Organizational Structures

Wisconsin’s Response to Intervention

Date: August 21Facilitators: Marlene Gross-Ackeret and Kathy Myles

The Wisconsin RtI Center/Wisconsin PBIS Network (CFDA #84.027) acknowledges the support of the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction in the development of this PowerPoint and for the continued support of this federally-funded grant program. There are no copyright restrictions on this document; however, please credit the Wisconsin DPI and support of federal funds when copying all or part of this material

Partnerships• CESAs• Professional Associations and Organizations• DPI Divisions & Teams

Objectives:• Operationalize the Wisconsin RtI Framework• Provide consistent messaging• Provide equitable access• Gather, analyze & disseminate RtI implementation data

& student outcomes

Wisconsin RtI Center

http://www.wisconsinrticenter.org/assets/files/rti-guiding-doc.pdf

Outcome

•Developing district leadership to facilitate and build capacity for a multi level system of support• Explore integration of systems

for academics and behavior

Guiding Questions• Have we built parallel systemic processes to support RtI

implementation?• Does the District Leadership Team comprehend RtI

implementation and have a process to monitor building level application?

• Are we sharing learning outcomes with external and internal stakeholders?

• Is our professional development aligned between buildings and on-going?

• Have we associated appropriate federal/state initiative outcomes with successful implementation of the RtI framework?

• So we have a structure in place to promote communication between administrative leaders?

Having, showing, or involving a system, method, or plan

Systematic & Systemic

WI RtI Roadmap for Academic and Behavioral Success

Technical change* Putting in solutions to problems for which you already know the answers

Adaptive Change*

Addressing problems for which you don’t know the answers (paradigm shift)

How are academics and behavior alike and different at each tier?

How can our district facilitate and build capacity to make our district and schools more responsive to the students we serve?

*Heifetz and Linsky, 2002

Who is here todayClassroom TeachersGeneral & special education

Building Administrators /Principals

Student support providers: Title 1, School Psychologists, Reading teachers, School Counselors, ELL, G&T

Teacher support providers: Coaches and Specialists

District Office: Superintendents, RtI Coordinators, Directors of Pupil Services, Directors of Instruction

Early Childhood

CESA/State

Parents

Other

District Wide Planning

How can your district support school

implementation of the RtI framework?

Implementation Blueprint

Funding Visibility Political Support

TrainingCapacity

CoachingCapacity Evaluation

Policy

Expertise

District Leadership Team (Coordinati on)

Local School / District Implementation Demonstrations

• RtI is a way of work for the district, not the implementation of a program

• Leadership prioritizes the implementation of RtI throughout its evaluation models

• District level organizational structures mimic and support the integrated models at the building level.

Evaluation

Visibility

Focal Points of District Level Support

Focal Points of District Level Support

• Decisions are made using a data based problem solving process

• Policies inform and support data based decision making

• Funding is aligned to support the implementation of RtI

Funding

Policy

Evaluation

Focal Points of District Level Support

• Resources are based on need and effectiveness of implementation

Funding EvaluationExpertise

Focal Points of District Level Support

• Professional development is the engine that drives and sustains improvement

• Communication with stakeholders include data that reflect “standards-based” performance outcomes

TrainingCapacity

CoachingCapacity

Political Support Evaluation

Academics & Behavior: A Symbiotic Relationship

• High quality academic instruction by itself can reduce problem behavior

Filter & Horner, 2009; Preciado, Horner, Scott, & Baker, 2009; Sanford, 2006

• Implementation of school-wide positive behavior support leads to increased academic engaged time and enhanced academic outcomes Algozzine & Algozzine, 2007; Horner et al., 2009; Lassen, Steele, & Sailor, 2006

• Improving the social behavior of students results in more minutes spent in academic instruction Scott & Barrett, 2004

Academics & Behavior: Research

• Implementation of universal behavior supports in middle school led to significantly improved performance on state assessments in both math and reading.

(Lassen, Steele, and Sailor, 2006)

• Integrated academic and behavior RtI models produce larger gains in both outcomes than single models

(Ialongo, Poduska, Werthamer, & Kellam, 2001; Lane & Menzies, 2003; McIntosh, Chard, Boland, & Horner, 2006; Stewart et al., 2007)

MLSS District Collaborative Opportunities

FundingResourcesPersonnel

VisibilityCommunication Plan internal & external

Political SupportCommunity

School Board

Professional Development

TechnicalAdaptive

CoachingLeadership

Instructional

Evaluation of Implementation

SIR and BoQ

PolicyHuman Resources

Student Handbooks

Content Expertise

Reading, Math, Bhxr

District Level Leadership Team (Coordinati on of Academics and Behavior)

Who : Cross-Representati on When: Quarterly What: Acti on plan & eval

Local School Implementati on Demonstrati ons Showcase pockets of best practi ce in eff ort to systemize across d ist r i c t

–Effective use of teaming–Accessing universal data components–Progress monitoring–Utilizing effective interventions–Relying on data decision rules

Sugai (2009)

Common System Elements: Behavior & Academic

–Multi-level, prevention focused model based on universal, selected, and intensive prevention

– Common focus on• School and community contexts of implementation• Identification of shared approach to intervention• Creating a supportive environment where these

elements can be embedded into routines of staff, school curriculum, and school policies.

Sugai (2009)

Common System Elements: Behavior & Academic

Potential Benefits Of Combined Data Sets

At the district level• Combined data sets can reveal system gapsAt the school level• Combined data sets can reveal instructional

gapsAt the student level• Combined data sets can help you better

understand locus of concern

Levels of Implementation

3 – 5 years Purpose Building/Exploration

Infrastructure/Installation

Initial Implementation

Full Implementation

Not in Place

Sustainability

Shared Outcomes• Maximizing time for instruction• Enhancing student-teacher

relationships• Fostering school connectedness• Improving academic and social

competency for all students Walker & Shinn 2002

Start with the Data

WI School-wide Implementation

Review

Practices

We use universal curriculum and instruction based on the Common Core State Standards or other state standards

We use research-based universal curriculum and instruction

Our school provides universal curriculum and instruction that engages students

We use multiple measures to review the overall effectiveness of our universal curriculum and instruction for all students and adjust accordingly

We use a process to ensure that our universal curriculum and instruction are delivered with fidelity (i.e. as intended)

We use a process to inform parents/guardians of our grade-level/course benchmarks

We collaborate frequently in grade level/content area teams about universal student data and instructional practices

Structures

Start with the Data

Benchmarks of Quality

Subscales on the BoQ• PBIS Leadership Team• Faculty Commitment• Effective Procedures

for Dealing with Discipline

• Data Entry & Analysis Plan Established

• Expectations & Rules Developed

• Reward/Recognition Program Established

• Lesson Plans for Teaching Expectations/Rules

• Implementation Plans

• Classroom Systems• Evaluation

Next Steps• Start with Shared Vision and Goals• Review shared features of PBIS and RtI with

stakeholders– At Universal AND– Selected and Targeted Levels

• Review student level data and supports– Reiterate that all integrated support must be guided by

multiple data sets• Define Multi-Level System of Support within your

local context

Working SmarterCreate• Common team structures• Common protocols for data-based decision-making• Shared calendars for screening and collaborating• Data boards with combined academic, behavior, and

demographic data• Opportunities to infuse cultural considerations• Family communication• Common professional development in processes,

data-based decision-making

Multiple Levels of SupportTeam Structures and Conversations

Problem Solving Team

Tertiary (Intensive)

Systems Team

Secondary (Selected)

Systems Team

UniversalTeam

•Plans school- & class-wide staff development and supports

•Reviews school-wide & Universal data trends

•Uses process data

•Determines overall intervention effectiveness

• Standing team

•Creates plans for one youth at a time

•Represents highest level of staff expertise

• Uses process data

• Determines overall intervention effectiveness

Teams to Connect the Data

Problem Solving TeamStanding team; uses data driven process for one youth at a time

Universal TeamPlans school-wide support

Secondary Systems TeamUses data; determines overall intervention effectiveness

Tertiary Systems TeamUses data; determines overall intensive intervention effectivenessWho

When

What Data

Who

When

What Data

Who

When

What Data

Who

When

What Data

Academic

Behavior

Academic

Behavior

Academic

Behavior

Academic

Behavior

Planning for Sustainability

• Implementation Blueprint•WI RtI Center Tools

Guiding Questions• Have we built parallel systemic processes to support RtI

implementation?• Does the District Leadership Team comprehend RtI

implementation and have a process to monitor building level application?

• Are we sharing learning outcomes with external and internal stakeholders?

• Is our professional development aligned between buildings and on-going?

• Have we associated appropriate federal/state initiative outcomes with successful implementation of the RtI framework?

• So we have a structure in place to promote communication between administrative leaders?

Implementation Blueprint

Funding Visibility Political Support

TrainingCapacity

CoachingCapacity Evaluation

Policy

Expertise

District Leadership Team (Coordinati on)

Local School / District Implementation Demonstrations

Think MARATHON, not SPRINT!1. Recognize that successful implementation is a

multiple- year commitment.2. Begin implementation with components

already nearly in place, then continue with subsequent components.

3. Integrate professional development and collaboration as the primary means for capacity building and sustainability.

Mellard & Johnson (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to implementing response to intervention.

The Wisconsin RtI Center/Wisconsin PBIS Network (CFDA #84.027) acknowledges the support of the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction in the development of this presentation and for the continued support of this federally-funded grant program. There are no copyright restrictions on this document; however, please credit the Wisconsin DPI and support of federal funds when copying all or part of this material.

Thank you!