Improving Results for All: The Role of Intensive Intervention in Federal Education Policy

1. Improving Results for All: The Role of Intensive Intervention in Federal Education Policy • Allison Gandhi, Ed.D., National Center on Intensive Intervention • Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D., University of Texas–Austin • Lee Kern, Ph.D., Lehigh University • Larry Wexler, Ed.D., U.S. Office of Special Education Programs April 9, 2015

2. Results-Driven Accountability: Vision All components of an accountability system will be aligned in a manner that best support states in improving results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities and their families. Shift from Compliance to Results + Compliance Slide adapted from: OSEP Slides to Explain Results Driven Accountability (RDA) Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/rda/index.html

3. State Systemic Improvement Plan Slide from: OSEP Slides to Explain Results Driven Accountability (RDA) Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/rda/index.html

4. State-identified Measurable Result(s) • State-identified Measurable Result(s) (SiMR) • A child-level (or family-level, for Part C) outcome • Not a process or system result • May be a single result or a cluster of related results • Identified based on analysis of data

5. On What Are States Focusing? In a May 2014 National Association of State Directors of Special Education survey of state education agencies (32 respondents), states shared their potential focus areas. These included the following: Part B • Approximately 21 states identified reading. • Approximately 9 states identified high school graduation. • Approximately six states identified mathematics. • Three identified preschool outcomes. • Two identified other outcomes. Part C • Approximately 18 states identified social/emotional outcomes. • Seven identified outcomes—knowledge and skills. • Approximately six identified outcomes—unspecified. • Approximately four identified parent/family outcomes. • One identified other.

6. Why Is This Important? • Meeting SiMR goals will require a focus on improving instruction. • States will be in need of support on how to provide intensive intervention for the kids who need it the most, including: • Evidence-based intervention strategies • Overcoming implementation barriers • Making connections to other state, district, and school initiatives

7. Intensive Intervention Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D. University of Texas, Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk

8. Goals • Participants will understand: • How intensive intervention supports access to the Common Core State Standards • How to intensify instruction within a response to intervention framework • How to provide deeper learning opportunities for students with learning disabilities

9. What Is Deeper Learning? • “…the process through which an individual becomes capable of taking what was learned in one situation and applying it to new situations (i.e., transfer).” • National Research Council, 2012, p. 4

10. Postsecondary Success Depends on Deeper Learning in K–12 • Federal laws (No Child Left Behind, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) have increased the focus on accountability. Students with disabilities are included in assessment and data reports, bringing the spotlight onto the need to improve learning outcomes for this population.

11. What Do Teachers Do to Make Deeper Learning Accessible for Students With Disabilities? • Most common suggestion: “Differentiate instruction for each learner.” • Sounds like good advice, but… • “the actual implementation is enough to physically and psychologically exhaust even the most capable and motivated teachers.”

12. Our Best Thinking on Making Deeper Learning Accessible • Though learning challenges manifest across subject areas, it is important to focus on developing students’ BASIC skills (reading, writing, mathematics). • However, do not limit instruction to ONLY these skills. Students need rich opportunities to learn content.

13. NCII Model

14. Intensive Intervention What is it?

15. Common Core State Standards Common Core State Standards How does intensive intervention relate to the data-based individualization (DBI) process and the Common Core? Intensification Evidence

16. Intensive Intervention • Individualized based on student needs • More intense, often with substantively different content and pedagogy • More frequent and precise progress monitoring • It is not instruction in core content but supports students’ access to content by focusing on foundational, underlying skills (e.g., a student cannot access science text without the ability to read the words).

17. What Can We Learn From Research About Intensive Intervention? • Little empirical research demonstrates specific effective intervention programs for the lowest 3 percent to 5 percent of readers. • Intervention practices are typically based on expert recommendations from a body of research. • Monitoring progress is essential to determine impact and intensity required for individual students.

18. More information • For more information on intensifying intervention, see National Center on Intensive Intervention (NCII) webinar, “So What Do I Do Now? Strategies for Intensifying Intervention When Standard Approaches Don’t Work”: http://www.intensiveintervention.org/video-resource/so-what-do-i-do-now-strategies-intensifying-intervention-when-standard-approaches-d-0

19. How NCII’s Approach to Intensive Intervention for Behavior Aligns With Recent Federal Initiatives Lee Kern, Ph.D. Lehigh University

20. Department of Education Guiding Principles

21. Guiding Principles “No school can be a great school—and ultimately prepare all students for success—if it is not first a safe school.” • U.S. Department of Education (2014)

22. NCII Approach to Behavior Intervention • Tiered Intervention • Tier 1—Universal • Tier 2—Targeted • Tier 2—Intensified • Tier 3—Function-based individualized support • Data-Based Individualization • Ongoing progress monitoring • Data-based decision making

23. Tiered Intervention • Tier 1 • Schoolwide rules • Tier 2 • Targeted intervention for nonresponders • Check In Check Out (CICO) • Social skills instruction • Tier 2 Intensified • Modified Tier 2 based on individual data • CICO with frequent monitoring • Tier 3 • Functional assessment-based intervention

24. Three Guiding Principles for Improving School Climate and Discipline • Climate and Prevention • Clear, Appropriate, and Consistent Expectations and Consequences • Equity and Continuous Improvement

25. Principle 1: Climate and Prevention • Schools that foster positive school climates can help to engage all students in learning by preventing problem behaviors and intervening effectively to support struggling and at-risk students.

26. Climate and Prevention:Action Steps

27. Principle 2: Expectations and Consequences • Schools that have discipline policies or codes of conduct with clear, appropriate, and consistently applied expectations and consequences will help students improve behavior, increase engagement, and boost achievement.

28. Expectations and Consequences: Action Steps

29. Expectations and Consequences: Action Steps

30. Expectations and Consequences: Action Steps

31. Expectations and Consequences: Action Steps

32. Principle 3: Equity and Continuous Improvement • Schools that build staff capacity and continuously evaluate the school’s discipline policies and practices are more likely to ensure fairness and equity and promote achievement for all students.

33. Equity and Continuous Improvement: Action Steps

34. Equity and Continuous Improvement: Action Steps

35. Why Focus on Intensive Intervention? Larry Wexler, Ed.D. U.S. Office of Special Education Programs

36. Federal Perspective • IDEA is an Individual Entitlement • Challenge of Minimal responders to E-B Instruction • Low incidence: Traditional Definition • Low incidence is a high priority • Academics Behavior • Redefined Low Incidence to include • …persistent and severe learning and behavioral problems that need the most intensive individualized supports

37. Federal Investments: Intensive Intervention • National Center on Intensive Intervention • Individual Doctoral Training Grants • Consortia Doctoral Training Grant • Masters Level Teacher Training

38. Disclaimer This presentation was produced under the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Award No. H326Q110005. Celia Rosenquist serves as the project officer. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or polices of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this website is intended or should be inferred.

39. References • National Research Council. (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills, J.W. Pellegrino and M.L. Hilton, Editors. Board on Testing and Assessment and Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. • U.S. Department of Education. (2014). Guiding principles: A resource guide for improving school climate and discipline. Washington, DC: Author.

40. NCII Information • National Center on Intensive Intervention • 1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NW • Washington, DC 20007-3835 • 866-577-5787 • www.intensiveintervention.org • Email:ncii@air.org • Twitter: @TheNCII