RtI in Monroe CountyThat Was Then…This is Now

Monroe County ISDMichelle Brahaney, Assistant Superintendent for Special Education and Early Intervention Services

That Was Then….Early Efforts at Early Intervention

2001-2002: Pilot project implemented with 4 schools in the county;

2002-03: Project expanded to include 23 schools; approximately 50 staff and 500 students involved county wide;

2003-04: over 100 classrooms were participating.

Project Implementation

Students identified based upon MLPP scores; Speech therapists and resource room teachers

worked with small groups of K-1 students on basic reading skills;

Some Districts used reading specialists and other personnel;

Post-test results on MLPP looked very promising but…

LD referral rates continued to be high overall throughout the county although pockets of progress existed.

LD Identification Trends 2001-2008

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

% SLD Eligibility

State Airport Bedford Dundee Ida Jefferson Mason Monroe Summerfield Whiteford

District

LD Identification Trends in State and Monroe County

2001

2008

Why The Discrepancy?

Lack of systematic approach in how early intervention was implemented;Some districts began to use DIBELS data to intervene systematically and systemically;Those districts began to see better results;Inconsistency led to inconsistency;We decided we needed to get serious about RtI.

What We Did

After studying a variety of resources, we chose MAASE “Response to Intervention” document as the basis for our work.

Used START intensive training process as a model with teams selected at each site for training and to support RtI implementation.

January 2009, provided a full day training to elementary teams using MAASE document as a guide.

Every district sent at least one team to training. Provided copy of MAASE book and a resource binder

to each team.

Response to Intervention/MAASE

Core Principles

We can effectively teach all children. Intervene early. A multi-tiered model of service delivery provides a

systematic approach to support student learning. Use a problem-solving model to make decisions within a

multi-tiered model. Use research-based scientifically validated

instruction/intervention. Monitor student progress to inform instruction. Use data to make decisions. Use assessment for three different purposes: identify,

diagnose, monitor.

RtI Requirements

Universal screening

Progress monitoring

Three Tier Model of Instruction

Problem –Solving Model

Data Driven

Scientifically Validated Materials and Strategies

Needs Assessment

Review of each core principle was followed by “Team Time.”

Each team completed “School Wide Assessment Tool for RtI” from MAASE “Response to Intervention” handbook.

Each team then developed an action plan which needed to be in place by the following school year.

Incentives

Through a combination of funding sources the ISD was able to provide reimbursement for:Subs to attend monthly meetings and for group RtI work at buildings;Universal screening--$1 per student per building for grades K-1;Instructional materials to support interventions;Purchase of books for professional study groups at the building level.

Monthly Sharing Meetings

Each meeting started with “progress monitoring” of each team’s progress in implementation;

Combination of “team time” and reporting out on selected topics;

Teams also presented on various topics related to intervention at the 3 tiers in their districts;

Attendance grew each month as more teams were added and staff were added to each team;

As we ended the year, all but 3 elementary schools in the county were participating.

Middle School RtI

Due to success of elementary teams, we decided to add middle school to RtI inititiative.

Followed similar process of bringing in building teams for full day training in December 2009.

Used “How RtI Works in Secondary Schools” as model.

Focus on systemic interventions related to drop-out prevention: Early Warning Systems.

Betterghighschools.org also a very valuable resource. Teams completed needs assessment relevant to

secondary concerns. Implementation guide helped teams to get started.

How RtI Works in Secondary SchoolsBy: Evelyn Johnson, Lori Smith, Monica Harris

Purposes of RtI at Different Levels

Elementary Screening and Prevention: to

identify students at risk for academic failure

Early Intervention: enhances general curriculum for all students and provides remediation for targeted skills

Disability Determination: based in part on failure to make progress as a result of intervention

Secondary Build Capacity: to address

diverse needs of all students

Intervention: to support students at risk for drop out based upon Early Warning System data

Continuous School Improvement: improve learning through integrated system of academic and behavioral support.

Adapted from Johnson, Smith and Harris; How RtI Works in Secondary Schools, 2009.

Similar Incentives/ProcessBut With Secondary Focus

Many used Early Warning System for universal screening.

Focus was more on Tier I supports (differentiated instruction/positive behavior supports) than Tier II or Tier III interventions.

Attendance at monthly sharing meetings continued to expand.

All but one middle school in county actively participated.

One Example of EWS Data

Target population: Monroe County middle school with highest % of free-reduced lunch students and minority sub-groups including ELL.

Students exiting 6th grade were identified by teachers as “at-risk” for failure in academic areas.

29 general education students identified as at risk in both ELA and math were included on list for intervention.

Progress tracked for school year using EWS criteria: absences greater than 10%, failure in ELA or math; history of discipline referrals

Students Absent > 10% of Days

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

6th Grade 7th Grade

>10%

< 10%

% Receiving 1 or MoreDiscipline Referrals

0102030405060708090

100

6th Grade 7th Grade

1 or more

0 Referral

Students Earning Below C in ELA/Math

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

ELA Math

Quarter 1

Quarter 2

Quarter 3Quarter 4

This is Now:What Does RtI Look Like in Monroe County?

Elementary-Universal Screening-Data based decision making-Problem solving process-Grade level meetings: assessment walls-Increasing focus on Tier I-Tier II supports-Tier III varies by district/still evolving

What Does It Look Like?

Secondary– Many districts using some form of EWS as

universal screening– Greater focus on transitioning students from

elementary to middle/middle to high school– Counselors very important in terms of providing

interventions– Check and Connect– Interventions vary

What Else Helped?

Michael Rettig: scheduling to maximize student achievement at elementary level;

Revision of LD Guidelines: SAT process mirrored RtI requirements for levels of intervention;

Increase of co-teaching at all levels with push-in service for SLPs;

Secret Weapon: Early Intervention Reading Consultant;

School-wide positive behavior supports Building principals key to successful

implementation

Initial IEPs by School Year

0

50

100

150

200

250

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

Next Steps

RtI Teams completed needs assessment at conclusion of 2010-11 school year;

Most teams identified need for more general education teachers to understand concept of RtI, especially Tier 1 interventions;

Plan for County-Wide Inservice Day and beyond