Response to Intervention

1. Response to Intervention Making it Work in Jessamine County Michelle Gadberry, Psy. S. Assistant Director of Special Programs

2. Background • 05-06 – funds allotted to purchase reading/math programs • Jan 07 – I met with CRAs to introduce RTI • March 07 – DoSE introduced RTI to principals and secured volunteers to pilot the process in 07-08 • K-2 only in reading • 4 elementary schools involved

3. 07-08 PILOT YEAR • Used DRA for universal screening • DIBELS for Progress Monitoring • Curriculum Coaches and Curriculum Administrators provided school structure • Each tier was outlined with suggested interventions for each level. • Still used discrepancy formula for SLD identification

4. If we could do it again… • We would have used district administrators to train all teachers so the message was more consistent. • Would have provided more organizational structure rather than allow flexibility. • Monitored interventions and process more intentionally.

5. Year Two 08-09 • All elementary schools involved • K-3 for Reading • Trained on DIBELS and administered 3x year as universal screening • Identified bottom 10% district-wide • All other grades were expected to use RTI to implement interventions with at-risk students and monitor progress (Pyramid of Interventions) for reading and other areas including attendance.

6. Year Two • Developed district forms for monitoring implementation, documenting meetings and a rubric for level/tier changes. • Provided a stipend for a coach to serve as the POI coach at each elementary. • I met with RTI Coaches each month to review intervention ideas, share concerns and celebrations, and share information as needed.

7. End of the year planning • All day planning with coaches • Refined district forms • Developed plan for district Pyramid of Interventions University in August 09.

8. Year Three and on… • With support of ARRA funds, each school hired an Intervention Resource Teacher (see job description.) • Asst. DoSE dedicated half of her time to RTI coaching (two years only.) • Currently - all schools are implementing RTI in some form or fashion. Elementary schools have the tightest program.

9. How are students selected? • We use universal screening (3x a year). • K-2 uses DIBELS for reading. • 3-11 uses PAS for reading and math. • Scores are combined and sorted to determine the bottom 10% district-wide. • Schools are then notified of the students in the “Bottom 10%”. • Teachers may also refer students.

10. Levels • Refer to Handbook • Three levels of increasing intensity/frequency based upon student need • Pyramids have been developed for reading, math, behavior and attendance

11. Progress Monitoring • We use DIBELS for reading K-5 • We use MBSP for math 1-5 • We use Aimsweb for reading/math middle school • We use a combination of created maze probes and PAS probes at high school.

12. Schedules • Elementary – all have blocks of time for students to receive intervention. Schedules vary but most have combined intervention teacher, reading teachers and assistants to cover multiple programs and multiple grade levels. • Computerized programs are used to supplement also and allow flexibility.

13. Schedules • Middle – both have a 30 minutes block for enrichment/intervention. Additional intervention is provided in pockets of time including before/after school. • High school – both have intervention “classes” which provide an elective credit. • One high school also provides individualized intervention (computer based) for small groups of students all day.

14. Student Monitoring Meetings • Teams meet monthly to review student progress. • Decisions are based on data. • Interventions are selected based on student need, not teacher convenience. • Targeted Intervention Plan form is completed each month to maintain record of progress.

15. Elementary Team Meeting

16. Elementary Team Meeting

17. Interventions • Level 1 reading and math is differentiated instruction using evidence based practices. • We love the Florida Center for Reading Research activities that line up with the areas of reading. • We created intervention packets from our Envisions materials.

18. Interventions • Level Two – supplemental 30 minutes • Interventions vary but most school have added quite a lot over the last few years • In most cases the same programs can be used for Level Two and Level Three – the intensity and/or frequency may vary, though.

19. Interventions • Level Three – should be 5% or less of population • Intervention should be changed if not working before referring for special education. • Prior to referral must show dual discrepancy.

20. What if it doesn’t work? • Referral for special education is only made when you can show that: • The student has received intensive evidence-based intervention geared at his/her academic deficits. • The student has failed to show an adequate response (slope). • The students skills remain well below that of their peers.

21. Training • Train, train and then train some more! • POI University • IA University • DIBELS trainings • Problem Solving Process trainings • Specific intervention trainings

22. Forms • Teacher Handbook • TIP • Level Change Rubric • Implementation Documentation • Referral Checklist

23. Success! • First grade students • May 08 vs. May 09 • The percentage of students “Low Risk” in oral reading fluency increased from 53% to 63%!! • The AVERAGE score for a 1st grader on ORF increased from 49 wpm to 60 wpm – an increase of 11 words per minute!

24. QUESTIONS?? • Contact information: • Michelle Gadberry • Michelle.gadberry@jessamine.kyschools.us