Presented by: Dr. James M. Patton, Monarch Tribal College Associate and Professor Emeritus

1. CULTURAL RESPONSIVITY, RTI and DISPROPORTIONALITY:Contexts, What We Know and New and Expanded Roles for Culturally Responsive Educators Presented by: Dr. James M. Patton, Monarch Tribal College Associate and Professor Emeritus The College of William and Mary jmpatt@wm.edu To Monarch Improving Paraeducator Programs in Tribal Colleges’ Participants Great Falls, MT March 16, 2012

2. Overview • Introduction and Perspectives • Cultural Responsivity • Culturally Responsivity and RTI Frameworks • Culturally Responsive RTI Frameworks—New and Expanded Roles for Education Professionals • The Challenge of Disproportionality

3. Culture is Central to Student Learning • Cultural Practices actually Shape Thinking Processes (Hollins, 1996). • Educators Trained in Culturally Responsive Teaching are Better Equipped to Spot early Warning Signs of Academic and Behavioral Distress. • Culturally Responsive Teaching Encourages Teachers to Use their Students’ Identities and Backgrounds as Valuable Sources to Inform Instruction and Conveys to Students that they are Respected and Genuinely Expected to Succeed.

4. Cultural Responsivity Underlying our Discussion is the Premise that Cultural Responsiveness is a Frame of Mind, More than a Set of Strategies or Practices that Guides the Teaching and Management Decisions that Teachers Make. 4

5. Culturally Responsive Practices Culturally Responsivity is “the Validation, Consideration, and Integration of Individual’s Culture, Language, Heritage and Experiences Leading to Supported Learning and Behavioral Development”. (NCCREst, 2008) An Educator Engages in Culturally Responsive Practices when he or she Utilizes the Culture, Frames of References and Performance Styles of CLD Learners to Encounter them, Assess and Evaluate them, Teach them (i.e., Counsel, Lead, etc.) and Make Decisions that are more Relevant and Effective for Them. To Accomplish the above it is Necessary to constantly Work toward Becoming a Cultural Broker and Culturally Competent. Patton, J. (In press) 5

6. Cultural Responsive Practices (Cont.) • These same Educators engage in what Mariane Hedegaard calls Instructional Planning and Implementation through making “Double Moves”. • In practice, Culturally Responsive Education ranges from the inclusion of specific pedagogical strategies to the construction of School Environments rooted in a given Cultural Prototype (Nieto, 1999). 6

7. Culturally Responsive Teachers’ GraphicNational Center for Culturally Responsive Education Systems- 2003)

8. Culturally Responsive RTI • RTI systems, when implemented with Treatment Fidelity and when Responsive to Culture, Class and Language, have the potential of being a significant factor in Reducing Disproportionality. (Patton, J., in press)

9. Culturally Responsive RTI Frameworks—Guiding Assumptions Allows for more Cultural Context and Informed Intervention Design • “We assert that the emphasis on the student’s response to an intervention or interventions, shifts to an emphasis on the importance of the interventions as responsive to the child”. (Harris-Murri, King & Rostenberg, 2006,p.9)

10. RTI—A FRAMEWORK • Montana, Arizona and North Dakota have RTI frameworks that involve the practice of providing high-quality instruction to all students while using ongoing assessments to monitor student progress to make data-driven instructional decisions through collaborative team processes.*** • “RTI is an approach that has a dual focus on: 1) improving the quality of instructional practices for all students and 2) providing additional instructional and behavioral supports for some students to ensure that every student is a success.”* • Extant research proves the effectiveness of RTI in addressing the learning difficulties among school-age children, confirmatory research of its effectiveness in Early Childhood populations is still forthcoming. *(NPDCI, “Response to Intervention (RTI) in Early Childhood—Building Consensus on the Defining Features”, 2012) ***(Montana Response to Intervention: RTI Framework, Montana Department of Public Instruction, 2008); Arizona RTI Framework, Arizona Department of Education, 2009; North Dakota RTI Framework, North Dakota Department of Public Instruction, 2010)

11. RTI Features • “The key components of an RTI approach in Early Childhood education are: (a) formative assessment, (b) instruction and tiered interventions/supports, and (c) collaboration and data-driven decision-making.”* • “An effective core curriculum and intentional teaching are the foundation of instructional practices for RTI early childhood. This concept includes targeting Tiered Interventions for some children who require additional academic and/or behavioral supports….”* • RTI includes methods that practitioners can use to collaborate with families, specialists, and others to plan and organize learning and behavioral supports and to assess how well children are responding to them.* * (NPDCI, “Response to Intervention (RTI) in Early Childhood—Building Consensus on the Defining Features”, 2012)

12. Culturally Responsive and RTI Frameworks RTI Tier 1---Universal Interventions (80-90%)* Tier 2—Targeted Secondary Interventions (5-10%)* Tier 3—Intensive Tertiary Interventions (1-8%)* *(Montana Response to Intervention: RTI Framework, Montana Department of Public Instruction, 2008) ALL OF THE RESEARCH, WORK, PRACTICE AND IMPLMENTATION OF RTI ON THE PART OF EDUCATORS SHOULD BE MINDFUL OF THE ROLE OF CULTURE AND CLASS IN THE RTI PROCESS.** **(NCCREST, 2008)

13. Culturally Responsive RTI Frameworks—New and Expanded Roles for Culturally Responsive Educators • RTI Models illuminate the Need for more “Systems” and “Ecological” Thinking---Remember Lev Vgotsky… • RTI represents a shift from “within child”deficit paradigms of thinking to a strengthbasedeco-behavioral perspective that Builds upon the “Funds of Knowledge” of Students and Their Families---Remember …..

14. Culturally Responsive RTI Frameworks—New and Expanded Roles for Culturally Responsive Educators (Cont.) • RTI Models demand an Increased Focus on Problem Solving and Knowing and Using Evidence/Data Based Decision Making and Interventions, especially Early Interventions that should ALL be Culturally Responsive. • These Models Require an Increase in the Time, Effort, Attention and Focus on Collaboration, Problem Solving, Team and Relationship Building and Consultation among Teachers, other pertinent Personnel and Parents regarding the effective use of Culturally Responsive Evidence Based Early Intervention Activities in the Classroom and Home. (NASP, The Role of the School Psychologist in the RTI Process, 2006)

15. Culturally Responsive RTI Frameworks • Additional Resources UNC Crosswalks Project www.fpgunc. edu/~scpp/crosswalks/toolbox

16. Additional RTI Resources (Cont.) • AZ Response to Intervention (RTI) System of Behavioral SupportsTitle IHigh School Renewal LiteracyMathematicsScienceSocial Studies Structured English ImmersionEarly Childhood – PreschoolExceptional Student Services RTI Home | RTI Framework | FAQ

17. Additional RTI Resources • Arizona RTI: Academic & Behavioral System of Support Overview: The Response to Intervention (RTI) process is a multi-tiered approach to providing services and interventions to all learners at increasing levels of intensity. This process can be used for making decisions about general, remedial, and special education, creating a well-integrated and seamless system of instruction that is guided by student outcome data… Belief Statements Glossary of Teresa RTI Self Assessment FormAZ RTI Database:Email Mark Hammill at the AZ Department of Education for a username and password at Mark.Hammill@azed.govRTI Resources: Brief List AZ RTI Training Module 1Module 1 PresentationModule 1 QuizAZ RTI Training Module 2Module 2 PresentationModule 2 Quiz AZ RTI Training Module 3Module 3 PresentationModule 3 QuizAZ RTI: Behavior Training ModuleBehavior Module Presentation

18. Additional RTI Resources • North Dakota RTI • To request assistance in your state • E-mail: RTIcenter@air.org • Does the state have a RTI website? Yes. • Does the state have a RTI guidance document? Yes. • What does the state allow for SLD determination? RTI and IQ Discrepancy • (2)(i) The child does not make sufficient progress to meet age or State approved grade-level standards in one or more of the areas identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section when using a process based on the child’s response to scientific, research-based intervention; OR (ii) The child exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, relative to age, State-approved grade level standards, or intellectual development, that is determined by the group to be relevant to the identification of a specific learning disability, using appropriate assessments http://www.dpi.state.nd.us/speced/guide/SLDGuide07.pdf • Does the state have an RTI Related SPDG? No. • Does the state have RTI Components in its SPP? Yes. • Does the state have RTI Components in its SPP? Yes.

19. Additional RTI Resources • North Dakota DPI Sample of State Resources: • RTI Model Using the Exclusion Model (pdf) • How to Involve Regular Education Teachers in the RTI Process • Early Intervening Services (EIS) (pdf)--This brief, developed by the State Superintendent’s office of North Dakota, describes the difference between early intervening services (EIS) and early intervention, how much of IDEA funds can be used for EIS, and what it means to have “scientifically-based” interventions. It is housed on the Response to Intervention and Title I section of the North Dakota Department of Public Instruction website. 

20. Donovan, M. S., & Cross, C. T. (Eds.). (2002). Minority Students in Special and Gifted Education. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. National Research Council Of the National Academy of Science (NAS) Recommendations on Special Education.

21. NAS 1982 and 2002 and The Persistenceof the Problem • In 1982 Disproportionality was found to be a problem as reported by the NAS. (Heller, Holtzman & Messick, 1982) • …“Twenty years later, Disproportionality in special education persists.” (Donovan & Cross, 2002)

22. National Research Council Report (2002) Recommendations for States: • “Course work and practicum experience to prepare teachers to deliver culturally responsive instruction. More specifically, teachers should be more familiar with the beliefs, values, cultural practices, discourse styles, and other features of student’s lives…(p.373).”

23. National Research Council Report(2002) Cont. • In response to Disproportionality, the NRC calls for extensive changes in training and roles of teachers, administrators, and related service personnel in order to makeeducation professionals responsive to a diverse population. In particular, this body suggests that “recognizing and working with implicit and explicit racial stereotypes should be incorporated in training programs” (p. 317).

24. What is Disproportionality? • “Disproportionality is the over or underrepresentation in special and gifted education of a given population group often defined by racial and ethnic backgrounds, but also defined by socioeconomic status, national origin, English proficiency, gender, and sexual orientation in a specific population category.” (EMSTAC: www.emstac.org,’04)

25. Research, Evidence,and Data Show That: • Disproportionality is not a special education problem alone. Its problems and symptoms cannot be removed from the general education, gifted education, and higher education discourses (Artiles, A., 1998). • Civil rights concerns and ethical issues around equity and justice are involved – i.e., resegregation after Brown v. Board of Education poses neo-challenges (Patton, J., 1998).

26. What Else do We Know?Research, Evidence, and Data Show That: • Disproportionality is Janus-like in nature, form, and structure—over SPED) and under (Gifted) (USDOE, 1998). • The problem is pervasive and has gotten better for some, but not for others – especially African American males (Artiles, A., and Trent, S., 1998). • The problem is with false positive youngsters in special education and false negative students in gifted education(Patton, J., 1998). • The problem is national and most apparent in the South; in cities with large concentrations of African Americans; and in some local school districts where Blacks are conspicuous (Patton, J., 1998).

27. What Do We Know About Disproportionality? • Problems often lie primarily in special education categories that tend to rely on subjective judgments. (Patton, 1998) • As a result, certain minority students tend to be overrepresented in classrooms for students with mild mental disabilities and emotional and behavioral disabilities and underrepresented in gifted education (Oswald, Coutinho, Best, & Singh, 1999). (USDOE, 2003)

28. No Arrangement Is Neutral E3 28

29. E3 Critique Justice Caring 29