PBS, EIS, PLC, MTI, RTI…. Oh My!
description
Transcript of PBS, EIS, PLC, MTI, RTI…. Oh My!
An Overview of Effective Behavior and Instructional Support Systems for MiBLSi
State Conference, 4/22/2008
Carol Sadler, [email protected]
PBS, EIS, PLC, MTI, RTI….
Oh My!
CSadler 2
PBS and RTI use MTI and PLCs to accomplish EIS!
What do PBS and RTI (for…) have in common?• District and school-wide Systems• Research-based• DATA focused• Processes NOT programs • For ALL students K-12• 3-5 year commitment to implement• Clear goals, common vision and expectations• Leadership and teacher collaboration, the Heart
CSadler 3
NCLBIDEA
RTI
LDED
EIS
PBSPBISEBS
EBISs
AYP
ESEA
OSAT/OAKS
TESAFBA-BIP
DIBELSCB
M
Teacher
TheAcronym SCREAM!
Carol Sadler, Ph.D., Educational Systems Consultant
PLC
ORFTLC
CSadler 4
“the vision of schools as a community of leaders is not a fantasy.
…shared leadership expands the possibilities for school improvement, increases commitment, complicates
decision-making, and makes for more effective education of children”
(Barth, 1990)
CSadler 55
Session Overview
Introductions Response to Instruction/Intervention
What, Where, Why, and How Relationship to Positive Behavior Support
Effective Behavior & Instructional Support (EBIS) Outcomes (from the 6 year demonstration in Tigard-Tualatin) How the EBIS Process Works
Example Protocols Forms Team Process SPED Referral and Identification Fidelity Monitoring
Summary & Conclusions
CSadler [email protected] 6
CSadler 7
Response to Instruction/Intervention (RTI)
What, Where, Why, and How
CSadler 8
What is RTI? (Mellard & Johnson, 2008)
Process of instruction, assessment and intervention that allows schools to identify struggling students early, provide appropriate instructional interventions, and increase the likelihood that all students will be successful.
CSadler 9
Where does RTI apply? (Is it just about Sped?)
Screening and Prevention Identifies students at risk and provides early
intervention Early Intervention
Enhances the general curriculum for all students and provides intervention and remediation
Disability DeterminationDetermines a student’s response to instruction
and intervention as one part of special education evaluation and identification
CSadler 10
RTI is not intended to replace comprehensive
evaluation “…it is meant to intervene in a research-based and hopefully effective way to address difficulties students are having, either academically or behaviorally. It rests on the possibility that prior instruction, not disability, might be at the root of the problem. It is meant for all students, even as it may also be used as part of making determinations of LD.”
(Guidance from U.S. Dept. of Ed., OSEP, Regional Regulations Implementation Meetings, Feb. 2007)
CSadler 11
Why Implement a RTI Approach?
General School ImprovementPromising approach to providing
appropriate learning experiences for all students
Usefulness for early identification, intervention, and reduction of risk
Compatibility with other school-wide models and systems for school improvement, such as PBS
CSadler 12
Why Implement a RTI Approach?
Alternative to Traditional ReferralTwo parallel systems: general and
special educationProblems in general referral and
evaluation in specialIdentification, when it occurred,
typically Learning Disabilities (LD)
Process Wait to FailWait to Fail
CSadler 13
“When we know better, we do better.”
Maya Angelou
CSadler 14
How? Multi-Tiered Instruction/EIS/Prevention Model
Public Health & Disease Prevention (Larson, 1994)
Tertiary (FEW)Tertiary (FEW) Reduce complications,
intensity, severity of current cases
Secondary Secondary (SOME)(SOME) Reduce current cases
of problem behavior
Primary (Primary (ALLALL)) Reduce new cases of
problem behavior
CSadler 15
RTI - Multi-Tiered Instruction
Tier 1 All Students: Primary Core, Screening, and Differentiated Instruction
Tier 2 Some Students:
Targeted Interventions
Tier 3 Few Students:
Intensive Interventions
Some refer to special education as a Tier 4 – still others, as Tier 3
CSadler 16
Why Implement an integrated behavior and academic approach?
Social behavior deficit model• Social skills problems lead to
academic problems (Dishion, French & Patterson, 1995, Reid & Patterson, 1991, Wehby, Lane & Falk, 2003)
Academic skill deficit model Academic problems lead to social
problems (Lee, Sugai & Horner, 1999, Roberts et al 2001)
Pathways to Problems in School
CSadler 17
Reading and Behavior Connections (McIntosh & Sadler, in process)
Predictors of 2 or more Office Discipline Referrals in 5th grade: LNF and PSF
below benchmark at end of Kindergarten (p <.01)
Predictor of meeting/exceeding OSA Reading/Literature in 5th grade: NWF above
benchmark at end of Kindergarten (p <.01)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Grade K Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5
Mean
ODRs
Per Y
ear
Established
Emerging
Deficit
N=426 students with scores K-5; binary logistic regression analyses
CSadler 1818
Reading and Behavior Connections Oregon State Reading x Office Referrals
200
205
210
215
220
225
230
235
240
245
Gr 3 Gr 5 Gr 8 Gr 10
Sc
ale
d S
co
re
Passing
0-1
2-5
6+
(Sadler & Sugai, 2008)
CSadler 19
1-5% 1-5%
5-10% 5-10%
80-90% 80-90%
Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•High Intensity
Intensive, Individual Interventions•Individual Students•Assessment-based•Intense, durable procedures
Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response
Targeted Group Interventions•Some students (at-risk)•High efficiency•Rapid response
Universal Interventions•All students•Preventive, proactive
Universal Interventions•All settings, all students•Preventive, proactive
Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success
Academic Systems Behavioral Systems
CSadler 20
Good Teaching Behavior Management
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
Increasing District & State Competency and Capacity
Investing in Outcomes, Data, Practices, and Systems
Effective Behavior & Instructional Support Systems
Adapted
CSadler 21
SYST
EMS
PRACTICES
DATASupportingStaff Behavior
SupportingDecisionMaking
SupportingStudent Behavior
OUTCOMES
Effective Support Systems
“Investments”
Adapted
CSadler 22
EBIS Model (Tigard-Tualatin School District)
CSadler [email protected] 23
T-TSD Demographics (2007-08)
17 Schools, 13,000 students10 elementary, 1 charter, 3 middle, 2 high, 1 alt
Special Programs participation1,200 Special Education (10%)1,800 English Language Learners (15%)1,500 Talented and Gifted (12%)
Socio-economic statusTitle 1 in 6 elementary schools
Free/Reduced ranges from 7% to 58%
T-TSD Significant Events
ODE Technical Assistance on ED evaluation (1988) Curriculum Based Measurement System (CBM) and
Problem-Solving Model (1989) Early Literacy (C & I) Specialists (1998) Effective Behavior Support (1996) First Step to Success (1999) Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (1999) Effective Behavior & Instructional Support – EBIS/RTI
Project (federal grant-elementary schools) (2001) Project CIRCUITS (2002) Tualatin ES-National Model Site-National Center for
Research on Learning Disabilities (2004) Oregon RTI Training Initiative-ODE (2005) Middle and high school—Literacy Initiative (2005) Carol retired (2006)
CSadler 25
CSadler 26
“Sustainability does not simply mean whether something will last. It
addresses how particular initiatives can be developed without
compromising the development of others in the surrounding
environment now and in the future.” (Fullan, 2005)
CSadler 27
T-TSD EBIS Project (2001-2006)
OUTCOMES
1. Sustain existing model of Effective Behavior Support in elementary schools
2. Implement a comparable, multi-tiered model of support to improve K-3 reading outcomes
3. Demonstrate use of RTI for Special Education evaluation and identification
CSadler 28
Sustaining EBS: How did we do?
Critical Features SW PBS: Rules CLEARLY DEFINED Rules are CONSISTENTLY TAUGHT Rules are POSITIVELY REINFORCED Systems are in place for CORRECTING PROBLEM
BEHAVIORS DATA are used for DECISION-MAKING A team holds REGULAR MEETINGS, and team
LEADERSHIP is clear There is a high level of SCHOOL and DISTRICT-LEVEL
SUPPORT
CSadler 29
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
ES 1 ES 2 ES 3 ES 4 ES 5 ES 6 ES 7 ES 8 ES 9
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
School Wide Evaluation Tool (SET) 5-Year Trends
80% Criteria
CSadler 30
Office Referrals per 100 Students Per Day T-TSD Elementary Schools
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05
Elementary Schools
Ref
erra
ls
U of O SWIS Avg 04-05: .39 per 100 student/per day
This worked out to a difference of about 2 ½
months of additional teaching/learning time in
T-TSD compared to national sample
CSadler 31
~80% of Students
~15%
~5%
(Walker, et al. 1996)
T-TSD Office Discipline Referral
Distribution All Students
2004-05
80% received NO referrals;
90% received 0-1 referrals
8% received 2-5 referrals
1% received 6 or more referrals
CSadler [email protected] 32
Improving K-3 Reading Outcomes: How did we do? T-TSD DIBELS PSF 1999-00 through 2005-06
CSadler 33
(Sadler & Sugai, 2008)
Figure 2. Percent of kindergarten students in established range on DIBELS Phoneme Segmentation Fluency pre- and post-implementation (2000-01 through 2005-06) of the Early Reading Intervention curriculum in 6 Title 1 elementary schools.
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 2 3 4 5 6 Avg.EachYr.
Elementary Schools
2000-01
2003-04
2005-06
CSadler 34
2005-06 DIBELS
Established/Low Risk
Emerging/Some Risk
Deficit/At Risk
K-PSF 88% 9% 3%
1st-ORF 71% 19% 10%
2nd-ORF 66% 15% 20%
3rd-ORF 58% 27% 14%
CSadler 35
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
Read3
Read5
Math3
Math5
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
Oregon State Reading and Math Assessments
Board Goal =>
CSadler 36
Early Intervening: How did we do? %(#) Students in DEFICIT range
2000-01 2005-06
ISF Beginning K 18% (142 students) 21% (184 students)
PSF End K 8% (59 students) 3% (25 students)
LNF Beginning 1st 28% (215 students) 22% (197 students)
ORF End 1st 21% (149 students) 10% (80 students)
Early Identification Using RTI Alternative
Overall #s K-12 SLD = 2001: 507; 2005: 530; 2006: 513
Grade 1: 2004 = 8; 2006 = 12 Grade 2: 2004 = 19; 2006 = 49
CSadler 37
How the EBIS Team Process WorksEBIS Team Process Works
EBIS is a structured, systematic process thatfeatures:
Team Membership and Responsibilities Decision Rules Data for Multiple Purposes Universal Screening: Core Evaluation and
Planning, Identifying At Risk Students Phases 1- 2: 1st and 2nd Interventions Phase 3: Individualizing Phase 4: Referring for Continuation of SPED Evaluation Fidelity Monitoring (Interventions, Processes)
CSadler 38
Key Component: Evidenced-based Curriculum and Instruction
New reading adoption this year: Macmillan/ McGraw-Hill Treasures-Fast Track Phonics-K 90 minutes per day (60 in K) Fidelity checks by principal Initial training for new teachers or teachers new to a grade
level Train-the-Trainers model for ongoing support during the year
Differentiated Instruction within the Core Skill grouping options
45 min. whole group plus 45 min. skill grouping (Approaching-On-Beyond)
90 min. skill grouping
Literacy Specialists work with A Teachers TAG Specialists work with B Teachers Master Teachers (Train the Trainers) work with all levels
CSadler 39
Macmillan Components
Main SelectionVocabulary, Comprehension Skills and
Comprehension Strategies Leveled Readers
Reinforce skills taught in main selection and add connected text reading at skill level
Grammar and SpellingCan be included in 90 min. or outside of
90 min. with district Writing program (Lucy Culkins)
CSadler 40
T-T Tier II: Core Plus Strategic Intervention
Additional, research-based instruction in area of need Usually 30 minutes per day Small group (3-7) Interventionist trained in program:
May be classroom teacher, Title I, or Instructional Assistant Ex. 2007-08: Pam provided up to a day of training for each
program…on-going refresher training by Lit. Spec. based on fidelity information
Example: Combined Phonics for Reading/Read Naturally 30-45 minutes daily Small group of 5 students Taught by an Instructional Assistant in the Reading Lab
CSadler 41
T-T Tier III: Core Plus Intensive Intervention
Goal for Tier III students is to be in Core instruction the whole time plus additional intervention
However, occasionally students will be in Core for 30 min. to receive main selection and vocabulary, then 60-90 min. of Reading Mastery
Example: Combined Reading Mastery and Read Naturally Group of 3 30-45 minutes twice per day Most experienced Instructional Assistant or Certified Teacher
How intensive might differ from strategic? More time Smaller group Different program Most skilled interventionist
CSadler 42
T-TSD Standard Protocols
History ES:Reading and Behavior in place for yearsReading interventions closer to 30 than 45
min.Math started this yearWritten Language starting next year
MS-HS: Scale up began in 2006
Review protocols (10 min.)
CSadler 43
EBIS Team Structure
EBIS Leadership Team
SW EBS Team
Individual Student Support Teams
On-Going Assessment of Students’ Academic & Social-Behavioral Skills
Grade LevelTeacher Teams
CSadler 44
EBIS Leadership Team (EBIS-T)Meets 3 Times/Yr. (Screening) and then
Monthly (Progress Monitoring) Includes principal, counselor, literacy
specialist, special education, ELL specialistsLeads screening, ongoing evaluation of coreMonitors students in small group and
individual interventionsOversees RTI fidelity and makes referrals to
special education
EBIS Team Membership and Responsibilities
CSadler 45
Grade Level Teacher Teams (GLT-T) (EBIS collaboration)Meet monthly with EBIS Leadership TeamCollaborate with EBIS-T to plan, implement
and monitor supplemental group/individual interventions (Tier 2)
EBS Team (EBS-T) Includes principal and representative
certified and classified staffMeets Monthly-Quarterly Focuses on implementation and fidelity of
SW prevention program
EBIS Team Membership and Responsibilities
CSadler 46
EBIS Team Membership and Responsibilities
EBIS Individual Student Support Team (ISS-T)Membership varies: classroom teacher,
school experts/specialists, ELL, parent, etc.Psychologist important here
Implements individualized interventions, monitors student progress
Reports to EBIS Leadership TeamMay recommend referral for Special
Education evaluation
CSadler 47
Conduct UNIVERSAL SCREENING (DIBELS, OSA Scores, Attendance, Office Referrals, etc. - Three Times/Year - Fall,
Winter & Spring)
Fall: REVIEW UNIVERSAL SCREENING DATA (EBIS Leadership & Grade Level
Teacher Teams)
IDENTIFY STUDENTS needing Supplemental Instruction/
Intervention (General Decision Rule: Lowest 20%) Complete EBIS Interventions & Planning
Form
IMPLEMENT INTERVENTION #1 (Small Group Intervention, Begin
Student Intervention Profile)
Monitor Progress Weekly
(4-8 Weeks)
- Progress
+ Progress
1Winter/Spring: Begin REVIEW of SCREENING
DATA to Evaluate Effectiveness of Core
Curriculum and Instruction Program (General Decision
Rule: =>80% on Track)
See Benchmark (Tier 1)
Instruction Options and
Program Evaluation Tools
See Intervention Decision Rules and
Progress Monitoring Guidelines
Continue Intervention #1
IMPLEMENT INTERVENTION #2 (Adjust Small Group, Continue Student Intervention Profile)
Use Options for Changing Interventions
EBIS TEAM PROCESS
2
CSadler 48
Core Evaluation and Planning If the 80% Criterion is not being met…
Literacy: 90 minutes of reading daily? Protected allocated reading
time each day? Skill grouping by class or
grade (“customized” instruction)?
Core and supplemental programs implemented with fidelity?
More professional development needed?
Math: Skill grouping by class or
grade? Identifying and emphasizing
specific strands?
Adequate allocated time for instruction each day? Guided practice?
Fluency issues, e.g., facts?
Behavior: Is the school-wide
program fully implemented?
Identifying and teaching to a small, clear set of rules?
Reinforcement systems in place?
Data being used for program/activities planning?
Systems for correction in place
CSadler 49
Monitor Progress Weekly
(4-8 Weeks)
- Progress
+ Progress
IMPLEMENT INDIVIDUALIZED INTERVENTION
Use “Formal” Problem Solving (IPS Worksheet,
Development History, Functional Behavior
Assessment)
Monitor Progress Weekly
(4-8 Weeks)
- Progress
+ Progress
Improvement Appears
Related to Other Factors
—Identify Resources to
Continue Needed Support
REFER FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION EVALUATION Intervention is so intense LD
is suspected
4
3
Resume General Program
EBIS TEAM PROCESS, continued
CSadler 50
Problem Solving
Process that uses the skills of professionals from different disciplines to develop and
evaluate intervention plans that significantly improve the school
performance of students
CSadler 51
Problem Solving Process
EvaluateDid the Plan Work?
EvaluateDid the Plan Work?
Analyze/Define Problem
Why is it happening?What is Contributing to it?
Develop Plan
Analyze/Define Problem
Why is it happening?What is Contributing to it?
Develop Plan
Identify Problem (need for support) Using screening data
Identify Problem (need for support) Using screening data
Implement PlanImplement As Intended
Progress MonitorModify as Necessary
Implement PlanImplement As Intended
Progress MonitorModify as Necessary
CSadler 52
EBIS Forms Review
Group Interventions & Planning FormDecision RulesStudent Intervention ProfileOptions for Changes in Interventions
Individual Problem Solving Worksheet & Action Plan (not in handouts)
CSadler 53
CSadler 54
Intervention: How Much is Enough? (Burns, Hall-Lande, et. al, 2006)
Nationally, most Tier 2-3 implementations
are at least 30 minutes3 to 5 times/week
T-TSD NEVER less than 5 for 8-16 weeks
8 pts. to calculate trend. “Reliable progress evaluation typically requires 16 data points”
CSadler 55
Determining Response to Intervention
Student Progress is weighed against Intervention Intensity
Student Progress has 22 components (This
evaluation concept is described as “Dual Discrepancy” by Fuchs & Fuchs,1998)
Under similar instructional context,student being evaluated has Low Skills (compared to Typical Growth) Slow Progress (compared to Cohort Progress)
CSadler 56
Referring for Special Education Evaluation
If a well-implemented individualized intervention is not successful, a special education referral is made
The referral form is accompanied by the Student Intervention Profile, Developmental History, Individual Problem Solving Worksheet and evidence of progress monitoring (e.g., DIBELS or other CBM graphs)
CSadler 57
Questions for Completing LD
Evaluation and Determining Eligibility
1. Is our information complete? (File review, Observation, Additional Assessments-other concerns, impact of disability, medical information)
2. Does the student have very low skills? (Consider multiple sources, CBM, DIBELS, State Assessments, published tests, work samples, grades, etc.)
3. Does the student fail to learn at a sufficient rate in response to intensive, research-based instruction? (RTI history, intervention intensity, progress data, peer comparisons)
Adapted from OrRTI Technical Assistance Guidelines, Dec. 2007
CSadler 58
Questions for Completing LD Evaluation and Determining Eligibility
3. Do we have conflicting data and, if so, how do we make sense of it? (Case by case, professional judgment)
4. Are there other explanations for the student’s low skills and lack of progress?
(Lack of appropriate instruction or the “exclusionary” criteria)
5. Do we believe the student has a LD?
Adapted from OrRTI Technical Assistance Guidelines, Dec. 2007
CSadler 59
A child with LD does not achieve adequately inone or more of the following areas, when provided with appropriate learning experiences and instruction (comparisons to age or state-approved grade standards)
(i) Oral expression(ii) Listening comprehension(iii) Written expression(iv) Basic reading skills(v) Reading fluency skills(vi) Reading comprehension(vii) Mathematics calculation(viii) Mathematics problem solving
CSadler 60
And, the child’s difficulties are NOT primarily due to
(i) A visual, hearing, or motor disability(ii) Mental retardation(iii) Emotional disturbance(iv) Cultural factors(v) Environmental or economic
disadvantage(vi) Limited English proficiency
CSadler 61
A child may not be determined eligible as LD
In reading, if there has been a lack of instruction in:
Phonemic awarenessPhonicsVocabularyReading fluencyComprehension strategies
Or lack of instruction in mathOr limited English proficiency
CSadler 62
A Student with LD
Has not been able to learn at a reasonable rate
Requires continued specialized instruction, and closer monitoring of progress with accountability for results Instruction/intervention may be similar to that
provided prior to eligibility depending on intensity and effectiveness for that student
How does RTI work for behavior, i.e., ED/EBD?
CSadler 63
EBIS ExamplesMonitoring Processes & Intervention Fidelity
Team Implementation Checklists Assessing and Planning EBIS (Instructional Focus) Assessing and Planning EBS Gauging EBIS Implementation EBS School Wide Evaluation Tool (SET) Planning & Evaluation Tool for Reading (PET-R) DIBELS Summary of Effectiveness
The Role of the Learning Specialist Fidelity Information (observations, program checklists)
– See websites in References Outcomes/Summative data analyses
CSadler 64
Implementing a EBIS (RTI) Approach
CSadler 65
7 Core Principles of EBIS (PBS & RTI) Implementation - District Level
Research-based and standards-driven instruction in general education for ALL students
Staff and funds for systematic data collection (for screening and progress monitoring) using direct measures of achievement and behavior
Staff and funds for developing and maintaining research-based, programs for targeted groups and individual student intervention
Development of policies and procedures for RTI implementation On-going professional development and support to ensure
fidelity of instruction/interventions and RTI decision-making processes at the schools
Schools to engage in collaborative, problem solving teamwork for student level decision-making (on a monthly basis)
Schools to engage in collaborative, problem solving teamwork for systems’ level decision-making (on at least a semi-annual basis)
CSadler 66
7 Core Principles of EBIS (PBS & RTI) Implementation School Level
(adapted from NASDSE, 2005, U of O Center for Teaching & Learning, 2008)
Clear GOALS are set and agreed upon by all Strong school-wide commitment to using a RTI framework and meeting academic
and behavior goals School personnel believe that ALL students are part of ONE proactive
educational system Believe all children can learn Use ALL available resources to teach ALL students All teachers are responsible for all students System includes behavior as well as academics
Instruction/Intervention are scientific and research-based Preventive, multi-tiered Instructional model Differentiated instruction Combined approaches, standard protocol and problem-solving
Collaborative teamwork is the norm Instructionally relevant assessments are used
Reliable and valid Multiple purposes (screening, diagnosis, progress monitoring, outcome/program
evaluation) Data guides instructional decisions On-going professional development, follow-up modeling, and coaching are
provided Leadership is vital and transparent
CSadler 67
Summary and Conclusions