RtI in Practice: Systems Change in the Hiawatha Valley Education District (HVED) 2010 MSPA Midwinter Conference

1. RtI in Practice: Systems Change in the Hiawatha Valley Education District (HVED)2010 MSPA Midwinter Conference Dan Hyson, Data Management Coordinator Lisa Skifton, Lead School Psychologist Hiawatha Valley Education District, Winona, MN

2. Background on HVED Cooperative serving ~21,000 students 15 districts and 5 charter schools in SE MN

3. Agenda • How did HVED start transitioning to RtI? • What have HVED’s goals been in this transition? • What has this transition looked like in our schools? • What has been the role of the school psychologist? • What training, support and resources has HVED provided to the schools? • What evidence does HVED have that our transition has been effective? • What challenges has HVED experienced and what tips can we provide to others? • Questions

4. 1. How did HVED start transitioning to RtI?

5. 1. How did HVED start transitioning to RtI? • George Batsche trained HVED staff and other district staff on RTI-2004 & 2006 • Kerry Bollman from SCRED trained HVED staff on the problem solving process-2005 • Data Management Coordinator position started in fall 2006-established a data warehouse of all students in HVED • AIMSweb benchmark data 3x/year, NWEA MAP tests, MCA-II

6. 2. What have HVED’s goals been in this transition? • Series of 3 grants from Minnesota Department of Education beginning in December 2006 • 5 pilot districts: Winona, Plainview-Elgin-Millville, Caledonia, Lewiston-Altura and Lake City

7. 2. What have HVED’s goals been in this transition? • Grants 1 and 2 • Implement research-based instruction with fidelity • Identify students not making progress and modify instruction • Make research-based interventions more readily available • Decrease number of students placed in special education

8. 2. What have HVED’s goals been in this transition? • Grant 3 • Help problem solving teams access, interpret and use data from benchmark screenings and progress monitoring to identify and implement instructional changes • Implement research-based interventions with fidelity in both general ed and special ed • Identify reliable measure of fidelity of implementation • Increase parent communication • Once demonstrate readiness, begin to make eligibility decisions based on data collected during interventions

9. 3. What has this transition looked like in our schools (e.g., Winona Area Public Schools)? • Reading Specialists hired in 2006 • Job description included working with students and training regular ed. teachers on strategies/interventions • Behavior Interventionist hired in 2009 to provide consultation services to teachers

10. 3. What has this transition looked like in our schools (e.g., Winona Middle School)? • 5th grade teachers trained in 6-Minute Solution, Read Naturally, and REWARDS • House system for team planning time • AIMSweb benchmarks-fluency and maze • 30-Minute Tier 2 reading interventions done daily • Monthly data meetings-discuss progress monitoring data to determine changes in intervention

11. 3. What has this transition looked like in our schools (e.g., Winona Middle School)? • Rocket Math done daily in all 5th grade classrooms (math fact fluency) • Working on training 5th grade teachers in TransMath for differentiated math instruction next year (math calculation and reasoning)

12. 3. What has this transition looked like in our schools (e.g., Rollingstone Elementary)? • Survey of research-based interventions that teachers are trained in, and interventions they are using • All teachers are using PALS math and PALS reading (Tier 1) • Individual teachers supplementing with Tier 2 interventions (Earobics, Sound Partners)

13. School Psychologist’s Role • Establish regularly-scheduled team meetings to discuss data • Schedule/Facilitate trainings for teachers • Organize AIMSweb benchmark testing • Help administer AIMSweb fluencies/enter in data, interpret data for teachers • Lead discussions on how to use data for Tier 2/3 interventions • Help teachers access specific intervention resources

14. Change in School Psychologist Role with transition to RTI • Fewer referrals for evaluations • Teachers do problem solving on their own • Gather data on groups of students • Interpret data on groups of students to help teachers facilitate group interventions

15. 4. What training, support and resources has HVED provided to the schools? • Access to information about research-based interventions • Summer Symposia • Links to national website clearinghouses • Local intervention database • RtI readiness checklists • Data and instructional coaching

16. HVED Summer Symposia • Nationally-recognized researchers • Every year since 2002 • 4-5 days in August during week before teacher workshops • For General Ed, Special Ed and administration • Started with training in research-based reading interventions • Now expanded to include math interventions and positive behavior interventions

17. Links to national website clearinghouses • What Works Clearinghouse - ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/ • Florida Center for Reading Research - www.fcrr.org/FCRRReports/LReports.aspx • Intervention Central – interventioncentral.org

18. 5. What evidence does HVED have that our transition has been effective? • Increased teacher awareness of research-based interventions • Increased use of technology tools to access data used in RtI process • Decrease in percent of students found eligible for Specific Learning Disability services

19. Increased teacher awareness of research-based interventions

20. Increased use of technology tools to access data used in RtI process Percent of HVED member district staff using data warehouse at least 1x/month

21. Decrease in percent of students found eligible for Specific Learning Disability services - all HVED Districts

22. Grant districts* * Winona, Lake City, Lewiston-Altura, Caledonia, PEM

23. HVED v. State average % in Special Ed overall

24. 6. What challenges has HVED experienced and what tips can we provide to others?

25. Pros/Cons at the elementary level • Pros: teachers taking ownership of students, willingness to do interventions at all three tiers, small school, small class sizes, reading specialist consultation services (providing resources and interventions) • Cons: lack of follow through on some behavior plan rewards

26. Pros/Cons at the middle school level • Pros: team planning time, 5th grade Rocket Math (universal), buy-in on the effectiveness of the interventions, teachers entering own benchmark data and using data-based decision making • Cons: no system for Tier 3 interventions-these are done on an individual basis, teachers with higher kids resist monthly meetings, 6th-8th grade teachers resisting doing any systematic interventions, no universal long-term vision/plan, lack of principal involvement

27. 7. Questions?

28. Contact information Dan Hyson dhyson@hved.org 507-452-1200, ext. 119 Lisa Skifton lskifton@hved.org 507-494-1013