Using Universal Screening Data to Make Educational Decisions

1. Using Universal Screening Data to Make Educational Decisions MO-Case 2010 Brian Sims Kayce Knaup Kelly Sutherland

2. Overview • Today’s presentation will include: • Utilizing universal screenings within an RTI process • Choosing a screening measure • Collecting data • Analyzing the data • Selecting interventions • Progress Monitoring

3. Demographics • Small, rural district • Elementary Building • Pre-K through 4th • 420 students • 22 teachers • 4.5 interventionists • Base camp instructor

4. Universal Screening and RTI • Understand the context of RTI • Broad View • School-wide • Pre-referral • Narrow View • As part of a special education referral • Determining eligibility

5. Universal Screening and RTI • Why use universal screenings • To get a quick “temperature” of all of the students • To check a pulse vs. conduct an autopsy • To understand how are students are doing compared to national and local norms

6. Pro’s of Universal Screening • Quick • Cost effective • Common assessment • Sensitive to change • Best practice

7. Con’s of Universal Screening • Cannot make in-depth decisions • Diagnostic limitations (doesn't identify specific problems • Teacher buy-in (another thing on their plate)

8. Universal Screening and RTI • RTI can not exist without universal screenings • Eliminates “Wait to Fail” paradox

9. RTI Programming Information • Working toward 80% in Tier 1 • Systematic evaluation of interventions at each tier

10. Choosing your Screening Measure • What data do you want to obtain? • Common measures • Math calculation & MCAP (concepts) • Oral counting & Missing number • RCBM (Words correct)& MAZE (Comprehension) • Letter naming & Letter sounds (K & 1st) • Total words written/Correct word sequences

11. Commercial Screening vs. In-House • Monetary Costs • Labor Costs

12. AimesWEB at Fair Grove • Multiple probes • Correlates with Dibels • National norms • Grade level probes (K-4 and higher).

13. AimesWEB at Fair Grove • Curricular Match • (example M-Concepts-specific skills) • Correlation to MAP (.40-.65)

14. Collecting Data • Classroom Teacher • SWAT Team • Interventionists, Title Teachers, SPED Teachers • School Psychologist, Curriculum Director, SPED Director • Paraprofessionals

15. Classroom Teacher Data Collection • Comfort of the student • Buy in/using the data • Scheduling flexibility

16. SWAT Team Data Collection • Quick, efficient, doesn't add more responsibility to the teacher • Takes 30 minutes out of teacher schedule • Objectivity, treatment fidelity

17. Analyzing Data • Eyeball Test • Leadership Review • Grade Level Review • Classroom Teacher Review

18. Data Analysis – Eyeball Test • Identify student scores that are atypical of their known performance • Rescreen with 3 probes (use median score) • Compare individual screening results to other measures given to that individual on the same date

19. Leadership Review • Look at overall levels of students in tiers • How many met benchmarks etc. • Compare district norms to national norms • (Possibly) Compare growth between classroom teachers.

20. Grade Level/Classroom Teacher Review • Meet with teachers as a grade • Discuss how the students fall, • Look at progress (% of students who changed tiers). • Decide Students for strategic and progress monitoring as well as intervention implementation

21. Selecting and Implementing Interventions • Problem Solving Approach vs. Standard Protocol

22. Selecting and Implementing Interventions • Additional Assessment • Identify the specific problem (Example: sight words, fluency, decoding skills, comprehension) • Assessment may include: DRA, other probes, phonemic awareness activities • Determine instructional level (via aimsweb probes) • Survey level assessment

23. Implementing Interventions • Pair a researched based intervention with the specific deficit area. • Implemented by various interventionists • Various instructional support at the school: • Interventionists, Title Teachers, SPED Teachers • School Psychologist, Curriculum Director, SPED Director • Paraprofessionals

24. Progress Monitoring • Deciding who gets strategic monitored • Deciding how long to monitor at this level • Practical implementation of the process • Ensureing that data is collected

25. Progress Monitoring • We use AimsWEB probes for progress monitoring, if we run out then we use Dibels • What grade level • Students grade level-once a month • Students instructional level-either once a week or every two weeks • This depends on the tier the student is in

26. Selecting a Goal • When a student is progress monitored, an aim line is generated • The goal for the student is set • 25th percentile when they are on grade level or • 50%ile at a lower grade level

27. Monitoring the Goal • Constantly analyzing the data based upon the aim-line • 4 data points above or under aim-line indicates a significant change. • If the student is above the aim-line then keep going until they meet their goal • Consider: • Decreasing services • Increasing grade level that progress monitoring is assessed.

28. Monitoring the Goal • If a student’s data trend is below the aimline: • Target instruction • Ensure fidelity • Discuss a second intervention • Consider motivation as a factor: student buy-in, show the graph, add reinforcement, etc. • Skill vs. Performance assessment

29. Areas for Improvement • Scheduling • Lack of interventions conducted in the classroom

30. Questions

31. Contact Information • Fair Grove R-10 Schools • 132 N. Main St. Fair grove, MO 65648 • 417-759-2555 • Mr. Brian Sims, Director of Student Services • Dr. KayceKnaup, School Psychologist • Dr. Kelly Sutherland, Elementary Principal