Response to Intervention: Accelerating Achievement for ALL Students

1. Response to Intervention: Accelerating Achievement for ALL Students Illinois IEA Professional Development Workshop Dr. George M. Batsche Professor and Co-Director Institute for School Reform Florida Statewide Problem-Solving/RtI Project University of South Florida

2. National Resources to Support District and School Implementation • www.nasdse.org • Building and District Implementation Blueprints • Current research (evidence-based practices) that supports use of RtI • www.rtinetwork.org • Blueprints to support implementation • Monthly RtI Talks • Virtual visits to schools implementing RtI • Webinars • Progress Monitoring Tools to Assess Level of Implementation • www.justreadflorida.org/readingwalkthrough/ • Principal Walk Through Integrity Evaluations • www.floridarti.usf.edu • Introductory Course

3. The Vision • 95% of students at “proficient” level • Students possess social and emotional behaviors that support “active” learning • A “unified” system of educational services • One “ED” • Student Support Services perceived as a necessary component for successful schooling

4. The Outcomes • Maximize effect of core instruction for all students • Targeted instruction and interventions for at-risk learners • Significant improvements in pro-social behaviors • Reduction in over-representation of diverse student groups in low academic performance, special education, suspension/expulsion, and alternative education. • Overall improvement in achievement rates • Maximize efficiency and return on investment • AYP

5. The Model

6. Response to Intervention • RtI is the practice of (1) providing high-quality instruction/intervention matched to student needs and (2) using learning rate over time and level of performance to (3) make important educational decisions. (Batsche, et al., 2005) • Problem-solving is the process that is used to develop effective instruction/interventions.

7. Problem Solving Process Define the Problem Defining Problem/Directly Measuring Behavior Problem Analysis Validating Problem Ident Variables that Contribute to Problem Develop Plan Evaluate Response to Intervention (RtI) Implement Plan Implement As Intended Progress Monitor Modify as Necessary

8. Three-Tiered Model of School Supports & the Problem-solving Process ACADEMIC SYSTEMS Tier 3: Comprehensive & IntensiveStudents who need individualized interventions. Tier 2: Strategic InterventionsStudents who need more support in addition to the core curriculum. Tier 1: Core CurriculumAll students, including students who require curricular enhancements for acceleration. BEHAVIOR SYSTEMS Tier 3: Intensive InterventionsStudents who need individualized intervention. Tier 2: Targeted Group InterventionsStudents who need more support in addition to school-wide positive behavior program. Tier 1: Universal Interventions All students in all settings.

9. Model of Schooling • All district instruction and intervention services have a “place” in this model. • If it does not fit in the model, should it be funded? • All supplemental and intensive services must be integrated with core.

10. Problem-Solving/RtIResource Management 1-5% 1-5% 5-10% 5-10% Students 80-90% 80-90% • Public Education Resource Deployment • Support staff cannot resource more than 20% of the students • Service vs Effectiveness--BIG ISSUE Academic Behavior

11. RtI: Framing Issues and Key Concepts • Academic Engaged Time (AET) is the best predictor of student achievement • 330 minutes in a day, 1650 in a week and 56,700 in a year • This is the “currency” of instruction/intervention • Its what we have to spend on students • How we use it determines student outcomes. • MOST students who are behind will respond positively to additional CORE instruction. • Schools have more staff qualified to deliver core instruction than specialized instruction. • Issue is how to schedule in such a way as to provide more exposure to core.

12. RtI: Framing Issues and Key Concepts • Managing the GAP between student current level of performance and expectation (benchmark, standards, goal) is what RtI is all about. • The two critical pieces of information we need about students are: • How BIG is the GAP? • AND • How much time do we have to close it? • The answers to these 2 questions defines our instructional mission.

13. RtI: RATE • Rate is growth per week (month) necessary to close the GAP • Rate becomes the statistic we need to define evidence-based intervention (EBI) • EBI is any intervention that results in the desired RATE

14. RtI: 3 Priorities 1. Prevention: Identify students at-risk for literacy failure BEFORE they actually fail. • Kindergarten screening, intervention and progress monitoring is key. • No excuse for not identifying ALL at-risk students by November of the kindergarten year. • This strategy prevents the GAP. • Managing GAPs is more expensive and less likely to be successful.

15. RtI: 3 Priorities • Early Intervention • Purpose here is the manage the GAP. • Students who are more that 2 years behind have a 10% chance, or less, or catching up. • Benchmark, progress monitoring data, district-wide assessments are used to identify students that have a gap of 2 years or less. • Students bumping up against the 2 year level receive the most intensive services. • This more costly and requires more specialized instruction/personnel

16. RtI: 3 Priorities • Intensive Intervention • Reserved for those students who have a GAP of more than 2 years and the rate of growth to close the GAP is unrealistic. Too much growth—too little time remaining. • Problem-solving is used to develop instructional priorities. • This is truly a case of “you cannot do something different the same way.” • This is the most costly, staff intensive and least likely to result in goal attainment

17. How Does it Fit Together?Standard Treatment Protocol Results Monitoring Addl. Diagnostic Assessment Instruction All Students at a grade level Individualized Intensive Individual Diagnostic Intensive 1-5% weekly Small Group Differen- tiated By Skill Supplemental 5-10% Standard Protocol Behavior Academics 2 times/month Core Bench- Mark Assessment Annual Testing ODRs Monthly Bx Screening None Continue With Core Instruction Grades Classroom Assessments Yearly Assessments 80-90% Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 1

18. Critical Components • Data are used to evaluate the effectiveness of core instruction • 80% of students receiving ONLY core instruction are proficient • Supplemental Instruction/Intervention uses a “standard protocol” of instruction based on student needs, informed by data • 70% of students receiving Supplemental AND Core are proficient

19. Critical Components • Intensive instruction developed for students who have not responded as desired to Core PLUS Supplemental Instruction

20. What Does the Research Say About RtI?

21. Effective Schools • 30% or more of students at risk but who were at grade level at the end of the year. • Characteristics • Strong Leadership • Positive Belief and Teacher Dedication • Data Utilization and Analysis • Effective Scheduling • Professional Development • Scientifically-Based Intervention Programs • Parent Involvement • (Crawford and Torgeson) • (

22. Data on the Top 10 Schools Meeting the Effective School Criteria

23. What is the impact of PSM/RtI on students from diverse backgrounds? • VanDerHeyden, et al. report that students responded positively to the method and that African-American students responded more quickly than other ethnic groups. • Marston reported a 50%decrease in EMH placements over a 6-year period of time. • Marston reported a drop over a 3-year period in the percent of African-American students placed in special education from 67% to 55%, considering 45% of the student population was comprised of African-American Students. • Batsche (2006) reported a significant decrease in the risk indices for ELL and African-American students

24. Risk Indices by Year & Race/Ethnicity

25. Response to Intervention Implementation

26. How Do We “Do” RtI? • Organized by a District PLAN • Driven by Professional Development • Supported by Coaching and Technical Assistance • Informed by DATA

27. Change Model Consensus Infrastructure Implementation

28. Stages of Implementing Problem-Solving/RtI • Consensus • Belief is shared • Vision is agreed upon • Implementation requirements understood • Infrastructure Development • Problem-Solving Process • Data System • Policies/Procedures • Training • Tier I and II intervention systems • E.g., K-3 Academic Support Plan • Technology support • Decision-making criteria established • Implementation

29. Building Consensus • Knowledge • Beliefs • Understanding the “Need”- DATA • Skills and/or Support

30. Consensus:Essential Beliefs • No child should be left behind • It is OK to provide differential service across students • Academic Engaged Time must be considered first • Student performance is influenced most by the quality of the interventions we deliver and how well we deliver them- not preconceived notions about child characteristics • Decisions are best made with data • Our expectations for student performance should be dependent on a student’s response to intervention, not on the basis of a “score” that “predicts” what they are “capable” of doing.

31. Consensus Development:Data • Are you happy with your data? • Building/Grade Level Student Outcomes • Disaggregated • AYP

33. Knowledge and Skill Requirements

34. Personnel Critical to Successful Implementation • District-Level Leaders • Building Leaders • Facilitator • Teachers/Student Services • Parents • Students

35. Development of the Infrastructure

36. Key Points • Unit of implementation is the building level. • Implementation process takes 4-6 years. • Implementation progress must be monitored • Must be guided by data indicating implementation level and integrity • Must be supported by professional development and technical assistance • Drive by a strategic plan • It is a journey, not a sprint

37. Implementation Model • District-based leadership team (DBLT) • School-based leadership team (SBLT) • School-based coach • Process Technical Assistance • Interpretation and Use of Data • Evaluation Data

38. The Infrastructure

39. Problem Solving Process Define the Problem Defining Problem/Directly Measuring Behavior Problem Analysis Validating Problem Ident Variables that Contribute to Problem Develop Plan Evaluate Response to Intervention (RtI) Implement Plan Implement As Intended Progress Monitor Modify as Necessary

40. Steps in the Problem-Solving Process • PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION • Identify replacement behavior • Data- current level of performance • Data- benchmark level(s) • Data- peer performance • Data- GAP analysis • PROBLEM ANALYSIS • Develop hypotheses( brainstorming) • Develop predictions/assessment • INTERVENTION DEVELOPMENT • Develop interventions in those areas for which data are available and hypotheses verified • Proximal/Distal • Implementation support • Response to Intervention (RtI) • Frequently collected data • Type of Response- good, questionable, poor

41. Data For Each Tier - Where Do They Come From? Tier 1: Universal Screening, accountability assessments, grades, classroom assessments, referral patterns, discipline referrals Tier 2: Universal Screening - Group Level Diagnostics (maybe), systematic progress monitoring, large-scale assessment data and classroom assessment Tier 3: Universal Screenings, Individual Diagnostics, intensive and systematic progress monitoring, formative assessment, other informal assessments

42. “Academic” Behaviors • Class work completed/accuracy • Home work completed/accuracy • Test scores/accuracy • Student Level of Performance • Goal or benchmark • Peer level of performance

43. Example • Data taken during a single grading period (6 weeks) • Progress Monitor Homework completed and accuracy • Goal: Completed 75%, Accuracy 75% • Student: Completed 40%, Accuracy 50% • Peers: Completed 65%, Accuracy 78% • Time Frame: 6 weeks • Assignments/Week: 20

44. Example • Completion: • 75-40=30 % improvement in 6 weeks • 30%/6 weeks= Improvement rate of 5%/week • 5% of 20 assignments=1 per week • Rate of Improvement for an effective intervention is 1 ADDITIONAL ASSIGNMENT PER WEEK

45. Decision Rules:What Constitutes “Good” RtI?

46. Decision Rules • Response to Intervention Rules • Linking RtI to Intervention Decisions

47. Decision Rules: What is a “Good” Response to Intervention? Positive Response Gap is closing Can extrapolate point at which target student(s) will “come in range” of target--even if this is long range Level of “risk” lowers over time Questionable Response Rate at which gap is widening slows considerably, but gap is still widening Gap stops widening but closure does not occur Poor Response Gap continues to widen with no change in rate.

48. Positive Response to Intervention Expected Trajectory Performance Observed Trajectory Time

49. Decision Rules: What is a “Questionable” Response to Intervention? Positive Response Gap is closing Can extrapolate point at which target student(s) will “come in range” of target--even if this is long range Questionable Response Rate at which gap is widening slows considerably, but gap is still widening Gap stops widening but closure does not occur Level of “risk” remains the same over time Poor Response Gap continues to widen with no change in rate.

50. Questionable Response to Intervention Expected Trajectory Performance Observed Trajectory Time