Response to Intervention: Using Data to Enhance Outcomes for all Students

1. Response to Intervention: Using Data to Enhance Outcomes for all Students Amanda VanDerHeyden Education Research and Consulting, Inc.

2. Objectives Today • Overview of RTI, RTI decision making, and expected outcomes • Specific How-To for RTI • Interpreting Assessment Data to determine need for Tiers 1, 2, and 3 Interventions • Selection and implementation of Tier 2 Interventions • Selection and implementation of Tier 3 Interventions • Implementing intervention for sustenance and system change

3. 16 x 3 = 48 hours

4. What is RTI? • A science of decision making and way of thinking about how educational resources can be allocated (or reallocated) to best help all children learn • Major premium on child outcomes

5. RTI is Not • A program, a curriculum, an intervention, a particular model

6. Data allow us to • Provide faster, more effective services for ALL children • Work “smarter” not harder, better utilize the talents of the school psychologist and school-based assessment and intervention teams. • Make implementation SIMPLE and EASY for teachers (low cost, few errors) • Prevent diagnosis

7. 5.2 2.5 Early Screening Identifies Children At Risk of Reading Difficulty J 5 4 Low Risk on Early Screening Reading grade level 3 2 At Risk on Early Screening 1 1 2 3 4 Grade level corresponding to age This Slide from Reading First Experts From Reading First

8. With substantial instructional intervention 4.9 With research-based core but without extra instructional intervention 3.2 Intervention Control Early Intervention Changes Reading Outcomes J 5.2 5 4 Low Risk on Early Screening Reading grade level 3 2.5 2 At Risk on Early Screening 1 1 2 3 4 Grade level corresponding to age This Slide from Reading First Experts From Reading First

9. Evolution • “Wait to Fail” • Let’s provide services early! • Costly sp ed programs not improving learning • Let’s shift resources to provide services in less restrictive setting! • Increasing numbers of children struggling in general ed • Let’s provide help in general education! • Traditional measures are de-contextualized and the constructs are problematic • Let’s help children who struggle academically by measuring performance in response to certain intervention strategies and then deliver what works!

10. Rationale for System Change • Level and Rate of Performance • Return to General Education • Lack of Certified Teachers • No demonstrated instructional techniques that differentially benefit SLD • Drop-out • Disproportionate Representation by Ethnicity 200-300% increase in SLD

11. History of RTI • Effective Instruction Lit, CBA/M Lit • Lab-Quality Intervention Programs • Progress Monitoring Data and Problem-Solving Models • Reading First data

12. Consistent with • NCLB • Reauthorized IDEA • Recommendations of panel reports on: Minority students in special education, National Reading Panel, Science and Math Initiative

13. Impetus • Faster, more effective services for ALL children • Work “smarter” not harder, better utilize the talents of the school psychologist and school-based assessment and intervention teams. • Make implementation SIMPLE and EASY for teachers (low cost, few errors)

14. Why RTI? • Viable alternative to traditional diagnosis of high-incidence disabilities, particularly Learning Disability (LD) • Reauthorized IDEA guidelines for identifying LD state that: a) A severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability shall not be required b) A response to intervention (RTI) may be considered

15. Why RTI? • RTI can address the problem of disproportionate identification of children with LD by race and gender • The utility of curriculum-based measures (CBM) for: • Identifying children not likely to benefit from the general education curriculum without assistance, • Predicting important long-term outcomes • Tracking individual student growth and informing instructional programming changes has been established

16. Considerations • There has been some consensus concerning the need for change; however, there has not been consensus on how this change can best be achieved. • Whereas RTI has considerable promise as a tool within special and general education, it is a vulnerable construct if misapplied.

17. Improved Treatment Validity • Direct link to treatment or consequential validity • Efforts are focused to: • Properly articulate a concern • Develop targeted intervention to resolve the concern • Collect information to determine whether or not the concern has been adequately addressed or whether different solution efforts need to be implemented • This approach changes the goal of assessment from what some have described as “admiration” of the problem to problem-solving.

18. Contextualized Decision Making • RTI emphasizes the pre-referral conditions (child and environment) and this context becomes part of the decision-making equation. • Allows practitioners to quantify: • The state of instructional affairs in the child’s regular education environment • Potential learning given optimal instructional conditions • RTI may enable improvement in general education programming leading to children receiving assistance in a more efficient manner.

19. Improved Identification Accuracy for LD • Under RTI models intervention becomes a specified, operationalized variable, thus false positive identification errors should be reduced dramatically. • Removing the current reliance on teacher identification and requiring direct measures of child performance in context will enhance identification accuracy.

20. More Effective Intervention • RTI is likely to facilitate less restrictive interventions and placements for children. • RTI allows school psychologists to bring their expertise to bear on assessment strategies at the classroom level and assist teachers to use data formatively to enhance their instructional programming.

21. Possible Challenges of RTI

22. Decision-making Criteria • Must be operationalized and validated through research • The purpose of RTI will be critical to determining how implementation should proceed

23. New Challenges for Teams • Effective intervention delivery will depend on relevant intervention variables • To be effective the intervention must have been: • Properly identified • Implemented with integrity and with sufficient frequency, intensity, and duration

24. STEEP Model Screening to Enhance Educational Progress

25. Tier 1: Math Screening • Math Probe: • Group administered. • Materials: Worksheet consisting of a series of problems sampling the target skill(s) (e.g., sums to 5, double digit multiplication with regrouping). • Timing: 2 minutes • Information obtained: digits correct in two minutes.

26. Math Probe Example • Total Digits: 38 • Errors: 5 • Digits Correct: 33

27. Tier 1: Writing Screening • Writing Probe: • Group administered. • Materials: story starter (e.g., If I had a million dollars…) printed at the top of a blank page. • Timing: 1 minute to think, 3 minutes to write. • Scoring: words written or correct word sequences in three minutes.

28. Writing Example

29. Tier 1: Reading Screening • Reading Probe: • Individually administered • Materials: A content-controlled reading passage. • Procedure: The student reads aloud as the teacher listens and records errors. • Timing: 1 minute • Information obtained: words read correctly in one minute.

30. CBM Reading: Sample Scoring • TRW=63 • Errors=6 • CRW=58

31. Class-wide Screening

32. Feedback to Teachers

33. Tier 2: Class-wide Intervention

34. No Class-wide Problem Detected

35. Tier 2: Can’t Do/Won’t Do Assessment • “Can’t Do/Won’t Do” • Individually-administered • Materials • Academic material that student performed poorly during class assessment. • Treasure chest: plastic box filled with tangible items. 3-7 minutes per child

36. Can’t Do/Won’t Do Assessment

37. Decision Rule Following Can’t Do/Won’t Do Assessment

38. Tier 3: Individual Intervention

39. Response to Intervention Before Intervention During Intervention #Correct Avg. for his Class Each Dot is one Day of Intervention Intervention Sessions Intervention in Reading

40. Response to Intervention Before Intervention During Intervention #Correct Avg. for his Class

41. Vehicle for System Change:System-wide Math Problem Instructional range Frustrational range Each bar is a student’s performance

42. Re-screening Indicates No Systemic Problem Fourth Grade

43. Rest of Grade at Standard Classroom A B C D E F

44. Spring 2003– Classroom F F

45. Teacher moved to lower grade in Fall 2003

46. Class-wide Intervention Teacher F Mult 0-12 120 100 80 Digits Correct Two Minutes 60 40 20 0 11/7/2003 10/24/2003 10/31/2003 11/14/2003 11/18/2003 Weeks

47. Increased Difficulty- Intervention Continues

48. Mixed Mult/Div/Fractions Probe Classroom F

49. Growth Obtained actual growth aimline

50. Effect on High-Stakes Scores VanDerHeyden, in prep