The RTI Data Dilemma:

1. Understanding and Managing Critical Assessment Information The RTI Data Dilemma: 2009 ASCD Convention Orange County Convention Center, Room W308A Orlando, FL Saturday, March 14, 2009

2. Introductions • Dr. Robert (Bob) Howell, Executive Director, Special Education, RtI Administrator (Retired) • Sandy Patton, Executive Director, Learning Resources and Project Director, RtI (Retired) • Dr. John Kerr, Deputy Superintendent. Curriculum and Instruction, Colorado Springs School District 11 (Retired) • Marcia Kaplan, Curriculum, Instruction and Technology Consultant © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

3. Points to Take Home • Teachers must know what data they need to inform instruction • Teachers must have ready and easy access to the needed data • Teachers must know how to use data to inform instruction • Fidelity of use/implementation is critical © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

4. What is RTI? RTI is a system for educational redesign based on a hierarchy of interventions which are implemented to meet the needs of students who demonstrate underachievement in core academic areas of literacy and math(Howell, Patton, & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention,) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

5. Another Definition of RTI RtI is the practice of: • providing high-quality instruction/intervention matched to student needs • using learning rate (and/or other outcomes) over time and level of performance to make important educational decisions (NASDSE, 2005 and from Understanding Response to Intervention, pg. 9) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

6. Learning Rate/Level of Performance • Learning Rate is referenced to a student’s performance compared to baseline rates and peer performance • Level of Performance is referenced to the student’s relative standing compared to expected performance © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

7. RTI Data Dilemma • Access to a variety of data & why data are needed • Screening and benchmarking must be valid, reliable, & ACCESSIBLE • Diagnostic & prescriptive assessments are dependent on bullets 1 & 2 • Progress monitoring quality is only as good as the data upon which it is founded © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

8. RTI Data Dilemma cont’d • Selection of interventions, fidelity of usage & data collection are critical to success • Outcome assessments to measure student progress against grade-level expectation must be given • All are dependent on a truly aligned curriculum with instruction and assessments © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

9. Activity First, by yourself, take 3 minutes to write down the 5 most critical issues that get in the way of your district, school, or classroom implementing the data requirements for RTI. When the facilitator says stop you will group in triads and work to select the 3 most critical dilemmas or variables that must be addressed. We will select 5 groups to report back. © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

10. What do we do with the data? • Inform instruction • Validate alignment of the curriculum • Insure that we are meeting standards • Determine if what is taught is learned • Focus on progress monitoring © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

11. Types of Data… • State and National • Provides the ‘Big Picture’ of school or district’s performance • Helps identify root causes • Benchmarking is the process of assessing all students three times per school year in reading, writing and math (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention. Pg. 81) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

12. Types of Data cont’d • Benchmarking data… • Identifies individual and groups of students with performance issues • Provides a screening process • Identifies needed instructional strategies and curriculum modification for school and/or district as a whole © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

13. Types of Data cont’d • Benchmarking data… • Provides a process for diagnosing student needs and prescribing interventions • Progress Monitoring provides the formative assessment link between instruction and high stakes testing (Under-standing Response to Intervention pg. 75) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

14. Types of Data cont’d • Progress monitoring must include measures for district-wide progress, grade-level progress, classroom progress and individual student progress • Progress monitoring data… • Must be aligned • Must ensure that what is taught is learned and what is learned is measured © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

15. Interventions An intervention is a new strategy or modification of instruction or behavior management designed to help a student or group of students improve performance relative to a specific goal (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention, pg. 57) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

16. Interventions Interventions begin in the general education classroom. Modifications, including changing intervention frequency, intensity and duration until the student achieves success (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention pg. 59) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

17. Curriculum Alignment RTI creates curriculum alignment because of the heavy emphasis on progress monitoring. Progress monitoring puts into practice those questions asked in a Professional Learning Community (PLC) (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention pg. 77) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

18. Four Critical PLC Questions • What do students need to learn and be able to do? • How do we know if the students are learning it? • What will we do if students have not learned it? • What will we do if they have learned it? (DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker & from Understanding Response to Intervention pg. xviii) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

19. Progress Monitoring Curriculum-based measurements (CBMs) are quick and easy normed assessments providing valuable data on student learning. CBMS are inexpensive, easy to use and quickly administered in 2 to 5 minutes (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention pgs. 77 - 78) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

20. Progress Monitoring Probes enable teachers to monitor student progress on a daily, weekly, semimonthly or monthly basis without loss of validity(Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention, pg 80) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

21. Progress Monitoring CBMs… • Determine a student’s individual instructional level within the curriculum • Establish long term goals and monitor individuals and groups of students • Assist teachers and Problem Solving Teams in making decisions regarding the impact of teaching on learning © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

22. Progress Monitoring cont’d CBMs… • Measure the impact of interventions • Measure the impact of the over-all problem-solving process (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention, pg. 80) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

23. RTI Assessment Process High quality professional development helps move from understanding and using data to incorporating thoughtful, targeted assessments as part of the instructional process (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention, pg. 82) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

24. RTI Assessment Process • Short tests such as CBMs are administered to obtain baseline data on student skills • If the student learns at a slower pace or at a lower level, the tests help the teacher pinpoint problems • Encourages the teacher to change methods and materials to better meet student learning needs (Colorado Springs School District 11, 2006) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

25. Role of Problem-Solving Team Problem-Solving Teams (PSTs) use data to discern current issues that exacerbate failure, discover the root cause or primary problem(s), and create a continuous improvement process to close the gap between a child’s performance and grade level, national norms or expected achievement(Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention, pg 39) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

26. Actualizing RTI Data Activity • You will have an opportunity to look at some real student data and analyze what the data are telling you. • Use your triads and look these slides, we will explain the key to you. • What are these data telling you. What if these data represented an entire district, a school or a group of kids. What would you do? © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

27. Actualizing RTI Data © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

28. Actualizing RTI Data © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

29. Actualizing RTI Data © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

30. Actualizing RTI Data © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

31. Actualizing RTI Data © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

32. Root Cause Analysis Root Cause Analysis is an eight step problem-solving process that focuses on an ongoing problem-solving cycle rather than a one time effort (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention , pg. 40) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

33. Root Cause Analysis Process • Define the problem based on identification of a sentinel event • Gather additional data and evidence • Identify contributory issues • Delineate possible root causes • Develop solution recommendations for the primary causes (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention, pg. 41) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

34. Root Cause Analysis Process cont’d 6. Implement solutions to eliminate or diminish the causes • Retest solutions based on data • Review data from Steps 1-7 to determine systemic prevention or intervention strategies (Howell, Patton & Deiotte, Understanding Response to Intervention, pg. 41) © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

35. Root Cause Analysis Process • Provides a well-defined system of evaluation using student-based assessments • Applies measures to monitor what educators are achieving with students on a daily basis • Guides staff in evaluating and acting on the results of students’ work © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

36. Managing RTI Data We strongly recommend the use of an electronic data management system to allow the classroom teacher and the Problem Solving Teams to graph student data without that component becoming an overwhelming factor and impeding the total RTI process. © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

37. Managing RTI Data Requirements in a system… • CBM probes that are normed and validated • A wide variety of multi-grade and multi-discipline probes • Interoperability with student information systems and other available systems • Easy access for teachers • Easy data entry and one data entry if possible © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

38. Points to Take Home • Teachers must know what data they need to inform instruction • Teachers must have ready and easy access to the needed data • Teachers must know how to use data to inform instruction • Fidelity of use/implementation is critical © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

39. Questions/Answers fromQuestion Cards

40. Contact Information: Sandy Patton Spatton@tecedge.net or Marcia Kaplan Mkaplan@tecedge.net

41. Presentation Available at: www.tecedge.net/presentations/The_RTI_Data_Dilemma.ppt http://www.ascd.org/conferences/acpresenterupload.aspx

42. Resources • www.nasdse.org • www.nwrel.org/nwrcc/rti/ • www.ritap.org/rti/resources/web_resources.php • www.interventioncentral.org • www.autoskill.com/intervention/rti.php • www.k12.wa.us/SpecialEd/RTI.aspx • www.cssd11.k12.co.us/RTI/ • rticenter@air.org © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

43. Research and References Barnett, D. W., Daly, E. J., III, Jones, K. M., & Lentz, F. E., Jr. (2004). Empirically based special service decisions from single-case designs of increasing and decreasing intensity. The Journal of Special Education, 38, 66-79. Bergan, J. R. (1977). Behavioral consultation. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill. Bergan, J. R., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1990). Behavioral consultation and therapy. New York: Plenum Press. Bradley, R., Danielson, L. C., & Hallahan, D. P. (2002). Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice. Washington, DC: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

44. Research and References(Cont’d) Brown-Chidsey, R., & Steege, M. W. (2006). Response to Intervention: Principles and Strategies for Effective Instruction. New York: Guilford Press. Deno, S. (1985). “Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative.” Exceptional Children, 52, 219-684. Deno, S., & Mirkin, P. (1977). Data-based program modification. Minneapolis, MN: Leadership Training Institute for Special Education. Donovan, M. S., & Cross, C. T. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Barnes, M., Stuebing, K. K., Francis, D. J., Olson, R. K., & Shaywitz, S. E. (2002). Classification of Learning Difficulties: An Evidence-based Evaluation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

45. Research and References(Cont’d) Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93-99. Gersten, R., & Dimino, J. A. (2006). RTI (Response to intervention): Rethinking special education for students with reading difficulties (yet again). Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 99-108. Heller, K. A., Holtzman, W. H., & Messick, S. (Eds.). (1982). Placing children in special education: A strategy for equity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Howell. R.J., Patton, S. L., & Deiotte, M. T. (2008) Understanding Response to Intervention. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Klingner, J. K., & Edwards, P. A. (2006). Cultural considerations with response to intervention models. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 108-117. Kratochwill, T. R., & Bergan, J. R. (1990). Behavioral consultation: An individual guide. New York: Plenum Press. © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

46. Research and References(Cont’d) Kratochwill, T. R., Clements, M., A., & Kalamon, K. (in press). Reconsidering response to intervention: Conceptual, methodological, and psychometric issues. In S. Jimmerson, M. Burns, and A. VanDerHeyden (Eds.) The handbook of response to intervention. New York: Springer Science, Inc. Kratochwill, T. R., Elliott, S. N., & Stoiber, K. C. (2002). Problem solving consultation. In A. Thomas and J. Grimes (Eds.). Best Practices. Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: Author. National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education. © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

47. Research and References(Cont’d) Newell, M., & Kratochwill, T. R. (in press). Response to intervention: Cultural issues and considerations. In S. Jimmerson, M. Burns, and A. VanDerHeyden (Eds.) The handbook of response to intervention. New York: Springer Science, Inc. Reschly, D. J., Tilly III, W. D., & Grimes, J. P. (1999). Special Education in Transition: Functional Assessment and Non-categorical Programming. Longmont, CO: Sorpis West. Rosenfield, S., Silva, A., & Gravois, T. A. (in press). Bringing instructional consultation to scale: Research and development of IC and IC teams. In W. Erchul & S. Sheridan (Eds.) Handbook of research in school consultation: Empirical foundations for the field. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Sheridan, S. M., Kratochwill, T. R., & Bergan, J. R. (1996). Conjoint behavioral consultation: An individual guide. New York: Plenum Press. © Howell, Kerr, & Patton 2009

48. Thank You and Good Luck