R.T. Why?: RTI 101

PBIS Conference March 2010Jon Potter & Lisa Bates

Objectives:

• Participants will be familiar with the “Big Picture” of RTI

• Participants will understand system requirements for a strong RTI system.

RTI Misconception: What it is and what it’s not

Is Not IsAn instructional program A framework to implement

effective practices

A group of students that leaves your room for extra instruction

A system of matching resources to each individuals student’s needs

Possible to implement alone A collaborative effort

The same for every school Uniquely designed for each building

A special education, a general education, a Title 1, a Talented and Gifted initiative

An “Every” Education Initiative

An educational fad A systematic method for delivering instruction

Defining Terms:

• Is a system of organizing gen. ed. curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of all students

• Integrates all support programs to use resources more efficiently

• Applies to all students

• Can exist without using RTI

• Is an evaluation procedure identified in IDEA for identifying learning disabilities

• Is a special education procedure that is limited to assessment

• Applies only to children suspected of having LD

• Cannot be implemented without a system like MTI in place

Multi-Tiered Instruction(MTI)

Response to Intervention (RTI)

• To increase the achievement for ALL students by providing them with appropriate instruction matched to their needs

• To better identify and instruct students who may have a learning disability

Purposes of RTI

RTI focus is on General Education!

• Teachers don’t fail students, systems do.

• RTI is a system for differentiation of instruction!

• RTI is a system that is predicated on the general education teachers’ skill and knowledge of instruction, assessment, curriculum, and children.

Assumptions in RTI-land

• Every child can and will learn• IQ and intelligence are not the same

thing• People are first• Flexible skill grouping changes

(frequently) based on data (about skills)

• “Ability” grouping implies tracking, tracking = bad news

Core RTI Principles

• We can effectively teach all children• Intervene early• Use a multi-tier model of service delivery• Use a problem-solving method to make decisions

within a multi-tier model• Use research-based, scientifically validated

interventions/instruction to the extent available• Monitor student progress to inform instruction• Use data to make decisions• Use assessment for 3 different purposes

– Screening, diagnostic, progress monitoringNASDSE, 2006

Our education system has grown up through a process of

“Disjointed Incrementalism” (Reynolds, 1988)

One Perspective on History

The currentEducationSystem’sProgrammaticEvolution

K-12 Education

Gifted

Title 1

SPED

Migrant

ELLAt Risk

In The Past

GeneralEducation

Title Reading or

Other Reading Support

Special Education

Some “Fell’”Through

Some “Fell’”Through

Pre-referral team (CARES)reviews what teacher

has tried

Jessie participates in thecurriculum

Jessie isn’t doing well

Teacher tries again

Resumesregular

program

Jessiedoesn’t

improve

Jessieimproves

Teacher’s effort is deemed sufficient

Special Education referral is initiated by the teacher

Jessie’s teacher does his best to differentiate instruction and keeps

anecdotal data

Teacher is told to try again

Jessie is tested, usually by special education personnel, using IQ, achievement, and other tests

The

pre referral/discrepancy

approach

The RTI Way…..

Does the child find the system, or does the system find the child?

• Builds a unified (collaborative) system

• Identifies students who need help EARLY

• It helps students receive instruction that they NEED

• RTI leads to a seamless INSTRUCTION focused evaluation process for students who may have a Specific Learning Disability

How does RTI SYSTEMATICALLY help to teach all students

effectively?

RTI: Full Continuum of Support

GeneralEducation

Title Reading & Reading Support,

Gifted Ed.

Special Education,Gifted Ed.IIIIIIII

all along the continuum!I =

Selecting screening measures to identify at-risk students early is key: Need for Screening

Wo

rds

Per

Min

ute

• Reading is a crucial skill not optional• Teach reading early

– Days and weeks matter

RTI prevents students from falling behind at the start..

Reading Is Not An Optional Skill

• Poor readers in 4th grade struggle in literacy in Kindergarten (Torgeson, 2004)

• Children who struggle K-3 rarely achieve average reading skills (Torgeson, Rashotte, Alexander, 2001)

• Children who cannot read drop out of school

• Over 60% percent of people without a high school diploma do not currently have a job. (underemployed, incarnated, self employed, raising families, ect.) (Bureau of Labor Statistics)

• Academic success or failure is strongly related to adaptive functioning as an adult

• Is it a skill deficit or developmental lag ? Can’t we wait for them to “bloom?”– Without intervention, kids who are behind stay

behind (Juel, 1988; Francis, et al., 1996, Shaywitz, 1999)

– Skill deficits can be erased—especially if you catch them early!

• Good reading builds reading AND cognitive skills!

Days and Weeks Matter

Independent Reading %tile Minutes Per Day Words

Read Per Year98 65.0 4,358,00090 21.1 1,823,00070 9.6 622,00050 4.6 282,00030 1.3 106,00010 0.1 8,000 2 0.0 0

Adapted from Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding (1988).

Reading makes you Smarter

RTI helps students receive instruction that

they need

Daisy participates in the general core curriculumwith strong instruction

Daisy isn’t doing well Second Group

Intervention

EBIS Team designs individualized intervention

Resumesgeneralprogram

Daisydoesn’t

improve

Daisyimproves

Daisydoesn’t

improve

Daisyimproves

Intervention is intense and LD is suspected

Improvement is good and other

factors are suspected as

cause

Special Education referral is initiated by the team

EBIS Team reviews screening data and places Daisy in group intervention

Parents Notified

How RTI Works from a Student’s Perspective

Progress monitoring and intervention data is used

RTI Process differs from Pre-Referral Process

RTI Process Pre-Referral ProcessStudent in need of assistance identified by screening data

Student in need of assistance identified by individual teacher

Multi-tiered instruction addresses students need

Individual teacher typically responsible for addressing student’s need

Students progress is monitored closely through systematic progress monitoring

Student’s progress is monitored by the teacher through informal assessments

Decision about continued need for support is determined by district decision rules

Decision about continued need for support is made by team’s beliefs about the student’s progress

systematic

Not S

ystematic

• Teacher– “RTI really advocates for the student. The data really

needs to be gathered and assessed. Are the child’s academic needs really being met? Are they making progress? If not, what is the problem and what instructional strategies need to be changed? It seems that the child’s issues becomes one of the team’s and not solely the responsibility of the classroom teacher. Also, in many cases I am sure, some individual students just need some intervention to be successful and NOT special education!”

– Nancy Greene, 2nd grade teacher

Shared Responsibility

• Teacher– “RTI is designed to help target a specific deficit in a

student’s learning and through collaboration with others design a plan to meet that particular need. This has helped to improve my teaching.”

– Jeff Kelley, 4th grader teacher

Shared Responsibility

Discussion

Does the child find the system, or does the system find the child?

• Seamless “instruction focused” evaluation process

RTI improves our identification & instruction of students who may have LD

In the Past…..

• Evaluations were based on…– Discrepancy between cognitive abilities

and achievement– Psychological processing deficits

Discrepancy Based Evaluation

• IQ: 100• Achievement in Reading is : 80

• Qualify for special education

• What does a discrepancy based evaluation tell you about what instruction a student needed to make progress?

Discrepancy Based Evaluation

Psychological Processing Deficit Evaluation

• What does a psychological processing deficit evaluation really tell you?

• Performance on tests that measure psychological processing are biased

• No patterns have been found that differentiate LD/not LD

The Psychological Processing Problem:

• Patterns on psychological processing tests do not predict outcomes

• Patterns on psychological processing tests do not lead to treatment

The Psychological Processing Problem:

• What does a psychological processing based evaluation tell you if it does not. . .

– differentiate LD students from non-LD

students or

– lead to recommendations that improve achievement?

Psychological Processing Based Evaluation

• Special education placements tend to stabilize the reading growth of students with reading disabilities rather than accelerate it. (Vaughn, 1998, Moody, 2000)

• Students who enter special education 2+ years below age mates can be expected to maintain disparity or fall farther behind.

Special Education Outcomes

What do you really want to know when a student gets evaluated?

What’s wrong with them?

Vs.

What can I do to instruct them effectively?

• Evaluation focused on teaching and learning– Information is gathered in classroom context– “Response” is objective and measurable

• Process leads to effective plan– Intervention eligibility IEP– Nature and intensity of service is identified

–Tells you what the child needs for instruction!

RTI Based Evaluation

How do you plan and implement a RTI based

system?• Build CONSENSUS amongst the

staff• PLAN to develop your system

requirements (Infrastructure)• IMPLEMENT your system requirements• EVALUATE how your system is working

and make changes as needed

The Process is Ongoing and Long-Term

CONSENSUS

Assumptions

Professional DevelopmentLeadershipData based teaming

Reading

MathWriting

Behavior

1. Leadership2. Teaming3. Research based

core reading 4. Universal

Screening5. Research based

interventions6. Progress

Monitoring

7. Decision Rules8. Procedures for LD

evaluation & eligibility

9. Professional development & Fidelity

System Requirements

1. Leadership

District LevelStrong administrative support to ensure commitment and resources

AND

School Level

Strong teacher support to share in the common goal of improving instruction

District

• Classroom teachers & Specialists (representing different levels and schools)

• District office leaders

• Principals

School

• Principal• Classroom

Teachers• Specialists• Counselor• Psychologist

2. Teaming

The Team is only as strong as the least invested member

Research-Based CORE Program

RTI is predicated on effective, research-based programs that

include the BIG 5 components of reading:

Phonemic Awareness Phonics Fluency Vocabulary Comprehension

Phonics

Fluency

Phonemic AwarenessComprhensionVocabulary

For all students!

How does it help a struggling reader to be in core?

• They need the most instruction• Need to be exposed to grade

level material• If they miss grade level material,

they will never catch up• Just because there is a deficit in

one area, does not mean there is a deficit in all areas of reading

• Interventions are limited in scope

Differences in Learning to Read

Estimates from NICHHD research

Population %

Journey to Reading Instructional Requirements

5 Easy: children read before starting school

Need no formal decoding instruction

35 Relatively Easy Learn to read regardless of instructional approach

40 Formidable Challenge Need systematic and explicit instruction

20 One of the most difficult tasks to be mastered during schooling

Need intensive, systematic, direct, multi-sensory instruction

Differences in Learning to Read-Discussion

• How does this research match up with your own experience of learning to read? Your children’s? Your students’?

More about the core

Important Facts:

• Students cannot be identified as LD if their difficulty is due to lack of instruction in the BIG 5.

• Research-based program must be implemented as designed (fidelity)

Universal Screening

Procedures must identify which students are proficient (80%) and which are deficient (20%).

Good screening measures:

Are not intended to measure everything about a student, but provide an efficient an unbiased way to identify students who will need additional support (Tier 2 or Tier 3)

Help you assess the overall health of your Core program (Are 80% of yours students at benchmark/proficiency?)

Why Use Fluency Measures for Screening?

• Oral Reading Fluency and accuracy in reading connected text is one of the best indicators of overall reading comprehension (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001)

• We always examine fluency AND accuracy

• Without examining accuracy scores, we are missing a BIG piece of the picture

• Students MUST be accurate with any skill before they are fluent.

Oral reading fluency (ORF) does not tell you everything about a student’s reading skill, but a child who cannot read fluently

cannot fully comprehend written text and will need additional support.

Interventions– Must be designed to match identified needs

– Should always be based on student data

– Almost always given in small groups (Not necessarily

1:1)

– On-going data determines need to continue, discontinue,

or change curriculum, instruction, and/or assessment

– Uses more explicit instruction

– Provides more intensity

• Additional modeling and guided feedback

• Immediacy of feedback

– Does NOT replace core

Interventions

• Students pulled out for interventions may be “missing” something else…

BUT• If a student can’t read, how much are they

already missing in the classroom?“No one seems to notice that it is only during that single period each day [intervention time] that the struggling readers are provided with texts and lessons that theory and research support. The other 5 hours each day are largely comprised of texts and lessons that are over their heads.”

Richard Allington

Which students:– All receiving

intervention – Borderline scores

or performance-as resources allow

Progress Monitoring

Tools Must Be:• Brief• Valid • Reliable• Repeatable• Easy to Administer

Frequency:• Every 2 weeks

(minimum)• Every week (ideal)

Are the children learning? How can we tell?

Decision Rules

• Provide the “now what” after teams have analyzed student data

• Guide decisions for all tiers• Take the guesswork out of “what to do

next”• Ensure equity across schools

I think… I feel… I believeWhat data do you have that makes you think/feel/believe that?

-Dr. Ed Shapiro

10

20

30

40

Dec.Scores

Feb.Scores

Jan.Scores

MarchScores

AprilScores

MayScores

JuneScores

60

50

Aimline

Decision Rule Example: 4 Points Below the Goal Line

Ora

l R

ead

ing

Flu

ency

Add 15 minutes to intervention

Reduce group size to 3 students

Districts must adopt common procedures for doing this work:

Decision RulesFormsSPED Procedures

Think of RTI as a

standardized test

Students should be identified similarly

from school to school

Policy and Procedure Development (Standardization)

Professional Development and Fidelity

Content:• Core curriculum &

instruction • Assessment• Interventions• Teaming• Data-based decision

making• SPED procedures

Delivery:• Ongoing• Sufficient time to collaborate and plan

• Incorporates fidelity checks

Anticipate and be willing to meet the newly emerging needs based on student performance

Data ALSO used to drive professional development needs

Does it REALLYwork?????

Let’s look at some data!

Tigard-Tualatin School District OAKS Reading

Proficiency

Tigard-Tualatin School District OAKS Math

Proficiency

A Tale of Two Districts

District 1: RTI for 4-5 years District 2: Non RTI

Small, rural school district Small, rural school district

350 elementary students(PK-5)

470 elementary students(PK-5)

Title 1 services Title 1 services

31% students on Free and Reduced Lunch

19% students on Free and Reduced Lunch

A Tale of Two DistrictsDistrict 1: RTI

2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-20090

20

40

60

80

100

5162

8679

36 32

51913

6 8 2

BenchmarkStrategicIntensive

3rd Grade ORF

A Tale of Two DistrictsDistrict 2: Non RTI

2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-20090

20

40

60

80

100

6251 52 49

22

41 41 37

148 7

13

BenchmarkStrategicIntensive

3rd Grade ORF

RTI District:3rd Grade ITBS Reading

Comprehension

2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-20080

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

8296 90

74 77 75

District Proficient and AboveIA Proficient and Above

Questions?

Contacts

• Jon Potter– jpotter@ttsd.k12.or.us– 503-431-4149

• Lisa Bates– lbates@ttsd.k12.or.us– 503-431-4079