1. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org Implementing 'Response to Intervention': A Guide for Schools Jim Wright www.interventioncentral.org

2. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org RTI: A Guide for Schools RTI: Key Concepts Promoting Teacher Use of Tier 1 Interventions Tiers 1 - 3: Building a Continuum of RTI Support RTI Progress-Monitoring Tools Creating RTI Special Education Decision Rules

3. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org RTI: Key Concepts

4. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 4 Five Core Components of RTI Service Delivery 1.Student services are arranged in a multi-tier model 2.Data are collected to assess student baseline levels and to make decisions about student progress 3.Interventions are ‘evidence-based’ 4.The ‘procedural integrity’ of interventions is measured 5.RTI is implemented and developed at the school- and district-level to be scalable and sustainable over time Source: Glover, T. A., & DiPerna, J. C. (2007). Service delivery for response to intervention: Core components and directions for future research. School Psychology Review, 36, 526-540.

5. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 5 RTI ‘Pyramid of Interventions’ Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1: Universal interventions. Available to all students in a classroom or school. Can consist of whole-group or individual strategies or supports. Tier 2 Individualized interventions. Subset of students receive interventions targeting specific needs. Tier 3: Intensive interventions. Students who are ‘non- responders’ to Tiers I & II may be eligible for special education services, intensive interventions.

6. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 6 At the Federal Level: A ‘Hands-Off Approach to RTI Implementation “There are many RTI models and the regulations are written to accommodate the many different models that are currently in use. The Department does not mandate or endorse any particular model. Rather, the regulations provide States with the flexibility to adopt criteria that best meet local needs. Language that is more specific or prescriptive would not be appropriate. For example, while we recognize that rate of learning is often a key variable in assessing a child’s response to intervention, it would not be appropriate for the regulations to set a standard for responsiveness or improvement in the rate of learning.” p. 46653 Source: U.S. Department of Education. (2006). Assistance to States for the education of children with disabilities and preschool grants for children with disabilities; final rule. 71 Fed. Reg. (August 14, 2006) 34 CFR Parts 300 and 301.

7. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 7 The Purpose of RTI in Schools: What Students Should It Serve? Early Identification. As students begin to show need for academic support, the RTI model proactively supports them with early interventions to close the skill or performance gap with peers. Chronically At-Risk. Students whose school performance is marginal across school years but who do not qualify for special education services are identified by the RTI Team and provided with ongoing intervention support. Special Education. Students who fail to respond to scientifically valid general-education interventions implemented with integrity are classified as ‘non-responders’ and found eligible for special education.

8. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 8 What previous approach to diagnosing Learning Disabilities does RTI replace? Prior to RTI, many states used a ‘Test-Score Discrepancy Model’ to identify Learning Disabilities. A student with significant academic delays would be administered an battery of tests, including an intelligence test and academic achievement test(s). If the student was found to have a substantial gap between a higher IQ score and lower achievement scores, a formula was used to determine if that gap was statistically significant and ‘severe’. If the student had a ‘severe discrepancy’ [gap] between IQ and achievement, he or she would be diagnosed with a Learning Disability.

9. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 9 Target Student Discrepancy 1: Skill Gap (Current Performance Level) Avg Classroom Academic Performance Level ‘Dual-Discrepancy’: RTI Model of Learning Disability (Fuchs 2003) Discrepancy 2: Gap in Rate of Learning (‘Slope of Improvement’)

10. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 10 Source: National Research Council. (2002). Helping children learn mathematics. Mathematics Learning Study Committee, J. Kilpatrick & J. Swafford, Editors, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 5 Strands of Mathematical Proficiency 1.Understanding 2.Computing 3.Applying 4.Reasoning 5.Engagement 5 Big Ideas in Beginning Reading 1.Phonemic Awareness 2.Alphabetic Principle 3.Fluency with Text 4.Vocabulary 5.Comprehension Source: Big ideas in beginning reading. University of Oregon. Retrieved September 23, 2007, from http://reading.uoregon.edu/index.php

11. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org RTI: Understanding Interventions

12. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 12 Interventions, Accommodations & Modifications: Sorting Them Out Interventions. An academic intervention is a strategy used to teach a new skill, build fluency in a skill, or encourage a child to apply an existing skill to new situations or settings. An intervention is said to be research-based when it has been demonstrated to be effective in one or more articles published in peer–reviewed scientific journals. Interventions might be based on commercial programs such as Read Naturally. The school may also develop and implement an intervention that is based on guidelines provided in research articles—such as Paired Reading (Topping, 1987).

13. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 13 Interventions, Accommodations & Modifications: Sorting Them Out Accommodations. An accommodation is intended to help the student to fully access the general-education curriculum without changing the instructional content. An accommodation for students who are slow readers, for example, may include having them supplement their silent reading of a novel by listening to the book on tape. An accommodation is intended to remove barriers to learning while still expecting that students will master the same instructional content as their typical peers. Informal accommodations may be used at the classroom level or be incorporated into a more intensive, individualized intervention plan.

14. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 14 Interventions, Accommodations & Modifications : Sorting Them Out Modifications. A modification changes the expectations of what a student is expected to know or do—typically by lowering the academic expectations against which the student is to be evaluated. Examples of modifications are reducing the number of multiple-choice items in a test from five to four or shortening a spelling list. Under RTI, modifications are generally not included in a student’s intervention plan, because the working assumption is that the student can be successful in the curriculum with appropriate interventions and accommodations alone.

15. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 15 Big Ideas: The Four Stages of Learning Can Be Summed Up in the ‘Instructional Hierarchy’ (Haring et al., 1978) Student learning can be thought of as a multi-stage process. The universal stages of learning include: Acquisition: The student is just acquiring the skill. Fluency: The student can perform the skill but must make that skill ‘automatic’. Generalization: The student must perform the skill across situations or settings. Adaptation: The student confronts novel task demands that require that the student adapt a current skill to meet new requirements. Source: Haring, N.G., Lovitt, T.C., Eaton, M.D., & Hansen, C.L. (1978). The fourth R: Research in the classroom. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co.

16. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 16

17. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 17 Increasing the Intensity of an Intervention: Key Dimensions Interventions can move up the RTI Tiers through being intensified across several dimensions, including: Student-teacher ratio Length of intervention sessions Frequency of intervention sessions Duration of the intervention period (e.g., extending an intervention from 5 weeks to 10 weeks) Type of intervention strategy or materials used Motivation strategies Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools. Routledge: New York. Kratochwill, T. R., Clements, M. A., & Kalymon, K. M. (2007). Response to intervention: Conceptual and methodological issues in implementation. In Jimerson, S. R., Burns, M. K., & VanDerHeyden, A. M. (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention: The science and practice of assessment and intervention. New York: Springer.

18. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 18 Research-Based Elements of Effective Academic Interventions ‘Correctly targeted’ : The intervention is appropriately matched to the student’s academic or behavioral needs. ‘Explicit instruction’ : Student skills have been broken down “into manageable and deliberately sequenced steps and providing overt strategies for students to learn and practice new skills” p.1153 ‘Appropriate level of challenge’ : The student experiences adequate success with the instructional task. ‘High opportunity to respond’: The student actively responds at a rate frequent enough to promote effective learning. ‘Feedback’: The student receives prompt performance feedback about the work completed. Source: Burns, M. K., VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Boice, C. H. (2008). Best practices in intensive academic interventions. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp.1151-1162). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

19. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 19 RTI ‘Pyramid of Interventions’ Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1: Universal interventions. Available to all students in a classroom or school. Can consist of whole-group or individual strategies or supports. Tier 2: Individualized interventions. Subset of students receive interventions targeting specific needs. Tier 3: Intensive interventions. Students who are ‘non- responders’ to Tiers I & II may be eligible for special education services, intensive interventions.

20. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 20 Tier I Instruction/Interventions Tier I instruction/interventions: Are universal—available to all students. Can be delivered within classrooms or throughout the school. Are likely to be put into place by the teacher at the first sign that a student is struggling. All children have access to Tier 1 instruction/interventions. Teachers have the capability to use those strategies without requiring outside assistance. Tier 1 instruction/interventions encompass: The school’s core curriculum and all published or teacher-made materials used to deliver that curriculum. Teacher use of ‘whole-group’ teaching & management strategies. Teacher use of individualized strategies with specific students. Tier I instruction/interventions attempt to answer the question: Are routine classroom instructional strategies sufficient to help the student to achieve academic success?

21. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 21 RTI ‘Pyramid of Interventions’ Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1: Universal interventions. Available to all students in a classroom or school. Can consist of whole-group or individual strategies or supports. Tier 2: Individualized interventions. Subset of students receive interventions targeting specific needs. Tier 3: Intensive interventions. Students who are ‘non- responders’ to Tiers I & II may be eligible for special education services, intensive interventions.

22. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 22 Tier 2: Supplemental (Group-Based) Interventions Tier 2 interventions are typically delivered in small-group format. About 15% of students in the typical school will require Tier 2/supplemental intervention support. Group size for Tier 2 interventions is limited to 4-6 students. Students placed in Tier 2 interventions should have a shared profile of intervention need. The reading progress of students in Tier 2 interventions are monitored at least 1-2 times per month. Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools. Routledge: New York.

23. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 23 RTI ‘Pyramid of Interventions’ Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1: Universal interventions. Available to all students in a classroom or school. Can consist of whole-group or individual strategies or supports. Tier 2: Individualized interventions. Subset of students receive interventions targeting specific needs. Tier 3: Intensive interventions. Students who are ‘non- responders’ to Tiers I & II may be eligible for special education services, intensive interventions.

24. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 24 Tier 3: Intensive Individualized Interventions Tier 3 interventions are the most intensive offered in a school setting. Students qualify for Tier 3 interventions because: –they are found to have a large skill gap when compared to their class or grade peers; and/or –They did not respond to interventions provided previously at Tiers 1 & 2. Tier 3 interventions are provided daily for sessions of 30 minutes. The student-teacher ratio is flexible but should allow the student to receive intensive, individualized instruction. The reading progress of students in Tier 3 interventions is monitored at least weekly. Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools. Routledge: New York.

25. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org Student Assessment, & Progress- Monitoring Under RTI: The Role of Curriculum-Based Measures

26. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 26 RTI Literacy: Assessment & Progress-Monitoring The RTI Literacy model collects reading assessment information on students on a schedule based on their risk profile and intervention placement. Reading measures used are valid, reliable, brief, and matched to curriculum expectations for each grade. Depending on the grade, the battery of reading measures used can include assessments in phonological awareness, oral reading fluency, and basic reading comprehension. Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures to assure scientific-based practices. New York: Routledge.

27. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 27 RTI Literacy: Assessment & Progress-Monitoring (Cont.) To measure student ‘response to instruction/intervention’ effectively, the RTI Literacy model measures students’ reading performance and progress on schedules matched to each student’s risk profile and intervention Tier membership. Benchmarking/Universal Screening. All children in a grade level are assessed at least 3 times per year on a common collection of literacy assessments. Strategic Monitoring. Students placed in Tier 2 (supplemental) reading groups are assessed 1-2 times per month to gauge their progress with this intervention. Intensive Monitoring. Students who participate in an intensive, individualized Tier 3 reading intervention are assessed at least once per week. Source: Burns, M. K., & Gibbons, K. A. (2008). Implementing response-to-intervention in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures to assure scientific-based practices. New York: Routledge.

28. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 28 Apply the ’80-15-5’ Rule to Determine if the Focus of the Intervention Should Be the Core Curriculum, Subgroups of Underperforming Learners, or Individual Struggling Students (T. Christ, 2008) –If less than 80% of students are successfully meeting academic or behavioral goals, the intervention focus is on the core curriculum and general student population. –If no more than 15% of students are not successful in meeting academic or behavioral goals, the intervention focus is on small- group ‘treatments’ or interventions. –If no more than 5% of students are not successful in meeting academic or behavioral goals, the intervention focus is on the individual student. Source: Christ, T. (2008). Best practices in problem analysis. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 159-176).

29. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 29 Curriculum-Based Measurement: Advantages as a Set of Tools to Monitor RTI/Academic Cases Aligns with curriculum-goals and materials Is reliable and valid (has ‘technical adequacy’) Is criterion-referenced : sets specific performance levels for specific tasks Uses standard procedures to prepare materials, administer, and score Samples student performance to give objective, observable ‘low- inference’ information about student performance Has decision rules to help educators to interpret student data and make appropriate instructional decisions Is efficient to implement in schools (e.g., training can be done quickly; the measures are brief and feasible for classrooms, etc.) Provides data that can be converted into visual displays for ease of communication Source: Hosp, M.K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2007). The ABCs of CBM. New York: Guilford.

30. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org Establishing RTI Guidelines to Diagnose Learning Disabilities: What Schools Should Know Jim Wright www.interventioncentral.org

31. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 31 LD Eligibility: Random Concerns About Special Education Team (SET) LD Determinations Under RTI The SET still relies almost entirely on the test-score discrepancy formula in determining LD and does not give adequate weight to RTI information presented. The SET fails to find a disability, citing a lack of evidence that the student failed to respond to instructional interventions. However, the SET does not specify what RTI evidence it is looking for or the format in which that evidence should be presented. The SET is inconsistent. On one day, it gives substantial weight to RTI information to make an LD eligibility decision. On the next day, the SET focuses primarily on test score discrepancies and ‘processing deficits’.

32. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 32 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Building the Foundation Ensure Tier 1 (Classroom) Capacity to Carry Out Quality Interventions. The classroom teacher is the ‘first responder’ available to address emerging student academic concerns. Therefore, general-education teachers should have the capacity to define student academic concerns in specific terms, independently choose and carry out appropriate evidence-based Tier 1 (classroom) interventions, and document student response to those interventions.

33. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 33 Tier 1 (Classroom) Interventions: Building Your School’s Capacity  Identify Specific Grade- or Schoolwide Academic & Behavioral Referral Concerns.  Inventory Tier 1 Interventions Already in Use.  Create a Standard Menu of Evidence-Based Tier 1 Intervention Ideas for Teachers.  Establish Tier 1 Coaching and Support Resources.  Provide Classroom (Tier 1) Problem-Solving Support to Teachers.  Set Up a System to Locate Additional Evidence-Based Tier 1 Intervention Ideas.  Create Formal Guidelines for Teachers to Document Tier 1 Strategies.  Develop Decision Rules for Referring Students from Tier 1 to Higher Levels of Intervention.

34. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 34 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Building the Foundation Collect Benchmarking/Universal Screening Data on Key Reading and Math (and Perhaps Other) Academic Skills for Each Grade Level. Benchmarking data is collected on all students at least three times per year (fall, winter, spring). Measures selected for benchmarking should track student fluency and accuracy in basic academic skills that are key to success at each grade level.

35. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 35 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Building the Foundation Hold ‘Data Meetings’ With Each Grade Level. After each benchmarking period (fall, winter, spring), the school organizes data meetings by grade level. The building administrator, classroom teachers, and perhaps other staff (e.g., reading specialist, school psychologist) meet to: –review student benchmark data. –discuss how classroom (Tier 1) instruction should be changed to accommodate the student needs revealed in the benchmarking data. –select students for Tier 2 (supplemental group) instruction/intervention.

36. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 36 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Creating Decision Rules Establish the Minimum Number of Intervention Trials Required Prior to a Special Education Referral. Your district should require a sufficient number of intervention trials to definitively rule out instructional variables as possible reasons for student academic delays. Many districts require that at least three Tier 2 (small-group supplemental) and/or Tier 3 (intensive, highly individualized) intervention trials be attempted before moving forward with a special education evaluation.

37. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 37 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Creating Decision Rules Determine the Minimum Timespan for Each Tier 2 or Tier 3 Intervention Trial. An intervention trial should last long enough to show definitively whether it was effective. One expert recommendation (Burns & Gibbons, 2008) is that each academic intervention trial should last at least 8 instructional weeks to allow enough time for the school to collect sufficient data to generate a reliable trend line.

38. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 38 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Creating Decision Rules Define the Level of Student Academic Delay That Will Qualify as a Significant Skill Discrepancy. Not all students with academic delays require special education services; those with more modest deficits may benefit from general- education supplemental interventions alone. Your district should develop guidelines for determining whether a student’s academic skills should be judge as significantly delayed when compared to those of peers: –If using local Curriculum-Based Measurement norms, set an appropriate ‘cutpoint’ score (e.g., at the 10th percentile). Any student performing below that cutpoint would be identified as having a significant gap in skills. –If using reliable national or research norms (e.g., reading fluency norms from Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2004), set an appropriate ‘cutpoint’ score (e.g., at the 10th percentile). Any student performing below that cutpoint would be identified as having a significant gap in skills.

39. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 39 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Creating Decision Rules Define the Rate of Student Progress That Will Qualify as a Significant Discrepancy in Rate of Learning. The question of whether a student has made adequate progress when on intervention is complex. While each student case must be considered on its own merits, however, your district can bring consistency to the process of judging the efficacy of interventions by discussing the following factors…

40. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 40 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Creating Decision Rules Define the Rate of Student Progress That Will Qualify as a Significant Discrepancy in Rate of Learning (Cont.). – Define ‘grade level performance’. The goal of academic intervention is to bring student skills to grade level. However, your district may want to specify what is meant by ‘grade level’ performance. Local CBM norms or reliable national or research norms can be helpful here. The district can set a cutpoint that sets a minimum threshold for ‘typical student performance’ (e.g., 25th percentile or above on local or research norms). Students whose performance is above the cutpoint would fall within the ‘reachable, teachable range’ and could be adequately instructed by the classroom teacher.

41. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 41 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Creating Decision Rules Define the Rate of Student Progress That Will Qualify as a Significant Discrepancy in Rate of Learning (Cont.). – Set ambitious but realistic goals for student improvement. When an intervention plan is put into place, the school should predict a rate of student academic improvement that is ambitious but realistic. During a typical intervention series, a student usually works toward intermediate goals for improvement, and an intermediate goal is reset at a higher level each time that the student attains it. The school should be able to supply a rationale for how it set goals for rate of student improvement. When available, research guidelines (e.g., in oral reading fluency) can be used. Or the school may use local norms to compute improvement goals.

42. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 42 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Creating Decision Rules Define the Rate of Student Progress That Will Qualify as a Significant Discrepancy in Rate of Learning (Cont.). – Decide on a reasonable time horizon to ‘catch’ the student up with his or her peers. Interventions for students with serious academic delays cannot be successfully completed overnight. It is equally true, though, that interventions cannot stretch on without end if the student fails to make adequate progress. Your district should decide on a reasonable span of time in which a student on intervention should be expected to close the gap and reach grade level performance (e.g., 12 months). Failure to close that gap within the expected timespan may be partial evidence that the student requires special education support.

43. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 43 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Creating Decision Rules Define the Rate of Student Progress That Will Qualify as a Significant Discrepancy in Rate of Learning (Cont.). – View student progress-monitoring data in relation to peer norms. When viewed in isolation, student progress- monitoring data tells only part of the story. Even if students shows modest progress, they may still be falling farther and farther behind their peers in the academic skill of concern. Your district should evaluate student progress relative to peers. If the skill gap between the student and their peers (as determined through repeated school-wide benchmarking) continues to widen, despite the school’s most intensive intervention efforts, this may be partial evidence that the student requires special education support.

44. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 44 Using RTI to Determine Special Education Eligibility: Creating Decision Rules Define the Rate of Student Progress That Will Qualify as a Significant Discrepancy in Rate of Learning (Cont.). – Set uniform expectations for how progress-monitoring data are presented at special education eligibility meetings. Your district should adopt guidelines for schools in collecting and presenting student progress-monitoring information at special education eligibility meetings. For example, it is recommended that curriculum-based measurement or similar data be presented as time-series charts. These charts should include trend lines to summarize visually the student’s rate of academic growth, as well as a ‘goal line’ indicating the intermediate or final performance goal toward which the student is working.

45. Response to Intervention www.interventioncentral.org 45 Confidence in Eligibility Decision Ensure Tier 1 (Classroom) Capacity to Carry Out Quality Interventions. Collect Benchmarking/Universal Screening Data for Each Grade Level. Hold Data Meetings to Make Tier 2 Group Placements for Each Grade Level. Establish the Minimum Number of Intervention Trials Required Prior to a Special Education Referral. Determine the Minimum Timespan for Each Tier 2 or Tier 3 Intervention Trial. Define the Level of Student Academic Delay That Will Qualify as a Significant Skill Discrepancy. Define the Rate of Student Progress That Will Qualify as a Significant Discrepancy in Rate of Learning.