1 / 9

Response to Intervention

Discover how White Bear Lake Schools implemented RTI to address student needs effectively, with a focus on diversity and collaboration. Learn about the successful interventions at Oneka and Lincoln Elementary schools, and the current focus on sustainability and data reviews.

scottmray
Download Presentation

Response to Intervention

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Response to Intervention White Bear Lake Schools -Oneka Elementary -Lincoln Elementary

  2. Demographics • Approximately 55,000 people live within the borders of White Bear Lake Schools. • Second ring suburb of St. Paul • Population has significantly changed showing a more diverse student population, both racially and socio-economically. • During the 2007-2008 school year, the student enrollment was 8, 347. • Special Education-12.6% • Free and reduced lunch district average 26% • ELL sites in 6 out of the 8 elementary buildings

  3. Pre – RTI • Individual student need’s were addressed through the TAT process • Inconsistent data collection • Instructional decisions not always based on data • Intervention implementation inconsistent • TAT process was a “hoop to jump through” to get to a special education assessment. • Wait to Fail Service Model approach • Inconsistent collaboration. • Interventions not always researched based

  4. How Did RTI unfold in White Bear Lake? • 2006-2007 Special Education Director began discussion with District Leadership Two elementary principals identified to join in the initiative • 2007-2008 Early Intervening Services dollars to research and began RTI planning (.4 FTE) Applied for and received RTI Coaching grant through MN RTI Center Met monthly as an RTI District Team and attended a variety of workshops. Action Plans written for each building. Small kindergarten pilot with AIMSweb progress monitoring

  5. Oneka Elementary Oneka: Implemented K-5 RTI model 752 students ELL site Measurement: All school AIMSweb benchmarking and progress monitoring Interventions: Tier 1- Houghton Mifflin Tier 2- EIR, Scripted Interventions, Read Naturally, Tune into Reading, Earobics Tier 3- Orton, Fundations (Wilson System) Problem Solving: Created RTI documentation, problem solving at grade levels and PST involvement with Tier 3 Intervention Teachers: Reading specialist .8, special education staff, ELL, Reach, paras

  6. Lincoln Elementary Lincoln: Added 1st grade to RTI model 403 students Measurement: AIMSweb K, 1st benchmarking and progress monitoring Interventions: Tier 1- Houghton Mifflin Tier 2 -EIR, PALS, Repeated Readings Tier 3 - Orton, TV Teacher Problem Solving: Improved process, data collection, and matching interventions to needs. Intervention Teachers: Special education, reading specialist, classroom teachers, behavior assistant, Reach

  7. Accomplishments • Site visits to a variety of schools • Attended a variety of SCRED trainings • Created an Action Plan • Established literacy block schedule • Established AIMSweb universal screening and progress monitoring • Adopted research-based tier 2 and tier 3 interventions. • Survived the “bumps in the road”!!!!

  8. Current Focus • Sustainability • Grade level data review and intervention reviews • Problem Solving Team • Diagnostics • Fidelity • Alternative Delivery of Specialized Instruction

  9. Contact Information • Tracy Presseller tapres@wbl.whitebear.k12.mn.us

More Related