategies being used and, when warranted, spur modifications in teaching and learning models that can produce better results. (talk about the Assessment for Learning movement)
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities, 2005

5. How are Data Used in RTI?
School staff conduct universal screening of academics & behavior.
Continuous progress monitoring of students’ performance occurs, pinpointing students’ specific difficulties.
School staff use progress-monitoring data to determine interventions’ effectiveness and to make any modifications as needed.
Briefly describe FBA process

6. Potential Benefits of RTI
Earlier identification of students by means of a problem-solving approach rather than by an ability-achievement discrepancy formula
Reduction in the number of students referred for special ed. and related services
Reduction in the over-identification of minority students
Provision of more instructionally relevant data than traditional means of identification
Discuss drawbacks of the discrepancy model (wait until they fail); give examples
NJCLD, 2005

7. The RTI Process

8. Scientific
Method 1.

9. RTI/Problem-Solving Models
What is the Problem?
Clarity and precision in this description is essential for developing hypotheses about interventions to try with the student. Too often referrals can be vague and ambiguous…Relying on observable events helps lend validity and objectivity to the process.
2. Why Does the Problem Exist?
Is the problem a skill or performance problem?
Why is the problem occurring? (in measurable and observable terms)
What circumstances/factors are associated with both occurrence & nonoccurrence of problem?
3. What Should We Do? (Intervention Plan)
Goal-directed, focused on measurable objectives
Based directly on results of assessment & hypotheses regarding etiology
Identifies who will do what, when, & how
Specific methodologies for monitoring effectiveness of interventions
Fits resources, values, & skills of those involved
4. Did it Work? What’s Next?
Student performance data are gathered frequently and are immediately available to teachers, psychologists and others. They provide information to those delivering instruction as to the effectiveness of that instruction. Based on these data, instruction must be modified or changed. Students do not continue in programs that are not working for them.
Studies show that while educators think “we do this”, in reality instructional modification does not occur frequently and typically is not done systematically or based on performance data. At times we try to make students change when it is our instruction that must change.
(Tilley, Reschly, & Grimes, 1999)

10. Data Sources in the Three-Tiered RTI Model
(from NJCLD, 2005)

11. Tier 1: Preventive RTI (Gresham, 2005; NJCLD, 2005)
Universal Screening
Ongoing Progress Monitoring/CBA
Differentiated Instruction Based on Assessment
(Gresham, 2005; NJCLD, 2005)

12. Tier 1: Preventive RTI Tier 2: Reactive RTI
Universal Screening
Ongoing Progress Monitoring/CBA
Differentiated Instruction Based on Assessment
Tier 2: Reactive RTI
CBA: Who still needs additional assistance?
Frequent Progress Monitoring
Assessment of Intervention Implementation
(Gresham, 2005; NJCLD, 2005)

13. Major Characteristics of a Curriculum-Based Measurement Model
Direct measurement: observation of specific student skills and behavior
Repeated measurement: monitoring students anywhere from 3X/week to 3X/year.
Time series analysis: graphing the direct, repeated measurement data, recording instructional interventions on the graph, & looking at the student’s response to instruction.
By cycling through the process of problem definition, selecting interventions, evaluating response to interventions, the educator will either find an effective approach for the student or has built a strong case for providing more intensive instructional services found in special education.
(Wedl, 2005)

14. Tier 3: SPED Eligibility RTI
Tier 1: Preventive RTI
Universal Screening
Ongoing Progress Monitoring/CBA
Differentiated Instruction Based on Assessment
Tier 2: Reactive RTI
CBA: Who still needs additional assistance?
Frequent Progress Monitoring
Assessment of Intervention Implementation
Tier 3: SPED Eligibility RTI
Evaluation using multiple measures
Additional data, as needed
(Gresham, 2005; NJCLD, 2005)

15. Tier 3: SPED Eligibility RTI
Tier 1: Preventive RTI
Universal Screening
Ongoing Progress Monitoring/CBA
Differentiated Instruction Based on Assessment
Tier 2: Reactive RTI
CBA: Who still needs additional assistance?
Frequent Progress Monitoring
Assessment of Intervention Implementation
Tier 3: SPED Eligibility RTI
Evaluation using multiple measures
Additional data, as needed
SPED Identification
(Gresham, 2005; NJCLD, 2005)

16. Educators Must Develop New Skills to Use Data Effectively
“General education teachers will need to compile relevant assessment data through continuous progress monitoring and respond appropriately to the findings.
Special education and related services personnel need to help design, interpret, and assess data as well as suggest instructional approaches.”
(NJCLD, 2005, p. 9)

17. Questions to Consider
Which measures are most appropriate to identify nonresponders at different points of reading development, and what criteria determine movement between tiers?
Is achievement determined by classroom, local, state, or national norms, and/or by reaching benchmarks?
How do you define expected achievement level, and what is acceptable progress?
At what point will a student be deemed “nonresponsive to intervention”?
How is the quality of the intervention monitored?