RTI and LD: Case Studies

Rhode Island RTI Initiative

Module 5

Edition 2, Feb. 2008

RTIGoals of this module

• To develop understanding of the LD criteria

• To gain experience making RTI-based special education decisions– Accepting a Referral– Evaluating for LD– Determining LD

RTI

There are three decisions within the special education process in

which RTI is important• Accepting a Referral – any student

• Evaluating– For other disabilities, specific criteria– If learning disabilities suspected, RTI

• Determining Learning Disability

RTIAccepting a Referral

• Great deal should have been done with a student already prior to referral, i.e.:– Parent Consultation– High-quality research-based instruction– Grade-level meeting – Differentiated small group Instruction– Intervention Team Meeting– Tutoring– Parents have received official notice

RTI Description of appropriate, high-quality, research-

based instruction

• Instruction

• Interventions

• Assessment data

RTI

Description of appropriate, high-quality, research-based instruction provided in all educational settings and by trained personnel; interventions of appropriate type, progression and intensity, implemented with fidelity and data indicating that frequent, repeated, appropriate assessments of this student's achievement/performance and progress were made, and that results were provided to the child's parents.

RTI Student’s Achievement/Performance

• Variety of Assessments– on assessment that measures progress towards

Grade Level/Span Expectation; – on district reading/math assessments; – on behavioral observations and/or rating scales; – on standardized norm-referenced tests

• Is the student’s achievement/performance significantly different from his/her peers? (e.g.: child performs below the +10th percentile in comparison to his or her peers)

YES NO 

RTI Progress During Instruction and Intervention

(1) Has the child received comprehensive classroom instruction (including supplemental strategies and differentiated instruction)?

YES NO(2) Has the child received individual and/or small group

interventions and frequent progress monitoring by classroom teacher and/or other personnel?

YES NO(3) Has the child received two periods (a month each at the

very minimum) of intensive interventions and weekly progress monitoring (including clear evidence of fidelity of implementation) YES NO

RTI

Is the gap between the student’s performance and his/her peers being closed?

• Can the student’s progress be maintained without

intensive support? YES* NO**

* If yes, describe effective strategies and interventions. **If no, proceed to consider suspicion of disability.

Gap Between Student’s Performance and Peers'

RTIAccept Referral

Would you accept the referral?

Yes, if the student has had intensive interventions and

continues to be significantly underachieving and

demonstrates the need for intensive

interventions to make progress…

= suspicion of a disability

RTI

• 5th grade boy

• Reading at grade-level

• Needs additional support in math

RTI Should we accept this referral?

Referral Meeting 3/24:

Mr. and Mrs. Martian, ParentsMr. Jupiter, General Ed. TeacherMs. Black Hole, Special Educator, Mrs. Comet, School Psychologist Ms. Jones, Guidance Counselor

What has been done with this student alreadyParent Consultation (9/20; 10/29)Math Instruction: InvestigationsGrade-level meeting (9/25)Differentiated small group InstructionIntervention Team Meeting (11/3, 12/15, 3/5)TutoringParents have received official notice

RTIBut….We are on Earth

Looking back at what we have just done ….

Let’s look at the “earthling” questions we collected…

Turn and Talk

RTIDoes have a LD?

• Comprehensive Evaluation

• Parents

• LD questions

• Exclusionary Criteria

RTI Will comprehensive evaluations change as a result of RTI? If so, how?

• Other disabilities – specific evaluation criteria– RTI can be useful

• For LD, RTI = criteria

• Still – ‘complete and individual’ doesn't change• RTI changes the nature of the comprehensive evaluation

away from testing for eligibility to an organization of organization of data already collected on the student’s instructional data already collected on the student’s instructional progress for planning increasingly intense progress for planning increasingly intense interventionsinterventions.

(NASDSE, 2006)

• WISC-III• Woodcock Johnson–III• Stanford Diagnostic

Reading Test• Motor Screen• Bender• Teacher Interview• Speech Screening• Health History• Social History• Educational History

• Intervention Summary Review

• Vision-Hearing Screening• Parent and Teacher

Interviews• CBM Normative

Comparisons• Curriculum-Based

Assessments• Observation

Our Old System Our New System

RTI 300.304 Evaluation Procedures

• (4) The child is assessed in all areas related to the suspected disability, including, if appropriate, health, vision, hearing, social and emotional status, general intelligence, academic performance, communicative status, and motor abilities;

• Emphasis Added

RTI

• Comprehensive Evaluation– Review of RTI Information

• Assessments• Intensive Intervention Response

– Observation– Additional evaluation based on remaining

assessment questions

RTIParents

StudentsTeachersParents

School-Based Problem Solving TeamEL Teacher

Special EducatorsSchool Psychologists-Diagnosticians

Special Education

Reading SpecialistCounselor

Teacher Assistants

RTIParents

• Involved from the beginning• Documentation about RTI process shared

– State's policies regarding data and gen. ed services– Strategies and interventions for increasing child's

rate of learning– Parents' right to request an evaluation

• Informed consent is required for an evaluation, a reevaluation and for the initial delivery of special education services.

• Active member of evaluation team

RTI Learning Disability Determination 

a) Achievement Gap Summarize group’s conclusion regarding the evidence from multiple sources that a student’s current achievement* is significantly different than his/her age peers (*after provision of appropriate general education learning experiences including at least two periods of intensive interventions).

AND b) Educational ProgressSummarize group’s conclusion regarding the evidence that the student does not make sufficient progress to meet age or State-approved grade level/span expectations, based on child’s limited responsiveness to intensive scientific, research-based interventions which have been implemented with fidelity. Longer-term intensive interventions are necessary for progress.

In one or more of the eight areas,does the student’s performance meet the description under (a) Achievement Gap AND (b) Educational Progress

RTIExclusionary Criteria

This finding is NOT primarily the result of:• A visual, hearing, or motor disability • Mental retardation• Emotional disturbance • Cultural factors • Environmental or economic disadvantage • Limited English Proficiency

If any one of the following is a consideration, it is NOT the DETERMINANT FACTOR of the group’s finding:

• Student has lacked appropriate instruction in literacy or in math • Student has had extended absences or repeated change of schools• Student has had an inconsistent or inappropriate educational program

RTI Martian's Special Education

Decisions

• Evaluation

• LD Determination

RTI What about us? Turn and Talk

Process Componen

ts

We do now?

We need to develop …

What do I do now?

Awareness, Infrastructure Building, Implementation

RTI Description of appropriate, high-quality, research-

based instruction• Instruction

• Interventions

• Assessment data

RTI

Description of appropriate, high-quality, research-based instruction provided in all educational settings and by trained personnel; interventions of appropriate type, progression and intensity, implemented with fidelity and data indicating that frequent, repeated, appropriate assessments of this student's achievement/performance and progress were made, and that results were provided to the child's parents.

RTI

• Look at information

• Jot down points for a summary statement

• Share points and come to consensus

RTI Student’s Achievement/Performance

• Variety of Assessments– on assessment that measures progress towards

Grade Level/Span Expectation; – on district reading/math assessments; – on behavioral observations and/or rating scales; – on standardized norm-referenced tests

• Is the student’s achievement/performance significantly different from his/her peers? (e.g.: child performs below the +10th percentile in comparison to his or her peers)

YES NO 

RTIMartian

• Investigation Unit Tests

• Math Calculation CBMs

• 4th grade Math Grades

• 4th grade NECAP

Unit One 45%, Unit Two 60%

Mult/Div 20 digits, 60% accuracyAdd/Sub 29 digits, 80% accuracy

Partially Proficient

Problem Solving Approaching StandardCalculations Below StandardEffort At Standard

RTI Progress During Instruction and Intervention

(1) Has the child received comprehensive classroom instruction (including supplemental strategies and differentiated instruction)?

YES NO(2) Has the child received individual and/or small group

interventions and frequent progress monitoring by classroom teacher and/or other personnel?

YES NO(3) Has the child received two periods (at the very minimum

a month each) of intensive interventions and weekly progress monitoring (including clear evidence of fidelity of implementation) YES NO

RTI

• Classroom Instruction

• Intervention One

• Intervention Two

Investigations Small group differentiation

Math Calculations with partner and TA

Math Calculations with partner and TAExplicit instruction (Mul, Div, Fractions) in small group

• Weekly Progress Monitoring

• Fidelity of Implementation

RTI

Is the gap between the student’s performance and his/her peers being closed?

• Can the student’s progress be maintained without

intensive support? YES* NO**

* If yes, describe effective strategies and interventions. **If no, proceed to consider suspicion of disability.

Gap Between Student’s Performance and Peers'

RTI Martian's Math CBMAddition and Subtraction

05

1015202530354045

9/5

9/19

10/3

10/1

7

10/3

1

11/1

4

11/2

8

12/1

2

12/2

6 1/9

1/23 2/

6

2/20

Cor

rect

Dig

its in

2 m

inut

es

Add/Sub CBM GOAL

3rd Grade End of the Year Benchmark is 32 Correct Digits

RTI Martian's Math CBM Multiplication and Division

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

9/5

9/1

9

10

/3

10

/17

10

/31

11

/14

11

/28

12

/12

12

/26

1/9

1/2

3

2/6

2/2

0

Co

rre

ct

Dig

itis

in 2

min

ute

s

Fall Mult/Div CBM Winter Mult/Div CBM Class Average Goal

RTI

36 Correct Digits Addition/Subtraction, ROI .5 Met 3rd grade benchmark

28 Correct Digits Multiplication/Division, ROI .7 Average 5th grade 38 Correct Digits, <10th percentile local norms

Investigation Unit 3 Re-take 83%Investigations Unit 4 76% (Average 90%, bottom quarter)

Investigations Unit 5 70% (Average 88%, bottom tenth)

Two on-going small group interventions in math, beyond one hour math block

RTIAccept Referral

Would you accept the referral?

Yes, Martian has had intensive interventions and

continues to be significantly underachieving and

he demonstrates the needs for intensive

interventions to make progress.

RTILauren

Lauren, a third grader, is entering your district late in the year. Her family has provided records from her previous school district, which has been giving her additional support in reading for two years.

You are a member of your school's team, which is meeting as a Referral Review Team to consider next steps for Lauren. Parents have received official notice.

RTILauren:

What shall we do?

Divide into two groups: (1) Interventions and (2) Assessment

Review Lauren's case in preparation for the Referral Team Meeting based on your group's assignment.

6 participants role-play a meeting3 from Interventions, 3 from Assessment

Remaining participants fishbowl and provide feedback after the meeting regarding Lauren and the process taken by the team.

RTIFishbowl Participants

Fishbowl participants:

What did you see that you feel reflects best practice in systematic problem solving to support learning for all students/RTI?

What questions do you have?

What would you have approached or done differently?

RTI Lauren: Critique of Idaho's Process

How do you help your staff understand the materials from Idaho? How do you translate it to RI RTI language?

• What did you like about the process they used? What are best practices?

• What concerns do you have?

• What would you do differently?

RTIRTI, LD

3 THINGS I LEARNED TODAY• • •

2 THINGS I STILL HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT• •

1 THING I KNOW OUR SCHOOL NEEDS TO DO•