1. “Sorting Out Response to Intervention” Nassau Association of District Curriculum Officials February 26, 2009 Presented by Arlene B. Crandall ABCD Consulting, Inc. (631) – 698-2792

2. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall2 The Future Reauthorization of IDEA is introducing the idea of Response to Intervention (RTI) as a choice for identification of LD. A number of states have been using this model for several years. Key elements of RTI reflect essential elements of the process of Instructional Support Teams

3. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall3 In the Beginning… As early as 1977… “A team may determine that a child has a specific learning disability if 1) the child does not achieve commensurate with his or her age and ability levels in one or more of the areas listed in paragraph (a)(2) of the section, if provided with learning experiences appropriate for the child’s age and ability levels” (300.541)

4. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall4 In the Beginning… … … A team may determine that a child has a specific learning disability if … there is a severe discrepancy between achievement and ability that is not correctable without special education and related services. (300.543)

5. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall5 The History A model of intervention before CSE referral has been in place for over 20 years in the U.S. powered by the subtleties in the federal regulations regarding LD classification NYS Part 200.4 a (2) “a referral submitted shall describe in writing intervention services, programs or instructional methodologies used to remediate the student’s performance prior to referral…

6. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall6 The History The models for pre-referral interventions have been called: Teacher Assistance Team Pre-Referral Intervention Team Mainstreaming Assistance Team School-Based Consultation Team Problem-Solving Model

7. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall7 Research Since neither IQ tests or traditional academic tests generate instructional strategies for academic skills, research began in 1983 to determine the processes of the learner that effect a child’s ability to read and write and then translate the research into instructional practices. (Reschley & Grimes, 1995)

8. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall8 Research Ongoing research has been funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) since 1989.

9. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall9 Operationalizing RTI Phase 1 Active format A group of students (class) is screened using a critical measure of academic performance Those scoring in the at-risk level are given intensive short-term interventions Passive format Determine whether effective instruction has been in place for a group of students

10. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall10 Operationalizing RTI Phase 2 Students who are still struggling are referred for more individual interventions Problem Solving Model (PSM) is used to develop well matched interventions and decide who will support the general education teacher during implementation Typically CBM is used for data gathering

11. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall11 Operationalizing RTI Phase 3 If the student does not demonstrate a change in learning after implementation of the intervention, the team needs to review the fidelity of the RTI plan. Team determines if a CSE referral is needed. The data from the RTI plan may be sufficient for documentation to the CSE

12. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall12 Implementation RtI requires a measured implementation in most school districts It is important to not overwhelm administrators and staff with information As with all professional development, it is important to educate all groups in the district and school

13. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall13 Central Office All central office administrators need at least an “exposure” to the basic information of RtI. They provide contact with the Board of Education and supervision to the buildings You can also use their support for the time it takes for building level professional development

14. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall14 Building Level Administrators The building principals are the key persons for successful implementation This is a general education initiative so the building principals need to be the leaders in the implementation process Forming a learning community for administrators can support them in the process of designing implementation

15. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall15 Essential Component 1: M ulti-tier Model

16. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall16 Learning Communities Learning communities meet to study a topic and discuss/ learn about it together. This model is helpful for RtI implementation because it allows the administrators to compare the experiences of their buildings. They can also share the results of each step in the process

17. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall17 Building Level Implementation The first step can be to examine how the IST is functioning. Is it using a “problem solving model” in the meetings? Are the recommendations building capacity for developing instructional interventions? Does the staff understand the focus of IST?

18. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall18 Building Level Implementation Use one of the RtI surveys to determine the needs of the building. Design awareness training for the staff Work with key members of the staff to discover and implement research based interventions, especially reading in grades K, 1, 2. Begin to use periodic measures of progress

19. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall19 Building Level Implementation Train a grade level of interested teachers in the measures Plan for “rolling out” training for other grade levels over time. Develop clear forms for the problem solving process teams.

20. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall20 Problem Solving Model A systematic, data-based, team driven practice Emphasizes team collaboration Reviews student strengths and weaknesses Identifies evidence-based interventions Collects data to monitor student progress Evaluates effectiveness of interventions

21. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall21 Challenges of RTI Developing a good Problem Solving Model. This could be implemented through the IST model. Creating district-wide understanding of the intervention in general education concept Maintaining fidelity of the interventions

22. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall22 Challenges of RTI Training for research-based reading interventions Ending the definition of special education as “the answer for all struggling learners”

23. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall23 References Kovaleski, J. & Prasse, D. Response to Instruction in the Identification of Learning Disabilities: A Guide for School Teams. NASP Communique’ Vol. 32#5 Specific Learning Disabilities: Finding Common Ground: A report developed by the ten organizations participating in the Learning Disabilities Roundtable. American Institutes for Research. July 25, 2002

24. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall24 References Reschly & Grimes (1995). Best practices in intellectual assessment in A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology III Beringer, V., Rury Smith, D. & O’Donnell, L. Alternative Three-tiered Model Integrates Biological and Instructional Research. NASP Communique’ Vol. 32#5 February 2004

25. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall25 References A.Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.). (2002). Best Practices in school psychology IV. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists Beringer: Best practices in reading, writing and math assessment-intervention links: A systems approach for schools, classrooms and individuals. Kovaleski: Best practices in operating pre-referral intervention teams. Shinn: Best practices in using CBM in a problem- solving model.

26. prepared by Arlene B. Crandall26 For the children

27. Thank you for your time and participation today. Arlene B. Crandall