Creating an RTI Culture at the District Level in order to make Sound Eligibility Decisions

1. Creating an RTI Culture at the District Level in order to make Sound Eligibility Decisions Oak Hills Local School District Cincinnati, Ohio UC Summer Institute June 14 &15, 2010 Jeff Langdon, M.Ed. Director of Curriculum and Instruction (K-8) Rachel Searcy, M.Ed. Coordinator for Intervention Services Geoff Harold, M.Ed. Assistant Principal at Bridgetown Middle Jessica Fuhrman, Ed.S. School Psychologist at Oak Hills High Keri Bennett, Ed.S. School Psychologist at C.O. Harrison Elem.

2. Objectives • Demonstrate how the action planning process, including understanding adaptive change, has assisted in the adoption of RTI • Provide examples of the application of RTI at OHLSD • Discuss how the implementation of RTI is building a culture for making sound eligibility decisions

3. Who is Oak Hills? • 5 Elementary Schools • 3 Middle Schools • 1 High School • Approximately 8,100 students • “Excellent” 7 years in a row • Currently “Excellent with Distinction” • Ending the 2nd year of RTI • implementation

4. Why RTI at Oak Hills? • Need for effective, efficient model to address needs of ALL learners • Need for research-based interventions during structured intervention times • Need for increased use of formative data to make instructional decisions

5. Our Model • OHLSD Model: • All students included in cone • Increasing supports within each tier • Base guides building and district planning process

6. Systems-level Capacity and Support • Yearly action plan supported by district leadership team and building administration • Who, what, when timeline • Flexible and ongoing • Continuously reviewed and monitored

7. Systems-level Capacity and Support • Focus not only on technical aspects of the plan, but also the ADAPTIVE change that will need to occur to support the plan • Technical change- requires procedural • changes or “ways of • doing things” • Adaptive change- requires change in • stakeholders’ beliefs, • values, and behaviors

8. Our Model • OHLSD Model: • All students included in cone • Increasing supports within each tier • Base guides building and district planning process

9. Data-Based Decision Making • Prior to RTI Implementation: • DIBELS administered individually by classroom teachers • Data analyzed at the classroom level by individual teachers • Training, support, and materials determined at the building level • Screening limited to K-2

10. Deployment of AIMSweb • 2 teams of 25 assessors visit all 9 buildings for • one full day each • K-8 plus at-risk 9th and 10th grade students

11. Deployment of AIMSweb • Use of Palm pilots for increased • standardization and efficiency • Laptop stations for immediate uploading of • data to staff

12. Deployment of AIMSweb • Ease for teachers to gain access to data • Entire classroom screened with reading and • math in a matter of minutes • Lower cost (reduced paper, no subs)

13. AIMSweb Technical vs. Adaptive Change • Technical change- requires procedural changes or “ways of doing things” • Creating an assessment “window” • Uploading data into a data management system • Adaptive change- requires change in stakeholders’ beliefs, values, and behaviors • Creation of a new way of doing “business” • Modeled best practice on gathering data • Showed importance of the data to the school community

14. Our Model • OHLSD Model: • All students included in cone • Increasing supports within each tier • Base guides building and district planning process

15. Multi-tiered Support • Prior to RTI Implementation: • Primarily staff designed interventions • Heavy emphasis on accommodations and modifications • First steps typically were individual problem-solving meetings for any referrals for students with concerns

16. Implementation of Standard- Protocol Model • Corrective Reading • Read Naturally • PALS • Fast Forward • Rewards • Number Worlds

17. Multi-tiered Support… • Doesn’t exist without the 1st Tier!! • Core Curriculum Review Process to evaluate programs, instructional practices, and assessment methods

18. Deployment of “Reading Street” and “My Sidewalks” (K-5)

19. Tiered Technical vs. Adaptive Change • Technical change- requires procedural changes or “ways of doing things” • Purchasing research-based programs • Organizing all the students into intervention groups • Adaptive change- requires change in stakeholders’ beliefs, values, and behaviors • Engagement process with staff in selecting research-based programs to fit our students’ needs • Ongoing professional development for staff implementing the interventions

20. Our Model • OHLSD Model: • All students included in cone • Increasing supports within each tier • Base guides building and district planning process

21. Fidelity of Implementation • Prior to RTI Implementation: • Intervention process was designed and implemented at building level • Various methods were used to document intervention history • Need for training on treatment integrity • No structured decision rules for moving students in and out of interventions across the district

22. Policies and Procedures Manual • Common language across district • Decision rules • Documentation process • Measures of treatment integrity • Procedures for informing parents on the RTI process and including them as a key stakeholder

23. Student Services Website Launched June 2010 • Build community awareness of the core components of RTI • Provide resources and intervention strategies to teachers and parents on various topics in education • Provide valuable links to reputable websites on RTI, PBS, mental health, etc. for our community

24. FidelityTechnical vs. Adaptive Change • Technical change- requires procedural changes or “ways of doing things” • Creating RTI documentation forms • Setting up a website • Adaptive change- requires change in stakeholders’ beliefs, values, and behaviors • Creating time to review the documentation forms and discuss treatment integrity as a key component • Observing during intervention time to check for implementation fidelity

25. OHLSD Learnings: If your District or Building-level RTI teams only focus on the technical elements of rolling out the RTI initiative, true change will not occur. The teams need to plan to make adaptive changes in the structure, as well, in order to make a true culture shift in the way they do “business” for kids. Changing the beliefs, values, and behaviors of the system is part of the action planning process for RTI. We believe that will lead to making sound eligibility decisions at the end of the process.