Response to Intervention (RTI)Lindenhurst Schools

2007-2008

Long Island Association for Supervision and Curriculum

Development (LIASCD)

Fall Conference – October 19, 2007

Workshop Objectives

Understanding the stages of adopting and integrating RTI into several elementary schools

Identify factors that contribute to the effective implementation of RTI

Recognizing the importance of a collaborative approach

Understanding the necessity of managing data Sharing ideas and insights between districts

http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/onlinemodules.html

Response to Intervention - RTI

Federal Government - – Reauthorization of IDEA in 2004– Shift in identifying students with reading difficulties

and classifying them Learning Disabled. – General Education and Special Education work in a

collaborative model. Roles of each teacher must be redefined to address literacy.

– Schools must shift resources to support struggling readers in the general education setting.

Definition of RTI

High-quality instruction/intervention that is matched to students’ needs and has been demonstrated through scientific research and practice to produce high learning rates for most students

Learning rate and level of performance are the primary sources of information used in ongoing decision-making

Important educational decisions about intensity and duration of interventions are based on individual student’s response to instruction across multiple tiers of intervention.

National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005

Problem-solving Model – ISTProcess, not interventions, are standardized

Individualized plan for each child that involves different levels of consultation:

•Description of student’s problem

•Data collection and problem analysis

•Intervention design and implementation – differentiated instruction determined by data

•Progress monitoring

•Evaluation of intervention effectiveness

•Flexible groupings throughout the year Wilson, 2007

Interventions are NOT

Shortened assignments Preferential seating Parent contacts Classroom observations Suspensions Doing more of the same assignments Retention

McCook, J., 2005

CORE Concepts of RTI

Research-based instruction – core programs are taught with fidelity as intended to maximize effectiveness. Instruction is focused on achieving state standards

Use of data to inform instruction – universal screening of all students to measure and to monitor the development of skills – provide program accountability

Measurement of response – progress monitoring is used to determine the effectiveness of interventions – it is systematic, documented, and shared with staff

Intervention Organized in Tiers

• Layers of intervention responding to students’ needs

• Each tier provides more intensive and supportive intervention

• Aimed at preventing reading disabilities

Torgeson, 2004

Multi-Tiered Response

Tier IIICSE

Referral

Tier IISmall Group InterventionMore intensive duration

Tier IWhole group classroom instruction

ALL

SOME

FEW

3 Tier Model for RTI

Tier 3

More Differentiated Intense Interventions

*Increase frequency and duration of intervention

*Referral to Special Education

Strategic Monitoring

Tier 2

Implementing Supplementary Instruction

*General Ed Teacher, AIS Teacher, Related Service Providers,

Special Ed Teachers

*Fundations, Wilson, Small Group Instruction through AIS Reading, ERSS Speech

Progress Monitoring

Tier 1

Implementing Classroom Instruction – General Ed Teacher

* Researched Based Curriculum – Harcourt Reading Program, Differentiated Instruction, Focus instruction on Big Ideas of Literacy.

Three Levels of Assessment

Benchmark Assessment – 3 times a year– Are there children who need additional support?– How many?– Which children?- What to do? Evaluate benchmark assessment data

Progress Monitoring – - Assess at-risk children more frequently – every two weeks

- Are current programs sufficient to keep progress on track or are additional supports / interventions needed?

Strategic Monitoring - weekly monitoring

What decisions do we make with data?

Plan for support with focus on BIG IDEAS.– Grouping – small group instruction, homogenous

groups, differentiated instruction, flexible grouping.– Time – How much? How Frequently? When?– Teacher / Student Interactions – modeling, direct

explanation, increase student engagement, increase guided practice with immediate feedback, scaffolding to support learning, review

BIG IDEAS

Phonemic Awareness Alphabetic Principle Accuracy and Fluency with connected text Vocabulary Comprehension

General Outcome Measures- (GOM) of Early Literacy

Relevant Features – Measure Basic Early Literacy Skills (Big Ideas)– Efficient– Standardized– Sensitive to growth and change over time and to the

effects of intervention

How can we use GOM to change Reading Outcomes?

Begin Early Focus Instruction on the BIG IDEAS of Early

Literacy Focus Assessment on Outcomes for Students

Getting Started…..

Select a team – – Classroom teachers, reading specialists, psychologist, building

principal, special education teacher(s), speech teacher, other. People that have a vested interest in reading and literacy outcomes.

– Attend training sessions– Plan for data collection –

Who will collect data? When will you collect data? How will you collect data?

Collecting Data

Plan and Schedule Data Collection Organize Resources Collect Data Enter the Data Use Data for Educational Decision Making

Scheduling Data Collection

Classroom Approach – Obtain coverage for classroom teacher. Approximately 1-2 minutes per benchmark per student. Teacher works in hallway / room.

Advantages – Teachers assess own students, less disruptive to entire school. Disadvantages – Loss of instructional time, coverage, requires more days.

Building-wide Approach – Multiple specialists / trained members of team will assess students. Teacher brings class to library, cafeteria, gym, or other location with tables. Entire class can be assessed in 30 minutes.

Advantages – can be completed in one day, minimal classroom disruptions and loss of instructional time.

Disadvantages – space, trained staff, teachers not assessing.

Benchmark Assessments

Kindergarten

Fall – Initial Sound Fluency (ISF), Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Letter Sound Fluency (LSF)

Winter – Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Letter Sound Fluency (LSF), Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)

Spring – Same as Winter

Benchmark Assessments

Grade 1Fall – Letter Naming Fluency (LNF), Letter Sound Fluency (LSF),

Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF)

Winter – Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (PSF), Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF), DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (DORF), Maze

Spring – Same as Winter

Benchmark Assessment – Cont’d

Grade 2 – 5• Oral Reading Fluency• Maze (Comprehension)

Data Management System

AIMS Web – Achievement Improvement Monitoring System

www.aimsweb.com

School Readiness for RTI

Assessment: screening measures, progress monitoring practices and procedures

Curriculum: high-quality, research-based core curricula

Instruction: focus on effective instruction and interventions

School Readiness - Continued

Positive School Climate: school-wide processes and structures, individual student interventions, and a professional learning community

Professional Development: outcome focused content and ongoing assistance

Leadership: problem solving and individual characteristics of strong leaders

Closing the Achievement Gap: School Readiness for RtI, Sopris West Educational Services, 2007

Thank You for

Your Attention

and

Participation