Gifted Education and Response to Intervention Update on Gifted Education Workshop August 2013 Toddie...

Gifted Education and Response to InterventionUpdate on Gifted Education WorkshopAugust 2013 Toddie Adams, Marshall County Schools

What is RtI?

• Screening children within the general curriculum

• Tiered instruction of increasing intensity

• Evidence-based instruction

• Close monitoring of student progress

• Informed decision making regarding next steps for individual students

Evolution of RtI

2004

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) signed into law

2006

IDEA became effective

RtI is an addition to IDEA

• Rooted in special education• Developed from studies

regarding IQ/achievement discrepancies

• Evolved into an approach to identify and service students with reading disabilities

• Currently implemented to include identification of low achieving students and provide instructional and behavioral interventions

Growing all Students

• 2002: NCLB is passed • Goal: All students will reach

proficiency by 2012• Focus is on raising math and

reading scores• Needs of high achieving and

gifted students is questioned

• 2010: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is passed• Goal: By 2020 the USA will lead

the world in college completion• Grow all students

New assessments with a revised accountability system

What is KSI?

The Kentucky System of Interventions (KSI) was established by the Kentucky Department of Education.

It is based on and includes the RtI model.

Goals of KSI

• Optimize instruction through accelerated learning targeted to student needs

• Development of teacher expertise

• Use data to collaborate• Close achievement gaps• Focus on student goals• Provide advanced instruction• Prepare students to be college

and career ready

A Guide to the Kentucky System of Interventions

http://education.ky.gov/educational/int/ksi/Documents/KSIRtIGuidanceDocument.pdf

The KSI Model

• Universal Screening/ Diagnostic Assessment

• Data-Based Decision Making• Evidence-Based Instruction• Progress Monitoring• Tiered Service Delivery• Fidelity of Implementation• Family Involvement• Professional Development

The practice of•Accelerated Learning •Highly Effective Teaching and Learning •RtI

To reach the goals of•Closing the achievement gap•Readiness to learn at all levels•Smooth student transition

Implications for Gifted Education

• RtI can be utilized for student growth in their area(s) of strength

• Teachers/schools/districts are accountable for continuous progress of all students including high ability students

• High level learners will be challenged in their area(s) of strengths

Gifted Education and the RtI Model

GT RtI

• Screening children within the general curriculum

• Tiered instruction of increasing intensity

• Evidence-based instruction

• Close monitoring of student progress

• Informed decision making regarding next steps for individual students

Research regarding GT RtI

• Lack of literature regarding research combining gifted education and RtI

• RtI was recently implemented in many states

• GT Programs are not mandated in all states

• Plans for integrating RtI within gifted programs are designed parallel to meeting needs of students requiring remediation

• Implications for the impact of RtI on gifted education are discussed

Literature addressing Response to Intervention and Gifted Education

District/State Policies

“RtI embeds gifted education in the daily priorities of quality instruction. Academic, behavioral, and affective outcomes and growth, not solely enrichment, are the focus. Strength of RtI lies in the upfront planning and problem solving that uses data, strengths and interests of students to plan appropriate, rigorous and relevant instruction. Ongoing assessment continually contributes new data so that learning is dynamic and adjustments made according to an individual student’s need”

Colorado Department of Education,

2008

District/State Policies

“In gifted education, rather than remediation-based interventions, strength-based interventions and strength-based programming, are used to describe tiered instruction. The problem-solving process which uses data, strengths and interests of students to implement appropriate, rigorous and relevant curriculum and instruction are strengths of RtI”

Montana Office of Public Instruction,

2009

Kentucky Department of Education

The Kentucky System of Interventions (KSI) framework emphasizes optimizing instruction through targeted accelerated learning, development of teacher expertise and responsiveness to the needs of all learners. What is effective for every learner is a systematic and ongoing assessment of their academic and behavioral needs and using the data in collaborative conversations with parents/guardians and educators in the interest of preparing students to be college and career ready to live and work in a global society.

A Guide to the Kentucky System of Interventions


Universal Screening

Traditional RtI

Students scoring below established criteria receive intensive remedial instruction

GT RtI

Students scoring above established criteria receive differentiated and advanced instruction

Hughes & Rollins, 2009

Early Intervention

Traditional RtI

Students qualify for intervening services before “waiting to fail”

GT RtI

Abilities are identified within a nurturing system regardless of label or potentially biased teacher recommendations


Tiered System of Interventions

Traditional RtI

The more intense the needs, the more intense and long-term interventions are provided

GT RtI

The more intense the needs, the more intense and long-term interventions are provided


Fidelity of Intervention

Traditional RtI

The student receives instruction geared to particular needs; not a “one size fits all” remedial program

GT RtI

The student receives instruction geared to particular needs; not a “one size fits all” accelerated program


Progress Monitoring

Traditional RtI

Documented student progress has a goal of moving a child from a more intensive to a less intensive tier of intervention as a child raises achievement levels

GT RtI

Documented student progress has a goal of moving a child from a less intensive to a more intensive tier of intervention as a child raises achievement levels


Professional Development

Traditional RtI

Training is provided for specific, research-based interventions that are effective for struggling learners

GT RtI

Training is provided for specific strategies of acceleration, enrichment, and differentiation that are effective with gifted learners


Collaborative Structure

Traditional RtI

Greater collaboration is needed between special education, reading specialists, and other interventionists to identify and serve struggling learners

GT RtI

Gifted education professionals collaborate with general education teachers to identify and serve gifted learners in need of differentiated services


Parental Involvement

Traditional RtISharing information to and from families raises the achievement levels and effectiveness of interventions. Targeted interventions are built upon acquired information regarding interest areas and areas of strength

GT RtISharing information to and from families raises the achievement levels and effectiveness of interventions. Targeted interventions are built upon acquired information regarding interest areas and areas of strength


Resources

Traditional RtI

Students scoring below established criteria receive intensive remedial instruction

GT RtI

Students scoring above established criteria receive differentiated and advanced instruction


Standard Treatment Protocol Model

• Implementation team• Principals• Counselors• Teachers• School Psychologists• FRYSC• GT Specialists• Curriculum Specialists

• Responsible for administration of core curricula and intervention system through formative and summative assessments

Used to implement educational decisions in the RtI model

Pulaski County Intervention System (PCIS) Appendix E, 2013

Problem Solving Process Model

• Interventions in general education

• Referral to special education or gifted education

• Evaluation for special education eligibility or gifted education eligibility

• Clarify the needs of individual students

• Gather information to assist in decision making

• Analyze data to assist in decision making

• Plan and modify interventions

Used to guide the decision making process in the RtI model


Accelerated Academic Systems


Tier IAll grade levels: scoring <79%

Tier II AccelerationAll grade levels: Scoring 80% -

94%

Tier III AccelerationAll grade levels: Scoring 95% -

99%

All students receive core instruction that is researched and standards-based with clear objectives and have multiple avenues to show mastery of content, skills, and learning.

Assessment data results are used

to shape future instructional decisions.

Instructional pacing, depth, and

complexity are varied with general education or core teacher providing differentiated instruction.

All students who meet above grade-level benchmarks early or quickly receive focused and targeted enhancement of differentiated instruction for individuals and/or small groups.

Assessment data results are used to

shape future instructional decisions.

Ensure continuous progress,

remove academic ceilings and align with the area(s) of clustered group instruction based on interests, needs and abilities

A Student with high abilities and others exceeding advanced expectations receive intensive individually designed curriculum with increased depth and complexity from age-level peers.

Students in Tier III Acceleration

are highly gifted students whose needs are not being met in Tier 1 and Tier 2.

Frequent progress monitoring

provides data that drives customized strategies to ensure the needs of these students are met.

Ensure continuous progress,

remove academic ceilings and align with the area(s) based on interests, needs and abilities

Key Strategies for Differentiated Instruction


Tier IAll grade levels: scoring <79%

Tier II AccelerationAll grade levels: Scoring 80% -

94%

Tier III AccelerationAll grade levels: Scoring 95% -

99%

Differentiated Instruction•Choice Boards•Curriculum Compacting•Extensions •Flexible tasks/Assessments•Grouping strategies: Cluster Grouping Cooperative Grouping Cross Grade Groups Flexible Skills Groups Full-time Ability Grouping Regrouping by achievement for subject instruction Within class performance grouping •Higher Order Thinking: Bloom’s Taxonomy•Orbital Study•Pre-assessment•Scaffolding•Tiered Assignments

Differentiated Instruction•Advanced Placement•Dual Credit•Flexible tasks/Assessments•Grouping strategies: Cluster Grouping Cooperative Grouping Cross Grade Groups Flexible Skills Groups Full-time Ability Grouping Regrouping by achievement for subject instruction Within class performance grouping Note: Accelerated students perform significantly higher when the majority of their time in academic core is spent in true peer interactions. •Curriculum Compacting•Honors/Advanced or Pre-AP Courses•Independent Study•Specialized Focus STEM Curriculum Example: Pre-Engineering & Project Lead the Way (PLTW)•Subject-Matter Acceleration•Partial Acceleration•Pre-assessment•Tiered Assignments

Differentiated Instruction•Advanced Placement•Grouping Strategies •Dual Credit•Early Entrance into Middle Grade Level Acceleration•School, High School, or Postsecondary•Flexible tasks/Assessments•Independent Study•Mentorships•Pre-assessment•Problem-based learning•Seminars•Specialized Focus STEM Curriculum Example: Pre-Engineering & Project Lead the Way (PLTW)•Symposiums•Tiered Assignments

References

Ardoin, S. P., Witt, J. C., Connell, J. E., & Koenig, J. L. (2005). Application of a three-tiered response to intervention model for instructional planning, decision making, and the identification of children in need of

services. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 23(4), 362-380. DOI: 10.1177/073428290502300405

Bianco, M. (2010). Strength-based RtI: Conceptualizing a multi-tiered system for developing gifted potential. Theory Into Practice, 49(4), 323-330. DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2010.510763

Coleman, M. R., & Hughes, C. E. (2009). Meeting the needs of gifted students within an RtI framework. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 14-17. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov.proxy.lib.siu.edu/PDFS/EJ849371.pdf

Colorado Department of Education (2008). Thinking points: Gifted student education in a response to interventions framework. Retrieved from http://www.cde.state.co.us/gt/download/pdf/GiftedRtI_thinking_points.pdf

Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research &Practice, 18(3), 157-171. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.siu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=4583c885-2cf1-46ba-880c-368eacd37ef0%40sessionmgr104&vid=2&hid=111

Hughes, C. E. & Rollins, K. (2009). RtI for nurturing giftedness: Implications for the RtI school-based team. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 31-39. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov.proxy.lib.siu.edu/PDFS/EJ849373.pdf

References

Hughes, C. E., Rollins, K., Johnsen, S. K., Pereles, D. A., Omdal, S., Baldwin, L., … Coleman, M. R. (2009). Remaining challenges for the use of RtI with gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 58-61. Retrieved from

http://eric.ed.gov.proxy.lib.siu.edu/PDFS/EJ849376.pdf

Kentucky Administrative Regulations: 704 KAR 3:285 (2008). Retrieved from http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/704/003/285.htm

Kentucky Department of Education (2012). A guide to the kentucky system of interventions. Retrieved from


Montana Office of Public Instruction (2009). Response to intervention and gifted and talented education. Retrieved from http://opi.mt.gov/pub/RTI/Resources/RTI_Gifted_Talented.pdf

National Association for Gifted Children (2011). Current definitions. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=574

Pulaski County Intervention System (2013). Retrieved from

http://rti--response-to-intervention.pulaski.schoolfusion.us/modules/locker/files/get_group_file.phtml?

gid=1554345&fid=21686351&sessionid=924a02b4af920ee72c3cda6380e40e0d

References

Rollins, K., Mursky, C. V., Shah-Coltrane, S., & Johnsen, S. K. (2009). RtI models for gifted children. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 20-29. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov.proxy.lib.siu.edu/PDFS/EJ849372.pdf

Simmons, D. C., Coyne, M. D., Kwok, O., McDonagh, S., Harn, B. A., & Kame'enui, E. J. (2008). Indexing response to intervention: A longitudinal study of reading risk from kindergarten through third grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(2), 158-173. DOI: 10.1177/0022219407313587

United States Department of Education (2010). A blueprint for reform: The reauthorization of the elementary and secondary education act. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf

Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., & Hickman, P. (2003). Response to instruction as a means of identifying students with reading/learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 69(4), 391-401. Retrieved fromhttp://www.metapress.com.proxy.lib.siu.edu/content/q742w7261667m47g/fulltext.pdf

Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Small, S., & Fanuele, D. P. (2006). Response to intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between children with and without reading disabilities: Evidence for the role of kindergarten and first grade interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(2), 157-169. Retrieved from http://ldx.sagepub.com.proxy.lib.siu.edu/content/39/2/157.full.pdf+html

Gifted Education and Response to Intervention Update on Gifted Education Workshop August 2013 Toddie...

Documents

Transcript of Gifted Education and Response to Intervention Update on Gifted Education Workshop August 2013 Toddie...