90 likes | 213 Views
SAT Referral Process. 08/12/14. Multi-Tiered Academic Interventions (Burns, Jimerson , & Deno, 2007). Tier I : Universal screening and progress monitoring: All students, Tier II: Standardized interventions delivered in an efficient manner (small groups) : 15% to 20% of students at any time
E N D
SAT Referral Process 08/12/14
Multi-Tiered Academic Interventions (Burns, Jimerson, & Deno, 2007) Tier I: Universal screening and progress monitoring: All students, Tier II: Standardized interventions delivered in an efficient manner (small groups) : 15% to 20% of students at any time Tier III: Individualized interventions developed through in-depth problem analysis: 5% of students at any time
Process Main Points • Three main roles (System Manager, Facilitator, and Consultant) • Consultation before and after meeting • Use a consistent form
Team Members • Referring teacher • Another general education teacher • Special education teacher • School psychologist • Others as needed (another teacher, Title I teacher, SLP, counselor, social worker, nurse, etc.) • Principal?
Team Roles • Number of members • 5 – 8 (Rosenfield, 1996) • 7 or fewer (Zins, 1988) • Systems Manager - Organizes meeting & monitors status • Problem-solving Facilitator • Consultant
Consultation • Within 2 to 5 days of referral • Behaviorally define problem • Prioritize • Observe kid/baseline data • Conduct meeting within 2 weeks • 10 to 15 minutes • Meet within 2 weeks of conference • discuss the teacher’s understanding • assess implementation integrity • problem solve previously unforeseen difficulties with the intervention
Grade-Level Team Meeting - Progress • Who is making sufficient progress? • Should we discontinue and write a transition plan? • Who is not making sufficient progress? • Should we make a change within the tier? • Should we change tiers? • Is there anyone new that we should talk about?
Tier 2 Problem Solving • Check student’s attendance – Does the student attend school regularly • Observe the student – Are behavioral difficulties interfering with the interventions? • Incentivize the intervention – Is the student sufficiently motivated? • Examine intervention fidelity – Is the intervention occurring as it should? • Compare skill and GOM data – Are students not generalizing (skill data are going up but GOM are not) • Examine the accuracy within skill and GOM data – Are the students receiving a proficiency intervention when they should be focusing on acquisition?