Gloversville Enlarged School District, Gloversville, NY

1. Gloversville Enlarged School District, Gloversville, NY • Located in Fulton County approximately 50 miles northwest of Albany, NY. • Considered by NYS as a rural district with high student needs. • Approx. 3500 students Pre-K through 12 • 65% of students are receiving free/reduced lunch • 18.7% of students have an IEP

2. Boulevard Elementary SchoolGloversville, NY RTI plan 2006-2007

3. Boulevard Elementary Regular Classroom Instruction All students involved in core curriculum program\whole group overview Small group station work/students work independently or with TA on activities that support Fab 5 and core program Small group teacher station modified according to groups needs/ same lesson different delivery based on need. Struggling students—small group instruction by AIS outside classroom. AIS intervention period On-track students are challenged through classroom activities designed by teacher. Emergent students receive intervention from classroom teacher Struggling students—assessed by deficit skills, provided additional 30 minutes skills based instruction. Core debriefing/ all students

4. Boulevard’s Academic Intervention Services Accelerated Growth Regular Classroom Instruction Accelerated Growth AIS pullout for strugglers and low emergent students as well as Extended Day opportunity Provide Small Group Specialized Skill Instruction in addition to regular AIS time as well as Extended Day Accelerated Growth Provide One-to-One Specialized Instruction Slow Growth or No Growth LD ? –provide continued instruction RTI Approach Slow Growth or No Growth Slow Growth or No Growth (Adapted from Scanlon 2006)

5. Timeline for Boulevard Intervention K – 3 Timeline for Boulevard Intervention K – 3

7. Data Analysis Summary Sheet We need to look for patterns within tests and between tests, to help inform corrective instruction. Critical information can be collected through running records, listening to the student think aloud as they arrive at answers, sampling vocabulary knowledge within passages, listing type of errors, etc. Therefore, please record data and error analysis from such measures as: DIBELS tests, the Phonological Awareness Test, the Gray Oral Reading Test, the PPVT, the Woodcock-Johnson III, Woodcock Diagnostic Reading Test, McGraw Hill Unit tests, Voyager Checkpoint testing, teacher-made tests, etc.

10. District K-12 Classification Data for Special Education

11. Boulevard ElementarySpecial Education K - 5 Resource Room support Replacement classroom Special Classroom 12:1:1 All Special Ed students receive 30 min. of AIS daily by Reading Specialist 45 minutes per day Students also receive 40 minutes resource room 40 minutes per day classroom 90 minute reading block daily within classroom Materials: Core program intervention Horizons, Reasoning & Writing, Mastery Reading Plus Modified 3rd grade McGraw-Hill Leveled books from core Students are benchmarked 3 times per year at grade level, progressed monitored every 10 days at instructional level.

12. NASDSE November 14, 2006 Margaret McGlinchey Kim St. Martin

13. This document was produced and distributed through an IDEA Mandated Activities Project for Michigan’s Integrated Behavior and Learning Support Initiative (MiBLSi) awarded by the Michigan Department of Education. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Michigan Department of Education, the Michigan State Board of Education, or the U.S. Department of Education, and no endorsement is inferred. This document is in the public domain and may be copied for further distribution when proper credit is given. For further information or inquiries about this project, contact the Michigan Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services, P.O. Box 30008, Lansing, Michigan 48909.

14. End of Year goal is for the student to demonstrate this skill at 35 phonemes per minute-grey area

15. Now you see this student in the context of the whole class. Does it make a difference in how you think about this student? • Yes • No

16. Same building different teacher

17. Mission Statement To develop support systems and sustained implementation of a data-driven, problem solving model in elementary schools to help students become better readers with social skills necessary for success.

18. Three Important Themes • Create systems, not just programs, to support each and all students • Earlier rather than later • Evidence, not opinion

19. 2004 Schools (21) 2005 Schools (31) 2006 Schools (50) Participating Schools Reaching over 40,000 students and 2,600 teachers and administrators in 102 schools and 17 ISDs!

20. Intensive Intervention Individualized, functional assessment, highly specific Targeted Intervention Supplemental, some students, reduce risk Universal Intervention Core Instruction, all students Preventive Reading School-Wide Support Systems for Student Success 1-5% 7-15% 80% Behavior

23. Comstock East Elementary An Exemplar of MiBLSi

24. Year 1 Behavior • Leadership team received training in creating a positive behavior support system • February~April: • 3-5 school-wide behavior expectations • school-wide teaching matrix • major vs. minor behavior • consequences • office referral form

25. Behavior Continued… Summer 2004: teaching plans for non-classroom settings -hallway -bathroom -playground -bus -cafeteria -library media center -assembly

26. Year 1 Literacy • DIBELS training was provided for all K-5 staff • Expectations for DIBELS testing: Classroom teachers had a leadership role in all DIBELS assessments. • Progress monitoring expectations • Intensive students-weekly • Strategic students-monthly

27. Literacy Continued… • Data Analysis • Kindergarten retention data was analyzed and discussed. Reading Mastery I in grades K~1 was implemented • Child Study data analyzed: 100% of the referrals cited reading as a major concern.

28. Year 2 • Behavior • August: school wide behavior expectations taught directly and formally, implemented acknowledgment/reward system, SWIS was used to monitor referral data • December: staff met to discuss regaining momentum for behavior tickets, classroom incentives were established to increase the number of tickets given.

29. Behavior Continued… Behavior Trainings: • Fall-Leadership team attended training on how to address tier 1 & 2 behaviors (check-in/check-out system, SWIS data analysis training) • Winter-Leadership team received intensive behavior training to address tier 3 behaviors (functional behavior assessments, behavior intervention plans, wrap-arounds)

30. Behavior Continued… Implementation of Tier 2~Teir 3 Systems • Behavior Intervention Team (B.I.T) • Students receiving three major office referrals were discussed at the B.I.T. • Goal was to establish a behavior intervention plan for students with input from teachers, parents, administrators, and personnel having behavioral expertise. • Check-in/Check-out person was identified and data collection system was established to determine effectiveness of the plan

31. Year 2 Literacy • 90-30 (K~5) • 90 minutes of uninterrupted language arts • 30 minutes of targeted reading support by reading personnel. • The most intensive students working with trained reading personnel. • Students identified using DIBELS/classroom assessment data • Flexible grouping

32. Literacy Continued… • 90-30-30 (K~1) • All kindergarten and first grade students received an additional 30 minutes of intensive reading support using Reading Mastery I to address phonemic awareness and alphabetic principle. • All students received 150 minutes of daily language arts instruction. • Supplemental programs became a part of the core instruction to fill gaps.

33. Literacy Continued • Leadership team received training on • analysis of core reading program • effectiveness of intervention programs • grade level meeting structure • application of data based decision making • action planning

34. Literacy Continued… Grade Level Meetings • The child study team changed from problem solving for one student, to groups of students within a grade level. • Grade level teachers, principal, school psychologist, reading personnel • 1st Meeting: review of core program and critical skills necessary for each grade level • Subsequent Meetings: • student progress monitoring data • data based decision making • Interventions • resources

35. Year 3 • Behavior • School Improvement Behavior Committee reviewed 2004-2005 SWIS data and identified months having highest referral counts. • Incentives were communicated to students via school-wide assemblies. (dessert buffet, pizza party, ice cream social) • Second Step (social skills curriculum) was being taught school-wide.

36. Year 3 Literacy • 90-30-30 (K~5) • 90 minutes of core instruction for all students • 30 minutes of targeted reading for intensive and lower strategic students • Sound Partners, Corrective Reading, Road to the Code • 30 minutes of intensive support for lowest students • Reading Mastery I & II, Teacher-Directed PALS, Corrective Reading, Read Naturally, Rewards

37. Percent at Benchmark Range Second Grade: School to District

38. Percent at Intensive Range Second Grade: School to District

39. Referrals Per Year Per 100 Students

40. Putting the Pieces Together MiBLSi provided problem solving framework : • to implement a culture of collaboration between general education and special education staff • for frequent assessment of student performance • to allow staff common planning time, grade level meetings, and staff meetings to address student’s needs and adjust instruction accordingly All of these practices are in accordance with NCLB, IDEA 2004 and are aligned with a Response to Interventionmodel