Opportunities and Challenges with RTI Implementation: A Secondary Teacher’s Perspective

1. Opportunities and Challenges with RTI Implementation: A Secondary Teacher’s Perspective Christy Khan University of Kansas December 15, 2008 Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H32E070004. Project Officers: Grace Duran and Tina Diamond.

2. Presentation Objectives • Understand benefits and challenges of RTI implementation in middle/secondary schools • Understand one school’s approach to effective intervention in a content area • Discuss how to apply intervention to your own school

3. Challenges to Implementing RTI in Secondary Schools • Collaboration • Time • Shared Underlying Values • Every child can respond to instruction • Every staff member is responsive to student needs

4. Collaboration in RTI • Stakeholders • General education teachers • Special education teachers • Support staff (e.g., reading specialists, paraprofessionals, school psychologists, speech and language pathologists) • Administrators • Parents • Student

5. Communication is Key • General education and special education teachers • Regularly share modifications and instructional techniques • At primary and secondary prevention levels • General educators, special educators, and administration • Share progress monitoring data to determine appropriate placement of students • School staff, parents and students • Keep well-informed of student progress and placement

6. Choosing methods, programs, and interventions As a team, review: • Federal, state, and local district policy initiatives • Research in relevant academic areas • Literature on • effective schools • system reform • effective teaching for diverse students

7. Fidelity of Implementation • Ensures all components of RTI implemented and delivered as intended • All staff must understand what is required and included in RTI • Staff must be assured that the fidelity process is one of observation and feedback, NOT evaluation

8. Benefits of Fidelity of Implementation Fidelity of Implementation Increased staff motivation Increased program credibility More consistent student outcomes

9. 10 % Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade reading assessment scores from 06-07 school year to 07-08 school year

10. Identify the Area of Need • Based on data from previous years’ Kansas Reading Assessment scores • Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to determine indicators needing the most improvement

11. Identify the Students • Based on test scores • 10th grade MAP scores • 8th grade Reading Assessment scores • Targeted students who scored below 50% RIT on MAP scores • Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and Reading Strategies enrollment

12. Met as 11th Grade PLC Team Entire day – all members present • What do we want students to learn? • How do we know if they learned it? • What do we do with kids who don’t get it? • What do we do with kids who already know it?

13. What do we want students to learn? • Aligned with standards and benchmarks • Determined indicators already taught in curriculum • Determined sequence of remaining skills to be emphasized

14. How do we know if they learned it? • Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks prior to State Assessment • Developed from released practice exams • Each test assessed 2-4 indicators • Students required to score 80% or higher

15. What do we do with kids who don’t get it? • Tuesday JAG Intervention • 45 minutes • Re-teach/review target skills • Offer additional practice • Thursday JAG Intervention • 20-30 minutes • Re-test target skills • SPED and Reading Strategies classes also focused on target skills

16. What do we do with kids who know it already? • Did not have to attend intervention • Determined on a week-by-week basis • Students who met standard (regular) or above standard (AP) on state assessment were exempt from final exam in CA

17. Proposal • What we wanted to do • Resources needed • People needed • Time required

18. Keys to Success • Teacher buy-in • Common formative assessments • Administrative support • Classroom coverage • JAG Time • Mastery Manager • Database • Teacher Aides • Money for treats

19. Most of all… • Quick turnaround of assessment data • COMMUNICATION to all parties involved • Students • Teachers • Administrators • Parents

20. Next Steps • Expand intervention to all year • “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester • Weekly during 3rd Quarter • Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade levels • Build on skills previously assessed

21. Challenges to Fidelity • Change in personnel • Time to prepare • Training for staff

22. Q & A • Contact Information: • Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed. The University of Kansasckhan@ku.edu

23. References Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148. Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232. DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”? Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11. Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics disability." Teaching Exceptional Children,37(4): 60-63. Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006). Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

24. References (continued) Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National Center on Response to Intervention. Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center on Learning Disabilities. Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C., Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5), 495-507.