RTI Lessons Learned 2008

Petrea Hagen-GildenTigard-Tualatin School District 23J

www.ttsd.k12.or.usphagengilden@ttsd.k12.or.us

Purpose Participants will be exposed to

information about Practices that we have found to be

supportive of successful implementation of RTI; and

Practices that we have found not productive; and

Some developments in thinking about Title I & CEIS

Participants can ask questions and ask for recommendations

Experience is simply the name we give our mistakes.

Oscar Wilde

TTSD district experience

Implementation visits to OrRTI districts

Sources

Lessons It’s ok to do “BIG” RTI without doing “little” RTI Don’t try to get ready and then start Eventually you will need to jump off the cliff Principals are key players Learning disability expertise is imperative Decision rules rule Train, train, train, and SUPPORT People don’t know what they don’t know

“BIG” or “little” RTI?

“BIG” or “little” RTI?

Big RTI is: the system of Multi-Tiered Instruction (MTI?) that

applies to all students the foundation

Little RTI: is the “procedure” in IDEA to determine whether a

child has an SLD or not cannot exist without BIG RTI

THIS DISTINCTION IS IMPORTANT IN HELPING EDUCATORS UNDERSTAND RTI!!

Daisy is part of a class that is part of a school that conducts DIBELS

screening three times a year—for EVERY child—and she isn’t doing well

Daisy receives highly structured

additional instruction—but

she doesn’t progress

Daisy’s interventio

n is intensified

Does Daisy progress? If not, should

she be referred for a

special education

evaluation?

It’s just that simple. . .but it takes:

Resource realignment Leadership Core curriculum Integration of programs Continuous monitoring

You will hit more than one brick wall

“Brick walls are there for a reason: They are there to show how badly we

want things” Randy Pausch

Our Current Brick Wall

“You can’t ‘do’ RTI in a Targeted Assistance School”

WHY? “If students in Non-Title Schools receive the

same interventions as students in Targeted Schools, it amounts to ‘Supplanting’”

We respectfully disagree

Title $$ Tests

Comprability Supplement, don’t supplant:

Paying for something from Title I that used to come from local funds

Paying for something with Title I that is required by another law

Paying for something with Title I that is paid for in non Title schools with general funds (‘the same thing’)

Our Take on It It doesn’t make sense:

Giving kids something they don’t need Withholding something kids do need

The law says: “When determining whether Title I funding is

supplemental, an SEA or LEA may exclude State and local funds expended in any school for carrying out a program that meets the intent and purposes of Title I, Part A. (These exclusions also apply when determining whether Title I and non-Title I schools are comparable.)”

“

AND you know if it is such a program if the program:

“Serves only students who are failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet the State's challenging student academic achievement standards;

• Provides supplementary services designed to meet the special educational needs of students whoare participating in the program to support their achievement toward meeting the State’s student academic achievement standards; and

• Uses the State’s system of assessment under 34 CFR 200.2 to review the effectiveness of the program”

[Section 1120A(d) and 34 CFR 200.79]

Coordinated Early Intervening Services

CEIS = K through 12, K-3 emphasis NOT sped students May include:

Professional development Educational and behavioral evaluations Services and supports

(all must be scientifically based)

$$ Considerations

MAY use up to 15% MUST use 15% if significant dis-

proportionality found Cannot be focused on group for whom dis-

proportionality is found May cause Maintenance of Effort issues

Should align with ESEA, but cannot supplant ESEA funds

So. . .

You can “do” RTI in a TAS school if you don’t supplant under NCLB and ESEA and of course you can use CEIS as long as you think about whether it will effect your MOE, and taking into consideration your obligations to provide FAPE in the LRE.

Just be sure you target the students correctly

Jumping off the cliff. . .

Don’t be a commitment-phobe Prerequisites:

Deal with core curriculum issues Make non-negotiables clear

Establish clear rules related to legal concerns

Write procedures

Create the expectation for change

Principals

Set expectations and model: Commitment to core curriculum Teaming Flexibility Commitment to RTI

Attend ALL meetings Hold individuals accountable Articulate process to constituents

Learning Disability Expertise

Shifting the “diagnostic” paradigm

Building up other special educators

Providing perspective Responding to skeptics TRAINING

Decision Rules

It’s a “test” Identification can’t be arbitrary Ensure students don’t get lost Essential to program evaluation

✔

✔

✔

✔

Train, Train, Train The Case for Urgency Using Data Progress Monitoring Fidelity

Core Interventions Procedures

Teaming Learning Disability Reports New Employees

Making Assumptions about What People Know. . .

Train Check understanding frequently

Attend meetings Coach Examine products Keep data

Be wary of SELF-EVALUATIONS

What do our Data Say?Reading/Literature

So, you are welcome to our successes and mistakes!

It's a wise man who profits by his own experience, but it's a good deal wiser one who lets the rattlesnake bite the other fellow.

Josh Billings