Talent Development in an RtI Framework

1. Talent Development in an RtI Framework

2. About the Presenter • Drew Wellman, Director of Learning and Student Services for the Lake Mills Area School District • Lake Mills Area School District—1,400 student K-12 • RtI Background • Contributing “architect” to two different systems • Thesis • Extensive PD • Admitted RtI super geek • Grew out of experiences as school psych • Gifted and Talented Background • Limited experience in GT Prior to D.L.S.S. • Steep learning curve!

3. Advance Organizer • Why the Lake Mills Story? • Highlights of the Lake Mills Talent Development Program • LMASD RtI Efforts and the Connection to Talent Development • LMASD TD Program • PLEASE—Ask Questions as we Go!

4. Why the LM Story? • History—3 Years Ago • No “program” • Random assortment of good interventions • Inequitable service delivery • Many “false starts” • No decision making framework • No qualifying criteria • Stand alone program • One staff member in charge • Limited budget

5. Why the LM Story? • Progress—Previous 1 ½ Years • Comprehensive Resource Guide • Begged, borrowed, and stole from many places • Tightly connected to RtI efforts • System imbedded • Distributed leadership model • Daily supports for students • Equitable identification processes • Talent Development philosophical orientation • Still have a long way to go! • Still a limited budget ($1,000)!

6. Why the LM Story? • From Disjointed to Connected • Particularly as it applies to RtI • From Random Acts of Good Intervention to Daily Supports • From No Decision Making Framework to a Comprehensive Decision Making Framework • From No Philosophical Orientation to a Talent Development Philosophical Orientation • The LMASD chooses to adopt the language of TD instead of the more prevalent language of GT. In doing so, we hope to advance a support system that is more inclusive and flexible than traditional gifted education approaches, while at the same time maintaining a commitment to promoting individualized learning experiences for our most talented students.

7. Why the LM Story? • About 1 ½ Years and Almost $0 Dollars • No Special Expertise • If You’re Where We Were—Our Story May Help • If You’re Looking to Partner with RtI Efforts—Our Story May Help

8. Talent Development Program • Highlights • Talent Development Identification • 3 Tiers—Tier 1 has no floor…everyone qualifies • Tri-annual data meetings • Promote fluid identification of students • Natural opportunities to discuss student strengths • Talent Development Service Delivery • Most services provided at Tier 1…all have access • Specific and individualized supports at Tier 2 and Tier 3 • Differentiated Education Plan (DEP) • 30 minutes a day with a TD teacher K-8 • Teachers make the difference! • Distributed Leadership Approach

9. LMASD RtI—The Foundation of TD Interest Convergence! • We set out to establish a great RtI framework to support struggling learners…along the way realized this fits perfect for TD • The same principles/actions/structures that apply to struggling learners apply to TD • MTSS, balanced assessment system, data-based decision making, problem solving process • Intentionally layered TD supports into everything RtI—it became a “rule” that when discussing RtI we must include TD • Interest convergence—Provides wonderful opportunity to grow and strengthen TD efforts for all districts

10. LMASD RtI—The Foundation of TD • Evidence Based • Improved Student Outcomes • Education for All Students

11. LMASD RtI—Elementary MTSS

12. LMASD RtI-Middle School MTSS

13. LMASD RtI—MTSS Resources

14. LMASD RtI—The Foundation of TD • Evidence Based • Improved Student Outcomes • Education for All Students

15. LMASD RtI—Assessment • Three Assessment Window’s Each Year • Fall, Winter, Spring • Three Data Meetings Follow Testing • Grade level K-8 • Place students into intervention groups • Review student progress • Promotes fluidity of placement • Equity in identification • Balanced Assessment System

16. 2012-2013 LMASD Assessment Profile

17. LMASD Assessment Calendar

19. LMASD RtI—Assessment and TD • Assessment Windows and Data Meetings • Top students are discussed regularly • Placement into the TD groups is fluid and activity/assessment dependent • I.E., Problem solving activities for a 1/3 of the year in 3rd grade—students with strong creativity, curiosity, cognitive abilities selected for the TD group • I.E., Math activities for a 1/3 of the year—students with strong math skills selected • Still evolving these efforts • Generally top 10%-15% of students may “fit” • Consistently high performance will prompt a TD referral for a DEP

20. LMASD RtI—The Foundation of TD • Evidence Based • Improved Student Outcomes • Education for All Students

21. LMASD RtI—Problem Solving Process • Tri-Annual Data Meetings • In-Depth Student Decisions for Tier 2 and Tier 3 • Struggling and talented students • Lake Mills Specific Processes • Binder system • Student Services monitors/tracks intervention placements • Student Services communicates student needs grade-to-grade • Talent Development Advocates communicates TD student needs grade-to-grade

22. LMASD RtI—Problem Solving • Tri-annual Data Meetings Tool • See Excel Data Wall

23. LMASD—RTI and TD • Interest Convergence • MTSS-Supports for struggling and advanced learners • Daily contact for all students with a key teacher • Fluid placement • Balanced Assessment • Multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate deficits and strengths • Ability to monitor progress over time and compare to benchmarks • Information contributes to tri-annual data meetings • Problem Solving Process • The system that “makes the wheels go ‘round”

24. RtI and Talent Development • System for Struggling Learners Can Be the Same/Similar for Advanced Learners • Advocate for alignment rather than independence • Allowed us to implement services and processes quickly • Advocate for time in the day for intervention • Opinion: The ONLY way to be true to the RtI framework in a meaningful way • Advocate for built in data meetings to review student progress • LM: Simple step of “calendarizing” assessment and meeting windows institutionalized the process quickly

25. LMASD Talent Development Program • Shift to Program Specifics • LMASD TD Resource Guide • Identification processes • Services • Staff roles/responsibilities • Additional Tidbits • Issues

26. LMASD TD Program Resource Guide • A “Frankensteined” Resource • Begged, borrowed, and stole from everywhere • No good idea left alone! • TD Resource Guide • Provides the framework for our work • Developed throughout a one-year process • Included K-12 educators and parents • See LMASD Talent Development Resource Guide

27. Talent Development Identification • Tier III • Top 1% • Performance, assessment, supporting data • Tier II • Top 2% • Performance, assessment, supporting data • Tier I • Top 97% • No ID floor • Performance, assessment, supporting data • 5 Qualifying Areas • Tier II and III potentially 10% of student population

28. Talent Development Services • Tier III • Exceptional needs met through DEP process (i.e., grade acceleration) • Tier II • Exceptional needs met through DEP process (i.e., subject acceleration) • Tier I • Access to most extension/enrichment opportunities • Needs met largely through RtI process

29. Talent Development Services • Tier 1 • Needs met largely through classroom differentiation • Competitions, clubs, etc. • RtI Intervention Time • Tier 2 • DEP—partnership with students and families • Possible subject level acceleration • Everything in Tier 1 • Tier 3 • DEP—partnership with students and families • Possible subject and/or grade level acceleration • Everything in Tier 1 and Tier 2

30. Talent Development Services

31. Talent Development Services • Differentiated Education Plans • Tier 2 and Tier 3 • Describes • PLOP • Goals • Services • Individualized classes, learning path, subject/grade acceleration, additional assessments, etc. • Meet at least annually • Minimally—LEA, TDA, teacher at meeting

32. Talent Development Staff Roles • All Staff are Advocates for Talented Students • Distributed Leadership Model • Decision making at building/class level • TDA’s, intervention teachers • Empowering staff • Examples • Timeliness of response to students and parents • Staff roles tied into “action teams” • Increased capacity for awesomeness!

33. Talent Development Staff Roles • DLSS • Oversee program • Principal • Oversee building level program • Talent Development Advocates • Most important! • Consultation, DEP team participation, professional development, identification and tracking responsibilities, organizational responsibilities, etc. • Student Services • Assist in identification (specifically formal testing), student supports, and RtI system components

34. Additional Tidbits • Process • Organization/Program Architecture for TD • 9 months, K-12 committee, professional staff and administration, 3 meetings • Parent group provided input in 3 meetings • June 2012 Board approval of Talent Development Resource Guide • Organization/Program Architecture for RtI • Extensive and ongoing • Different buildings at different places

35. Additional Tidbits • Roll Out • Imbedded in RtI efforts 11-12 • “Build the plane as it flies” • Principals and TDA’s helped implement • Explicit 12-13 in RtI system • TD Resource Guide Available on Web • www.lakemills.k12.wi.us • Student Services—Talent Development—Talent Development Resource Guide • Building Level Presentations

36. Additional Tidbits • At-Risk/Special Education Influences • Unique learners need a person • Non-categorical identification fits most students • Special education process can be informative • Frequency of meetings, meeting participants, information for plans, etc. • Supports need to be imbedded into daily practice or they will not be implemented with fidelity • Services, accommodations/modifications, differentiation

37. Issues • Moved Very Quickly • Can the foundation support the program? • Intervention teachers have steep learning curve • TDA’s are learning to be consultants on the fly • RtI system is still working out the “bugs” • Staff/parent communication and understanding

38. Issues • Tier 1 Identification Criteria • Is the “everyone qualifies” approach good? • Tier 2 and 3 Identification Criteria • Is 98th and above percentile too restrictive? Or, with 5 qualifying areas, is this too broad (theoretically, 10% of student population identified) • DEP’s • Can we manage the administration of these plans? • What’s so different?

39. Hopes • Equitable Identification • All students get their individual needs met • The most talented students are identified and supported in an individualized manner • Sustainable • Not dependent on one person • Approach becomes cultural • Efforts ease for individual teachers as “system” picks up • Improved Outcomes • More engagement, higher scores, happier students, happier families

40. Hopes • Intervention Teachers and TDA’s • Become experts in TD • “Own” their TD responsibilities—take professional development into their own hands • Create a welcoming environment for students • Become an essential partner with students and families

41. Contact Information • Drew Wellman • drew.wellman@lakemills.k12.wi.us • 920-648-2474