Response to Intervention in General, Remedial, and Special Education

Response to Intervention in General, Remedial, and Special Education
Daniel J. Reschly Delaware Department of Education May 7, 2007 Reschly RTI

What To Do With Egbert?? 1st Grade, falling behind in reading
Slow progress compared to peers Likely to miss benchmarks related to passing 3rd Grade reading test Distractible, inattentive, disruptive, non-compliant Sound Familiar WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? Driven by Federal Legislation Consider NCLB and IDEIA Reschly RTI

What To Do With Egbert?? 9th Grade, failing 3 of 5 classes at first 9 weeks Attendance is declining Homework non completion Poor performance on weekly or unit tests Defiant, distractible, inattentive, disruptive, non-compliant Sound Familiar WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? Driven by Federal Legislation Consider NCLB and IDEIA Reschly RTI

Egbert in the Traditional System
Refer Egbert Preferral “intervention” (check a box) Comprehensive Evaluation-Battery of Tests, “common battery”? Assessment largely outside of the natural context Dubious generalizations from test behavior to classroom Eligibility assessment unrelated to intervention Team decision-making SLD diagnoses often inaccurate Reschly RTI

Can you blame somebody else?
PROBLEM SOLVING CHART Yes Does the *%$# thing work? No Don’t mess with it! You Idiot! Yes Did you mess with it? No No Hide it! Does anyone else know? Yes Will you catch hell? No Yes You poor slob! Ignore it Can you blame somebody else? No Yes NO PROBLEM

What Is Response to Intervention (RTI)?
Scientifically-based instruction/interventions matched to student needs Formative evaluation including frequent progress monitoring in relation to benchmarks, with decision rules applied Decisions driven by student RTI, including gen’l ed instruction/intervention, remedial services/individual interventions, sp ed eligibility, placement, annual review and exit Implementation requires: Allocating (aligning) resources to deliver effective interventions that produce improved child outcomes Reschly RTI

RTI Model Differences Restricted vs Comprehensive System Wide
LD Identification Do Tiers I and II, then traditional evaluation Or Use RTI in eligibility determination and in the design, implementation, and evaluation of IEPs Academic only or Academic and Behavior False dichotomies: Standard Protocol vs Problem Solving vs Recognition of Both Choices determined by nature of problem Use of both in many situations Reschly RTI

Order at: www.nasdse.org RESPONSE TO Intervention
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION Order at: Cost: $15 with discounts for large orders Reschly RTI

Purpose of the RTI Process
Improve results in academic, behavioral, and emotional regulation domains, through High quality interventions Formative evaluation Student results drive decisions about needs and intensity of interventions Improve, eliminate disproportionate representation Identification of disabilities through procedures that are valid and connected to effective special ed interventions Improve special education results and increase exit from sp ed Prevention and early identification-intervention Reschly RTI

Why RTI? Dissatisfaction with ach. results
Expensive programs with undocumented benefits, General Ed. Title I and Sp Ed Poor overall outcomes re: benchmark tests, graduate rates, early adult outcomes Overrepresentation in sp ed Disjointed programs across general, remedial and special ed.-compromised outcomes and wasted resources Reschly RTI

13 16 18 41 42 29 30 30 35 31 58 54 52 27 24 Reschly RTI

Special Education Placement Effects: High Incidence Disabilities
Treatment/Intervention aEffect Size EMR/Special Classes (IQ 60-75) Special Classes (IQ 75-90) Resource for SLD and E/BD Traditional Placement Practices Have Weak Relationships to Outcomes Special Education as a Solution? Note: Effect size is expressed in SD units, analogous to a z-score Reschly RTI

Old Assumptions re: High Incidence Disabilities (SLD, MMR, E/BD)
Disabilities Inherent in Individual?-BUT, Context and prevention are crucial Identify and Treat Underlying Causes-BUT, Failure of process training Prescribe Methods that Capitalize on Strengths and Avoid Weaknesses-BUT, Failure of Aptitude by Treatment Interaction in Research and Practice Reschly RTI

Old Assumptions, cont. Unique Treatment Methods and Teacher Training by Disability But, Same methods work for virtually all High Incidence I SWD, LD, ED, EMR IQ Essential to Accurate Classification-BUT Same kids found with problem solving processes and measures Identifying Disability and Sp Ed Placement Solves Problem Dubious Effects of Special Education Reschly RTI

Meaningfulness of Special Education High Incidence Categories (www
Meaningfulness of Special Education High Incidence Categories ( Table 1-13, retrieved Category Prevalence Range Factor of Notes MR: % (NJ) to 3.0% (WV) 7Xs (9 at 0.4) ED: % (AR) to 2.4% (DC) Xs (VT=2.0) LD: % (KY) to 7.7% (OK) Xs Sp/L: 0.5% (HI) to 4.3% (WV) Xs OHI: 0.5% (CA) to 2.4% (RI) Xs All: % (CO) to 15.9% (RI) Xs Notes: Child disability count as a percentage of the population. Reschly RTI

Some things do not make sense
Reschly RTI

Progression of Research, Policy, and Legal Requirements
RESEARCH: Scientific research with practice demonstrations leading to POLICY: Multiple policy analyses in presented in prestigious reports leading to FEDERAL LAW: Multiple layers of Federal legal requirements leading to STATE LAW: Changes in state rules leading to SCALING UP: Scaling up efforts in states Reschly RTI

What Works? See Kavale (2005), Learning Disabilities, 13, 127-138 and other sources
Treatment Effect Size Applied Behavior Analysis CBM+Graphing+Formative Evaluation + reinforcement Explicit Instruction and Problem Solving to 1.50 Comprehension Strategies Math Interventions to 1.10 Writing Interventions to .85 Reschly RTI

Policy and Legal Influences
NICHD LD Studies Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S. & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington DC: National Academy Press. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Panel Report LD Summit Researchers Recommendations (Bradley et al., 2002) Presidents Commission on Excellence in Special Education (2002) report, Reschly RTI

Commonalties in Policy Recommendations
Accountability-Improved results for all students and better results are possible!! (Gloeckler) Integration of general, remedial, and sp ed through multiple tiers of intervention Scientifically-based interventions with problem solving Progress monitoring with formative evaluation Decisions at all levels driven by child response to intervention Abandon IQ-Achievement discrepancy in LD Identification Reschly RTI

Progression of Federal General and Special Education Legislation
s To s Assistance Results [__________________________________________] ESEA EHA NCLB/ Rdg 1st IDEA 2004 Procedures Outcomes Number Served Improvement Reschly RTI

Major Legal Themes (NCLB, IDEA)
Scientifically-based instruction More frequent assessment, progress monitoring, formative evaluation Well integrated multiple tiers of Intervention Decisions driven by child responses to instruction-intervention in general, remedial, and special education Alignment of resources to enhance positive outcomes Reschly RTI

Changes in Legal Requirements IDEA (2004)
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 607(b), when determining whether a child has a specific learning disability as defined in section 602, a local educational agency 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. Reschly RTI

Response to Intervention (IDEA, 2004)
‘‘(B) ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY.—In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, a local educational agency may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as a part of the evaluation procedures described in paragraphs (2) and (3). Does response to intervention appear in the law? Reschly RTI

Final Regulation NEW AND SIGNIFICANT: (b must consider, as part of the evaluation described data that demonstrates that— (1) Prior to, or as a part of the referral process, the child was provided appropriate high-quality, research-based instruction in regular education settings, consistent with section 1111(b)(8)(D) and (E) of the ESEA, including that the instruction was delivered by qualified personnel; and (2) Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, was provided to the child's parents. Reschly RTI

Prevention-Early Intervention
LEA can use 15% of federal IDEA funds to support prevention and early identification-treatment Purpose: minimize over-identification and unnecessary sp ed referrals Provide academic and behavioral supports; and professional development re: early literacy and behavior MUST use the 15% if LEA has “significant disproportionality Reschly RTI

Enter a School-Wide Systems for Student Success
Multiple Tiers Implemented Through Progress Monitoring and Formative Evaluation (Sugai, Horner, & Gresham, 2002) Enter a School-Wide Systems for Student Success Academic Systems Behavioral Systems Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual and Small Groups Intense, Prolonged Intervention Intensive, Individual Interventions Individual and Small Groups Intense, Prolonged Interventions 5-10% 5-10% 10-15% Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) Standard protocol reading interventions 10-15% Targeted Small Group or Individual Interventions Some students (at-risk) Targeted Individual Behavior 80-85% Universal Interventions Effective Academic In- struction School-wide positive Behavior Effective classroom and Behavior management Reschly RTI

Key Mechanism: Formative Evaluation
Multi-Tiered Academic Interventions of Increasing Intensity and Measurement Precision Tier I: General Education: All students; Effective instruction, 80-85% at benchmarks Tier II: Standard Protocol and Problem Solving: (about 10 to 20 weeks) Small group and individualized interventions Decision Making: Continue Program, Modifications, Comprehensive Evaluation?? Tier III: More Intensive, Sustained Instruction in General and/or Special education Key Mechanism: Formative Evaluation Reschly RTI

Key Mechanism: Formative Evaluation
Multi-Tiered Behavior Interventions of Increasing Intensity and Measurement Precision Level I: General Education : School wide positive discipline, effective classroom organization and management, teacher assistance teams Level II: Individualized Problem Solving re: Behavior: Targeted, intense individual interventions in general education Decision Making? Continue Program, Modifications, Comprehensive Evaluation Level III: More Intensive, Sustained Instruction in General or Special education Key Mechanism: Formative Evaluation Reschly RTI

Formative Evaluation Frequent assessment of progress
Referenced to goals based on benchmarks toward passing state tests Decision rules regarding modification of goals or instructional programs All decisions about student needs and instructional intensity are based on child RTI Reschly RTI

Characteristics of Effective Formative Evaluation Measures
Direct measures of skills Natural settings Efficient re: costs and time required Sensitive to small increments of growth in relevant skills Results can be graphed in relation to goals Reliable in terms of stability Valid re: relationship to broad indicators of competence Example: CBM oral reading fluency and reading comprehension Reschly RTI

Tier I: General Education, Universal Stage, Primary Prevention
Academics and Behavior Scientifically-based Explicit instruction Systematic intervention Inter-related, reciprocal relationships, mutually supported Discuss separately here, but acknowledge the essential inter-relationship of academics and behavior Reschly RTI

Tier I: Academic Interventions
Scientifically-based instruction in reading Curricula-content-Big ideas, e.g., reading Phonemic Awareness Alphabetic principles Fluency Vocabulary Comprehension Study of IHEs pre-service preparation in rdg 14 of 72 taught all 5 components and many taught none, see Reschly RTI

IHEs and SBRR Five Components
Source Sample N=72 5 Components Phonemic Alphabetic Fluency Vocabulary Compre-hension 43% N=31 13% 15% 7% 11% 11% N=11 N=8 N=8 N=9 N=5 Components

Tier I: Academic Interventions
Teaching Methodology Explicit Instruction Modeling, guided practice, practice to automaticity, integration; You do it with feedback, You do it independently, You do it automatically Frequent responding with feedback, Brisk pace Systematic Instruction Sequential, Hierarchical Include all reading components each day Beat the odds teachers: Reschly RTI

Tier I: Assessment: Academics
Routine Assessment of Progress Screen all students, begin in kindergarten; 3 times per year with appropriate early literacy measures More intense instruction and monitoring within classroom for students below trajectories toward passing state benchmark tests Grouping, instructional materials, time, paraprofessionals Pat Vadasy at U of WA Increase assessment to 2 Xs per month Reschly RTI

Reading Benchmarks (DIBELS)
Age/Grade Measure Fluency (FL) Criterion Winter KTG Letter Naming Fl Initial Sound Fl 25 sounds per minute (pm) Spring KTG Phoneme Seg 35 sounds pm Winter 1st gr. Spring 1st gr. Spring 2nd gr. Spring 3rd gr. Nonsense WD Oral Rdg Fluency Oral Reg Fluency 50 sounds pm 40 wds pm 90 wds pm 110 wds pm Reschly RTI

Benchmark: Winter KTG 25 sounds correct/min.
KTG: Initial Sound Fluency Fall to January Yr. Benchmark: Winter KTG 25 sounds correct/min. New KTG Teacher and Traditional Instruction Reschly RTI

KTG: Initial Sound Fluency Fall to January Yr. Benchmark: Winter KTG 25 sounds correct/min. Experienced Teacher Direct Instruction Reschly RTI

Phoneme Seg. Fluency: Jan to May 05-06 Yr. Benchmark: 35 correct
New KTG Teacher and Traditional Instruction Reschly RTI

Benchmark: May 35 per minute
Phoneme Seg. Fluency: Jan to May Yr. Benchmark: May 35 per minute Experienced Teacher Direct Instruction Reschly RTI

Benchmark: 25 correct per minute
Nonsense Word Fluency: Jan to May Yr. Benchmark: 25 correct per minute New KTG Teacher and Traditional Instruction Reschly RTI

Benchmark: 25 correct per minute
Nonsense Word Fluency: Jan to May Yr. Benchmark: 25 correct per minute Experienced Teacher Direct Instruction Reschly RTI

KTG: Initial Sound Fluency Fall to January Yr. Benchmark: Winter KTG 25 sounds correct/min. Students needing greater Gen’l Ed monitoring and Interventions Reschly RTI

Benchmark: Winter First Grade
1st Gr. Nonsense Word Fluency Benchmark: Winter First Grade 50 Words Per Minute ?? Reschly RTI

Second Grade Oral Reading Fluency Benchmark: End of 1st=42 WCM
Winter=71 WCM End of 2nd=100 WCM ?? Reschly RTI

Behavioral Assessment and CBM Measures
Focused on determination of change Formative evaluation critical Tied to effective practices and better outcomes Applications in general, remedial, and special education Identification of disabilities-integrates identification with treatment Reschly RTI

Why Behavior Assessment (including CBM)
Determine current levels in academics and behavior; degree of need Monitor progress, assess change Foundation for formative evaluation-improving interventions Determine success of interventions Decisions based in child response to interventions Reschly RTI

Deno & Mirkin (1977) Breakthrough Brief samples of behavior
Foundations of CBM Deno & Mirkin (1977) Breakthrough Brief samples of behavior Use of oral reading fluency samples Production per unit of time Fluency and accuracy combined Words read correct per minute Math-digits correct Spelling-letters correct Reschly RTI

Prior Barriers to CBM Use
Cumbersome for practitioners, developing own passages Conceptual issues: Passages from curriculum or generic passages? Teachers’ concerns about comprehension: Word calling?? Inertia; satisfaction with current practices IDEA: assessment of change not required Reschly RTI

Combines fluency (speed) and accuracy
Reading CBM Combines fluency (speed) and accuracy Broad range of competencies including Letter naming (Ktg) Sound identification (Ktg) Nonsense words or real word identification (Ktg to first grade) Oral reading fluency (mid first to high school Comprehension (maze, other methods) Reschly RTI

Importance of Standardized CBM Procedures
Standardized meaning uniformity in administration, scoring, interpretation Prerequisite to use of data in Determining risk status within classroom or school Measuring change for individuals or groups Predicting later performance Reschly RTI

Oral Reading Fluency What is it? Why do it? Word Calling Myth
Reading aloud fluently and accurately from text. Why do it? Indicator of proficiency in reading that is sensitive to growth Highly correlated with performance on standardized tests and tests of comprehension Provides information that may be used to evaluate effects of instruction Word Calling Myth Reschly RTI

Administering Oral Reading Passages
Essential Items -One student copy -One administration copy -Timer or stopwatch (make sure to time exactly 1 min) -Administration script Reschly RTI

Instructions to Child When I say “please begin” start reading aloud at the top of this page. Read across the page. [Demonstrate by pointing] Try to read each word. If you come to a word you don’t know, I’ll tell it to you. If you get to the end of the page, start over. Be sure to do your best reading. Are there any questions? [Pause] Please begin. Reschly RTI

Examiner’s Administration Rules
After reading instructions to students, Start timer. If the student fails to say the first word of the passage after 3 sec., tell him/her the word and mark it incorrect. If the student stops or struggles with a word for 3 seconds, tell the student the word and mark it incorrect. If the student reaches the end of the page and does not continue, point to the first word and ask the student to start over. At the end of 1 minute, place a bracket after the last word and say, please stop. Reschly RTI

Scoring Rules Words must be pronounced correctly to be counted as correct (disregard if mispronunciations due to speech problems or dialect) Ignore inserted or repeated words Reschly RTI

ORF Passage: Making Friends (from Deno and Amy Reschly)
There once was a little girl named Ann who was very shy. She was too shy to make friends Ann lived in an apartment building with her mother 28 and brother. Ann liked to play at the playground near her apartment building One day Ann was playing on the swings when 50 Total words read = 49 Words read incorrectly = 3 Words read correctly = 46 Reschly RTI

What is recorded? Give 3 Passages Record the Median Score Example:
If a student’s scores on the 3 passages were: 24 words read correctly 38 words read correctly 35 words read correctly GO TO VIDEO Reschly RTI

Sample passage from DIBELS, http://dibels.uoregon.edu/
The Ant Hill Dad and I took a hike in the woods. We walked for a long time and stopped to take a rest. We sat down on a log and had a 30 drink of water. A big hill was nearby Dad said, "Look, there's an ant hill." I walked up to the hill and took a closer peek. At first it looked just like a dirt hill. Then I noticed a few ants running around. I looked closer. Reschly RTI

I was so sad. This was the day we were going to the park for 15
Sample passage from DIBELS, The Rainy Day Picnic I was so sad. This was the day we were going to the park for 15 a picnic. I wanted to go to the playground. I wanted to swing. I 29 wanted to lay on the grass and look up at the fluffy clouds. But 43 that morning it was raining. There were puddles everywhere. 52 And we could hear thunder. I started to cry My mother said, "Wait! We will still have the picnic!" 71 I cried, "But how? It won't be fun if it's wet!" 82 Reschly RTI

Visiting Aunt Rose My Aunt Rose invited me to spend the weekend. Aunt Rose 11 doesn't have kids. She said I could be her kid for two days. She's 25 like my big sister I like to go to visit my Aunt Rose's home. She likes to do the 44 same things I like. I like to go swimming. So does my Aunt 57 Rose. The pool where she goes also has a hot tub. I like to sit in 73 the hot tub. So does my Aunt Rose. I always bring my swimming 86 Reschly RTI

The Robin's Nest There was a robin's nest outside our kitchen window. 'I he 10 nest was in a tall bush. The mother robin sat in the nest all day 25 long. One day when I was watching, the mother bird flew away. 37 I saw the eggs she was sitting on. There were four blue eggs. 50 I watched and watched. Pretty soon the eggs started to move. 61 I watched some more until the eggs started to crack. Finally-, the 73 eggs hatched. I saw four baby birds. The baby birds opened their 85 beaks wide. I heard them peeping. Soon the mother bird came 96 back. Then the mother robin put worms in their mouths. 106 Reschly RTI

Resources for Reading and Interventions
Good & Kaminski: DIBELS Gary Germann and Mark Shinn AIMSWEB ; James Wright Vaughn-Gross Reading Center Florida Reading Center-Torgesen/Wagner Reschly RTI

Math CBM Scoring rule: Count the number of correctly written digits in the problems 64 x 722 128 Answer= 128 448__ 46208 Reschly RTI

Math CBM Scoring rule: Count the number of correctly written digits in the problems 64 x 722 128 3 pts Answer=17 pts pts pts Reschly RTI

Math CBM Scoring rule: Count the number of correctly written digits in the problems 64 x 722 126 2 pts Answer=12 pts pts pts Reschly RTI

Positive Behavior Supports (www.pbis.org)
Tier I Behavior Positive Behavior Supports ( Universal screening for behavior in early grades Classroom organization and behavior management Teacher Assistance Teams (many names) Reschly RTI

Tier I Prevention School-wide Positive Behavior Supports
National Technical Assistance Center at PBS is a broad range of systemic & individualized strategies for achieving important social & learning outcomes while preventing problem behavior with all students. Reschly RTI

PBIS: Characteristics of Support
1. Common purpose & approach to discipline 2. Clear set of positive expectations & behaviors 3. Procedures for teaching expected behavior 4. Continuum of procedures for encouraging expected behavior 5. Continuum of procedures for discouraging inappropriate behavior 6. Procedures for on-going monitoring & evaluation Reschly RTI

Tier I Behavior: Early Screening
Focus on classroom and individuals Screen all children for behavior Aggressive behaviors-identify and treat at young ages Treat through age 8; Manage after age 8 Early intervention much more effective than later Social isolation Bullying Classroom related social skills (or academic enablers Reschly RTI

Tier I Behavior Importance of Prevention and Early Identification-Early Treatment
Walker et al (1995) “If antisocial behavior is not changed by the end of grade 3, it should be treated as a chronic condition much like diabetes. That is, it cannot be cured, but managed with the appropriate supports and continuing intervention” (p. 6). Reschly RTI

Multiple Gating Procedures (Walker & Severson, 1995) Sopris West
Teacher Ranking of Children ( 3 highest ranked) on Externalizing and Internalizing Behaviors Teacher Rating (Exceeds Norms) Direct Observations and Parental Questionnaire Focused Interventions Reschly RTI

Behavioral Earthquakes
Critical Behavioral Events High impact-great intensity-low frequency behaviors: Behavioral Earthquakes Fire setting, cruelty, extreme aggressiveness, suicide threats/attempts, physical confrontation, use of weapons, etc. Should provoke immediate referral School Archival Records Search (SARS)-Sopris Reschly RTI

Tier I: Behavior cont.: Classroom Organization and Behavior Management (
Kellam, Baltimore Schools Students randomly assigned to 1st grade teachers, then classroom was the unit of analysis Classrooms observed during first 9 wks., high rates of disruptive behavior and aggression, large differences across classrooms Classrooms randomly assigned to, Experimental condition: Good Behavior Game (Barrish, et al, 1969; Sulzer-Azaroff & Mayer, 1991) vs. Control condition of in-service on general curriculum issues Reschly RTI

Kellam Research: Classroom Organization and Management
Good Behavior Game (Barrish, et al., 1969) Group contingency Two groups formed into teams Define rules and positive behaviors Teams compete for positive consequences Team with highest rate of appropriate behaviors earn “rewards” Lining up first, Help teacher pick-up classroom, free time, etc. Reschly RTI

Kellam Research: Effects of Good Behavior Game Were Statistically Significant
Aggression and disruptive behavior continued in control classrooms Marked reduction in experimental condition Experimental classrooms had higher academic productivity and achievement Aggressive students in both conditions followed through 6th grade and first grade classroom effects persisted First grade experience sets academic and behavioral trajectory Reschly RTI

Tier I: Implications of Behavior
Classroom organization and behavior management are crucial to student success “Teacher’s skills at classroom management were then critical to children’s socialization, particularly in the face of family poverty.” (Kellam, et al., 1998a, p. 182) “Teacher training typically does not provide effective methods and experience in classroom behavior management.” (Kellam, et al., 1998, p. 182). Relatively simple, cost effective interventions can produce large and persistent effects Reschly RTI

Teacher Support Teams For students who need additional support and intervention (1% to 5% of students) Classroom based, teacher and/or team develops One or two session problem solving Minimal data requirements Attempts over 3-4 weeks Produce changes, then must sustain Apply basic problem solving procedures Reschly RTI

Basic Problem Solving (Teachers and School Teams) (Heartland Area Education Agency, Johnston, IA)
• Define the Problem (Screening and Diagnostic Assessments) What is the problem and why is it happening? • Develop a Plan (Goal Setting and Planning) • Evaluate (Progress Monitoring Assessment) What are we going to do? Did our plan work? • Implement Plan (Treatment Integrity) Reschly RTI Carry out the intervention

Tier I: Teacher Support Team Analysis
What is student doing and why is it a problem When is student successful and less likely to misbehave? When is student less successful and more likely to misbehave Why does behavior occur, what is student getting from the behavior What other factors contribute to the behavior Consider attention, escape, etc. Reschly RTI

Principles: Secondary Level (Sprick, R. S. (2006)
Principles: Secondary Level (Sprick, R.S. (2006). Discipline in the secondary classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.) ( ) Basic behavioral strategies, Key concepts Instructional design and evaluation systems Prepare for routines and procedures Expectations: Teach students to be successful Rules and consequences, responding to misbehavior Motivation: Enhancing desire to succeed Proactive planning for misbehavior Reschly RTI

Middle and High School RTI Applications
Same principles and goals: Improve Results Evidence-based interventions matched to student needs implemented with good fidelity Data-based, progress monitoring with formative evaluation, that is, data on initial status, goals related to benchmarks, progress monitoring against goals, and changes in interventions based on progress Decisions based on student responses to interventions Reschly RTI

Academic skills deficits
Middle and High School RTI Applications Frequent Goals at Middle and High School Academic skills deficits Teach skills in basic areas including reading and math See Florida web site for teaching reading to adolescents at CBM used, progress at > 1 word correct growth per week, goals, graphs, formative evaluation, etc. Significant needs for basic instruction Reschly RTI

Many students with these needs
Middle and High School RTI Applications Course Involvement and Completion Learning strategies: Systematic teaching of methods to learn content Taught in context of general education classes, by general education teachers or special education teachers (resource program) Significant effect sizes related to completion of courses, improved grades, and improved content mastery Many students with these needs Reschly RTI

Middle and High School RTI Applications Effort and Work Completion
Can Do But Won’t Do Unintended reinforcement for poor effort and low productivity Interventions do improve both effort and productivity Data are critical!!! Data followed by interventions, etc. Reschly RTI

Drop out not an event, but a process
Middle and High School RTI Applications School Involvement and Drop Out Drop out not an event, but a process Encouragement to leave or to stay?? Drop out prevention measures Find at risk kids Ensure teacher encouragement, someone who cares, monitors, encourages Formal programs like Check and Connect Reschly RTI

Middle and High School RTI Applications Middle and High School Problem Solving
Define problem Determine data, several weeks, months, years depending on the problem Establish goals, Implement interventions, Monitor progress, Change interventions as necessary Evaluate results Reschly RTI

Middle and High School RTI Applications Problem Solving Example
Drop Out Scientifically-based interventions Identify proxies for drop out to permit early intervention, e. g., school attendance, disciplinary referrals, failing courses, etc. Gather data on current conditions Establish goals Implement interventions Monitor progress and change intervention if results do not meet reasonable goals Reschly RTI

Middle and High School RTI Applications Problem Solving Example
Failing courses Current status Causes of failure (effort vs skills or both) Goals for improvement (without lowering standards) Interventions (brainstorm) Monitor progress, change interventions as needed Evaluate results Reschly RTI

Summary of Tier I Universal level, all students
Scientifically-based, right content and direct instruction Greater intensity and increased measurement precision for students below benchmark trajectories Criterion for success? 80% to 85% are at or above benchmarks Assess classrooms, schools, districts Identify students needing additional assistance Reschly RTI

Tier II: Academic and Behavioral Interventions
Individual behavior interventions in general education that meet all criteria for problem solving Individual or small group academic interventions, following Standard protocol interventions (reading) Individualized academic Evidence based practices. Reschly RTI

Tier II Behavior: Problem Solving Criteria
Behavioral definition of the problem Collection of data reflecting current level of performance Comparison of current level of performance to expectations (peer comparisons, age or grade norms) Development of goals for change in performance Analysis of conditions (including prerequisite and current skills levels) Reschly RTI

Tier II Behavior: Problem Solving Criteria cont.
Development of an intervention plan that is written, systematic, and based on scientifically-based instructional or behavioral intervention principles Implementation of the plan with treatment fidelity checks Reschly RTI

Tier II Behavior: Problem Solving Criteria cont.
Progress monitoring data collected frequently, represented graphically, and results compared to goals Changes are made in the intervention based on progress monitoring data Evaluation of results with decisions made to consider more intensive interventions which may be special education Reschly RTI

Example of Tier II academic intervention
Tier II Academic Interventions (Vaughn et al., 2003 Exceptional Children) Goals: Move performance to benchmark trajectories and, If needed, consider more intensive interventions Example of Tier II academic intervention Small group, N=4-5, pull out, similar needs 30 to 35 minutes per day in addition to classroom instruction Progress monitoring weekly 10 to 20 weeks of instruction 5-component reading interventions, with emphasis on weak components Reschly RTI

Tier II: Academics and Behavior
Targeted individual interventions in classrooms and in standard protocol academic settings Behavior (attention and on task) predict outcomes of academic interventions) Standard protocol interventions use a point system to prompt and reinforce task engagement Improved behavior often is crucial to persistence of academic interventions effects over time and generalization to classroom settings Reschly RTI

Standard Protocol Reading Models for Tier II
U Texas, Vaughn Florida State Torgesen Reading five domains taught each day Direct instruction Weekly progress monitoring Individual graphs, progress against goals referenced to benchmarks Decisions determined by student response Fade Tier II and return to general education Consider Tier III based on insufficient response Reschly RTI

Graph Current Status Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark=24 Egbert=11
Weeks Reschly RTI

Determine Goal: Class=1
Determine Goal: Class=1.5 wd growth per week; Egbert Goal: 2 wd growth per week Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Class=24 Egbert=11 Egbert goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Monitor Egbert’s Progress Relative to Goal
Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Class=24 Egbert=11 Egbert goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Formative Evaluation: Change Intervention
Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Class=24 Egbert=11 Egbert goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Continue Intervention and Monitor Progress
Change Intervention Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Class=24 Egbert=11 Egbert goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Raise Goal to 2.5 WCM Growth
Change Intervention Change Goal Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Class=24 Egbert=11 Egbert goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Continue Intervention and Monitor Progress
Change Intervention Change Goal Fade Tier II Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Class=24 Egbert=11 Egbert goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Decisions Re: Egbert Fade Tier II academic intervention
Reduce number of weekly sessions Monitor progress to ensure continued progress Evaluate behavioral intervention (not shown here) Depending on results, consider enhancing, fading, or discontinuing Do NOT consider more intensive interventions Reschly RTI

Prevention of Special Education
President’s Commission (2002) Values and Outcomes: Efficacy of special education is not universally documented—lowered expectations, reduced academic press Later educational opportunities typically are better if learning and behavior problems can be resolved in early grades Probable later career opportunities are better if students can complete general education programs Prevention and early intervention enhance positive outcomes and expand educational and career opportunities Reschly RTI

Case II: Egberta, Academic Intervention
Egberta (Egbert’s twin sister) Similar performance in reading No behavioral issues, described as quiet, cooperative child who tries hard and does not disrupt the class Would not have been referred by teacher, but discovered through universal screening Reschly RTI

Egberta: Determine Goal: Class=1
Egberta: Determine Goal: Class=1.5 wd growth per week; Egberta Goal: 2 wd growth per week Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Class=24 Egberta=11 Egbert goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Monitor Egberta’s Progress Relative to Goal
Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Class=24 Egberta=11 Egberta goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Change Egberta’s Intervention
Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Class=24 Egberta=11 Egberta goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Implement Revised Intervention and Continue to Monitor Progress
Change Intervention Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Egberta goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Implement Second Intervention Revision
Change Intervention Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Egberta goal line Weeks Reschly RTI

Gap Not Closing: Consider Eligibility and More Intensive Interventions
Change Intervention Class WCM=54 Words Correct Per Minute Benchmark Egberta WCM=32 Weeks Reschly RTI

Egberta Consideration of Eligibility
Levels Difference: Large performance differences compared to peers and benchmark expectations in relevant domains of behavior Rate Difference: Large differences in rate of learning compared to peers and trajectories toward benchmark standards when provided with high quality interventions implemented over a significant period Documented Adverse Impact on Education Documented Need for Special Education Exit Criteria Exclusion Factors: Rule out MR etc. Reschly RTI

What is a Comprehensive Evaluation
Note Federal Regulation, (g) The child is assessed in all areas related to the suspected disability, including, if appropriate, health, vision, hearing, social and emotional status, general intelligence, academic performance, communicative status, and motor abilities. (34 C.F.R Meaning? Note “if appropriate” Reschly RTI

Multiple domains must be considered
Federal Requirements Multiple domains must be considered Screening in multiple domains followed by, if appropriate, …… If potential educationally related deficits are suggested by screening, THEN In depth assessment in the domain Principle: If screening suggests adequate functioning, then in depth assessment is wasteful and irrelevant Reschly RTI

Comprehensive Evaluation: After Tier II
Domain Screening If depth, if appropriate Possible Decision Health Nurse, records Referral MD Eval Medical condition Vision Ophthalmology Visual Impairment Hearing Otological, Audiologist Hearing Impairment Intelligence Records, Tch ratings, ach. tests Psychologist, Gen’l Intell Functioning (GIF) Sig subaverage GIF, possible MR, possible sp ed Reschly RTI

Comprehensive Evaluation: After Tier II
Domain Screening In Depth, If Appropriate Possible Decision Reading Class work, Tch eval., CBM, group tests Individual tests, diagnostic tests More intense intervention, possible sp ed Math Adaptive Behavior Records, Tch checklist Observations Parent interview Possible eligibility for MR Written Language Reschly RTI

Comprehensive Evaluation: Post Tier II
Domain Screening In depth, if appropriate Possible Decision Communication Tchr Observations, Sp/L screening Sp/L eval, tests, obs. Sp/Lang need, therapy Behavior Tchr judgment, checklists, nomination Observation, Interview, Indiv intervention Emotional Regulation More intense intervention, possible sp ed Motor Physical, Tch, PE observations Medical evaluation Reschly RTI

Special Education Eligibility Determination Using RTI
Recall problems with current system Integrate identificaton with treatment Level of skills Pattern of skills, deficits and strengths Evaluation of progress Evaluation of outcomes Enhance effectiveness of special education Reschly RTI

Old Models of SLD Identification
Problems with severe discrepancy criteria Unreliable (especially stability of discrepancy scores) Invalid (IQ discrepant poor readers do NOT respond better than IQ non-discrepant poor readers to reading instruction) Causes Harm (Wait to Fail) Reschly RTI

Old Models of SLD continued
Cognitive processing option ?? Scatter is normal, virtually all children will show significant strengths and weaknesses Pattern of cognitive processes unrelated to More accurate SLD identification Improved instruction Improved child outcomes No scientifically-based studies showing benefits of designing instruction from cognitive profiles Vested interests? and Burden of proof Reschly RTI

Cognitive Processing Strengths and Weaknesses
ALL children have strengths and weaknesses Normal readers? Not referred despite cognitive strengths and weaknesses Poor readers? May be referred and, if so, cognitive strengths and weaknesses will be found So what?? Improve accuracy of identification? Improve interventions? Cash validity is not sufficient Reschly RTI

Cognitive Processing and Interventions: ATI or Matching Strengths Effects
Treatment/Intervention Effect Size Modality Matched Instr. (Aud.) +.03 Modality Matched Instr. (Vis.) +.04 Simultaneous/Successive ?? Right Brain/Left Brain .?? Cultural Leaning Style NOTHING FOR KIDS FEEL GOOD ASSESSMENT Reschly RTI

Results of ATI Research
King of England describing his Danish brother-in-law: There is nothing there. Cronbach, (1975). “Once we attend to interactions, we enter a hall of mirrors that extends to infinity.” (p. 119) Kavale (1999) No supportive data, but cannot kill “Phoenix-like” processing claims Vaughn and Linan-Thompson (2003), “There is no empirical support for the use of modality-matched instruction or learning styles as a means to enhance outcomes for students with LD.” (p. 142). Reschly RTI

Challenge to Cognitive Processing Advocates in SLD
Show the field one scientifically-based study confirming a statistically significant interaction between cognitive processing pattern and teaching methodology OR Document how cognitive processing can be used by practitioners to make reliable and valid SLD diagnoses, using the joint APA-AERA-NCME Test Standards? Reschly RTI

Digression: Neuropsychology and Neuroscience
Distinguish between neuropsychology and neuroscience Neuropsychology is dependent on psychometric profiles Difference scores are less reliable Scatter is normal Base rates for profile variations Flat profiles are atypical Nearly all have profile variations Reschly RTI

Neuroscience Findings
Instruction in decoding changes brain functioning on fMRI Neuroscience findings generally refute traditional neuropsychology with learning problems Neurological functioning more dynamic, less static Little practical application of fMRI to current school psychology practice No unique LD markers!! Reschly RTI

Digression: fMRI Studies
Science article: fMRIs of boys and girls engaged in decoding-Girls used both hemispheres, boys one Implications?? Do fMRI to find real LD? Abandon IQ and go to fMRIs Trade the hatchback for an 18 wheeler Cost issues: $3m per machine, plus maintenance Reschly RTI

More fMRI Implications
Delay reading until both hemispheres work for males simultaneously So that is going to happen? Equity issue---restrict girls to one hemisphere; hemispherectomy Hey, fair is fair Improve male-female communication if females could use only one hemisphere at a time Wait until I tell Krisann Reschly RTI

Disproportionality Legal Requirements
§ Overidentification and disproportionality States must collect data on to determine if significant disproportionality by race exists re: Identification of students with disabilities by category Placement options used, i.e., LRE profile Incidence and kind of disciplinary actions including suspensions and expulsions Reschly RTI

Disproportionality Legal Requirements
§ Overidentification and disproportionality continued If significant disproportionality exists, the state must Review and, if appropriate, revise the policies, procedures, and practices used in identification or placement Allocate 15% of IDEA funds to EIS, especially focusing on children significantly overidentified Require the LEA to publicly report on the revision of policies, practices, and procedures described under paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Reschly RTI

NRC Overrepresentation Panel: Digression: Disproportionality
What were the real issues? Was IQ the issue? Did an IQ test ban resolve disproportionality or improve outcomes Reschly (1980) Right problem-Wrong Solution Reschly RTI

NRC Report: Causes of Overrepresentation
Biological factors Social factors General education experiences Special education system Reschly RTI

Centrality of Outcomes in Disproportionality
Judge Peckham commenting on the 1979 Trial Opinion ban on IQ tests, “… clearly limited to the use of IQ tests in the assessment and placement of African-American students in dead end programs such as MMR.” (Crawford and Larry P., 1992, p. 15). Reschly RTI

Centrality of Outcomes in Disproportionality, cont.
“ Despite the Defendants’ attempts to characterize the court’s 1979 order as a referendum on the discriminatory nature of IQ testing, this court’s review of the decision reveals that the decision was largely concerned with the harm to African-American children resulting from improper placement in dead-end educational programs.” (Crawford and Larry P., 1992, p.23).” Reschly RTI

Overrepresentation Panel NRC Recommendations
Universal early screening for academic and behavioral problems (Ktg-Grade2) Early identification-interventions Multi-tiered academic and behavioral interventions RtI for eligibility-eliminate IQ for LD Eligibility: non-categorical for high incidence disabilities OR change current classification criteria for LD Reschly RTI

Overall Conclusion “ There is substantial evidence with regard to both behavior and achievement that early identification and intervention is more effective than later identification and intervention.” Executive Summary, p. 5 Efficacy of special education with reading problems after grade 3? Reschly RTI

Solutions to Significant Disproportionality
Prevention, especially improving reading ~60% of 4th grade black students read below basic; inexcusable! Eligibility determination procedures and decision making Focus on RTI and needs, consider alternatives to sp ed Intensive interventions and special education exit for ~20% to 40% Torgesen et al. studies Reschly RTI

Overrepresentation Panel NRC Recommendations cont.
…. no IQ test would be required, and the results of an IQ test would not be a primary criterion on which eligibility rests. Because of the irreducible importance of context in the recognition and nurturance of achievement, the committee regards the effort to assess students’ decontextualized potential or ability as inappropriate and scientifically invalid. (p. 313). Reschly RTI

RTI in Special Education Programs
Special education programs should be, Scientifically based Matched to student need Progress monitoring against goals (exit criteria) Formative evaluation Goal of passing benchmark tests, exiting Current special education programs???? Reschly RTI

Special Education for Students with High Incidence Disabilities
Mild Mental Retardation Emotional Disturbance Specific Learning Disability Other Health Impaired-Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rate is 1% or more of the general student population Reschly RTI

High Incidence Disabilities
School age identification Usually not identified as adults Teacher referral due to poor achievement plus, for many, disruptive behavior No identifiable biological anomaly, normal appearance Reading is a major concern for most (70%-80%) Reschly RTI

Improving IEPs Connect individual evaluation with IEP with Special Education Interventions Critical IEP Components (relevant to the intervention) (not an exhaustive list) Present Levels of Educational Performance Measurable Annual Goals Specifically designed instruction provided by qualified personnel Participation in the general education curriculum and state wide assessments Reschly RTI

Present Levels of Educational Performance
Must be related to the full and individual evaluation Desirable Stated in terms of the school curriculum Specification of gaps between current performance and trajectories toward reaching benchmarks Exit criteria for special education dismissal Reschly RTI

Measurable Annual Goals
Goals are described in objective, measurable terms Goals are stated in terms of the general education curriculum Rate of progress specified, graphed Skills specified Progress compared to goals Interventions changed or goals changed depending on progress Reschly RTI

Specially Designed Instruction
Uniqueness of special education is NOT in different methodologies BUT IS IN Intensity, frequency of progress monitoring and formative evaluation, precision of goals, and specificity of instruction Intensity involves time, group size Specificity of instruction, thoroughness of skills specification, intentional teaching, integration with other skills Application of explicit, systematic instructional methods Reschly RTI

Special Education Final Remarks
Special education can be effective Set of services brought to students, not a place Integrated with general education curriculum Strong accountability Implementation of scientifically based interventions with Specification of goals Frequent progress monitoring Formative evaluation Exit criteria Reschly RTI

Critical Skills/Competencies
Problem solving-interviewing skills Behavior assessment including CBM Powerful instructional interventions Powerful behavior change interventions Relationship skills Tailoring assessment to referral concerns Reschly RTI

Continuing Education: Problem solving and system design
Reschly, D. J., Tilly, W. D. III, & Grimes, J. P. (Eds.). (1999). Special education in transition: Functional assessment and noncategorical programming. Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Bergan, J. R., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1990). Behavioral consultation and therapy. New York: Plenum. Shinn, M. R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford Press. Reschly RTI

Continuing Education: CBM, CBE, Behavioral Assessment
Shinn, M. R. (Ed.) (1998). Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement: New York: Guilford Press. Shapiro, E. S. (Ed.) (1996). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (2nd Ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Shapiro, E. S., & Kratochwill, T. R. (Eds.). (2000). Behavioral assessment in schools: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd Ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Reschly RTI

Continuing Education: Academic and Behavioral Interventions
Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Mayer, G. R. (1991). Behavior analysis for lasting change. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart, Winston. Howell, K. & Nolet, V. (2000). Curriculum-based evaluation: Teaching and decision making (3rd Ed.). Atlanta, GA: Wadsworth. Shinn, M.R., Walker, H.M., & Stoner, G. (2002). Interventions for academic and behaviors problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches. Bethesda, MD: NASP Reschly RTI

Summary Moving from where we are to where we need to be is a huge challenge for the new century BUT I Believe The Best Is Yet To Be Reschly RTI

Response to Intervention in General, Remedial, and Special Education

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Response to Intervention in General, Remedial, and Special Education"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Response to Intervention in General, Remedial, and Special Education

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Response to Intervention in General, Remedial, and Special Education"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback