2. Training Modules

3.  Participants will understand… Progress Monitoring Graphing Data Data-Based Decisions Linking Cases to PS/RtI

5. State Standards Data-Based Decision Making Process What do we expect all students to know and do? Progress Monitoring Benchmarks ScreeningProgress Monitoring How do we know if students are meeting the expectations? Outcome Assessment Data What do we do if students are not meeting expectations? Data Compilation & Analysis Diagnostic Assessments Fidelity Checks Decision Rules about Problem Solving / Response to Intervention

6. “Until you have data as a backup, you’re just another person with an opinion.” Dr. Perry Gluckman

7.  Collaboration between departments/professionals (PLC)  Buy in  Tier structure in place  Problem Solving Model  Progress Monitoring  Staff Skills  Resources

8. How BIG is the GAP? How much TIME do we have to close it?

10. Tiered System of Intervention Systematic Problem Solving Data Monitoring and Analysis RtI

12.  Fidelity  Intensity  Rigor  Accommodations  If Done Well, We Expect to Meet the Needs of Most...Some Will Need More

13.  (More) Time (Core Program +)  (More) Explicit Teacher-Led Instruction  (More) Scaffolded Instruction  (More) Opportunities to Respond with Corrective Feedback  (More) Targeted Specific Skills  (More) Intensive Motivational Strategies  (More) Frequent Progress Monitoring

14.  (Most) Time (Core Program + to Greatest Degree Possible)  (Most) Explicit Teacher-Led Instruction  (Most) Scaffolded Instruction  (Most) Opportunities to Respond with Corrective Feedback  (Most) Targeted Specific Skills  (Most) Intensive Motivational Strategies  (Most) Frequent Progress Monitoring

15.  What is the root cause of the problem?  Lack of Phonological Awareness  Phonics/Decoding/Text Processing  Fluency  Comprehension  Performance deficit or skill deficit?  Without a match, student will be practicing skills that are good, but not directly related to what they need to make progress

16.  Tier 1 (Core) instruction present at all three levels  Purpose of Tier 2 is to improve success in Tier 1  Purpose of Tier 3 is to improve success in Tier 1

17.  Data types used within the RtI model Three purposes for assessment within RTI: 1) Screening: identify students at risk for academic difficulty 2) Diagnostic: provide an in-depth, reliable assessment of targeted skills 3) Progress monitoring: determine whether the student is responsive to given instruction 4) Outcome: student demonstrates accepted level of mastery

18. Progress Monitoring

22. Curriculum Based Measurements

24.  Monitors progress throughout the school year  Measures at regular intervals  Uses data to determine goals  Provides parallel and brief measures  Displays data graphically

25.  FAIR Tool Kit  InterventionCentral.Org  EasyCBM.com

26. Graph Components

27.  Current Level of Performance (Baseline)  Desired Level of Performance (Goal)  Aim Line-Desired Rate of Improvement  Trend Line-Actual Rate of Improvement  Time to Goal

28. Skill equal increments Time - equal increments Instructional Change Line Goal Intervention (Group or Individual) Baseline Aim Line Trend Line

29. Making Decisions: Using Data to Move Between Tiers

30. General Instruction Supplementary Intervention Intensive Intervention Decision rules Intensity of Intervention Should this student move to Tier 3? Should this student move to Tier 2?

31.  Is rate of progress acceptable?  If not, why and what should we do about it?  Frequency and amount of intervention  Instructional strategy  Opportunity for practice and application  Other factors?  Choices- try another intervention, modify existing intervention, other?

32. Performance Time Response to Intervention Expected Trajectory Observed Trajectory Positive Questionable Poor

33. Decisions What to do if RtI is: Positive Continue intervention with current goal Continue intervention with goal increased Fade intervention to determine if student(s) have acquired functional independence.

34. Decisions What to do if RtI is: Questionable Was intervention implemented as intended? If no - employ strategies to increase implementation integrity If yes - Increase intensity of current intervention for a short period of time and assess impact. If rate improves, continue. If rate does not improve, return to problem solving.

35. Decisions What to do if RtI is: Poor Was intervention implemented as intended? If no - employ strategies in increase implementation integrity If yes - Is intervention aligned with the verified hypothesis? (Intervention Design) Are there other hypotheses to consider? (Problem Analysis) Was the problem identified correctly? (Problem Identification)

36. 1. Is the student’s rate of progress (trend line) less than the expected rate of progress (aim line)? 2. Will the student’s rate of progress (trend line) allow the student to meet identified standard within the specified goal timeline or within a reasonable amount of time? 3. Is the plan able to be maintained in the general education setting?  If no, can student maintain rate of progress when interventions are modified or faded?

37. Goal Intervention 1 Making instructional decisions based on student performance data (always includes graphing) Intervention 2

38. How BIG is the GAP? How much TIME do we have to close it?

39. Case Studies: Let’s Practice Using Our Data-Based Decision Making Skills…

40. Baseline