Response to Intervention: A Guide for Schools Jim Wright interventioncentral

1. Response to Intervention: A Guide for SchoolsJim Wrightwww.interventioncentral.org

2. Download PowerPoints and Handouts from this workshop at:http://www.interventioncentral.org/rtitoolkit.php

3. Understanding the RTI model Discussing team problem-solving, intervention planning, and assessment as elements of RTI Reviewing web resources that can assist your school or district in implementing RTI Identifying next steps to make RTI a reality in your school or district Response to Intervention: An Introduction Today we will work toward the goals of:

4. The Focus of RTI: The Struggling Learner “The quality of a school as a learning community can be measured by how effectively it addresses the needs of struggling students.”--Wright (2005) Source: Wright, J. (2005, Summer). Five interventions that work. NAESP Leadership Compass, 2(4) pp.1,6.

5. ‘RTI Logic’: The Power of Working Smarter… -You're a pretty smart fella.-Not that smart.-How'd you figure it out?-I imagined someone smarter than me. Then I tried to think,"What would he do?”From HEIST (2001)Written by David Mamet

6. What is ‘Response to Intervention’ (RTI)? 'Response to Intervention' is an emerging approach to the diagnosis of Learning Disabilities that holds considerable promise. In the RTI model: • A student with academic delays is given one or more research-validated interventions. • The student's academic progress is monitored frequently to see if those interventions are sufficient to help the student to catch up with his or her peers. • If the student fails to show significantly improved academic skills despite several well-designed and implemented interventions, this failure to 'respond to intervention' can be viewed as evidence of an underlying Learning Disability.

7. What are advantages of RTI? • One advantage of RTI in the diagnosis of educational disabilities is that it allows schools to intervene early to meet the needs of struggling learners. • Another advantage is that RTI maps those specific instructional strategies found to benefit a particular student. This information can be very helpful to both teachers and parents.

8. What previous approach to diagnosing Learning Disabilities does RTI replace? Prior to RTI, many states used a ‘Test-Score Discrepancy Model’ to identify Learning Disabilities. • A student with significant academic delays would be administered an battery of tests, including an intelligence test and academic achievement test(s). • If the student was found to have a substantial gap between a higher IQ score and lower achievement scores, a formula was used to determine if that gap was statistically significant and ‘severe’. • If the student had a ‘severe discrepancy’ [gap] between IQ and achievement, he or she would be diagnosed with a Learning Disability.

9. Learning Disabilities: Test Discrepancy Model “Traditionally, disability is viewed as a deficit that resides within the individual, the severity of which might be influenced, but not created, by contextual variables.”(Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003)

10. Limitations to the ‘test-score discrepancy model’ (Gresham, 2001): • Requires chronic school failure BEFORE remedial/special education supports can be given. • Fails to consider that outside factors such as poor or inconsistent instruction may contribute to a child's learning delay. • A ‘severe discrepancy’ between test scores provides no useful information about WHY the student is doing poorly academically. • Different states (and even school districts within the same state) often used different formulas to diagnose LD, resulting in a lack of uniformity in identifying children for special education support.

11. Why is RTI now being adopted by schools? Congress passed the revised Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) in 2004. • This Federal legislation provides the guidelines that schools must follow when identifying children for special education services. • Based on the changes in IDEIA 2004, the US Department of Education (USDE) updated its regulations to state education departments. The new USDE regulations: • Explicitly ALLOW states to use RTI to identify LD • FORBID states from forcing schools to use a ‘discrepancy model’ to identify LD

12. IDEIA 2004-05 Federal (US Dept of Education) Regulations: What do they say about LD diagnosis? In 2004, Congress reauthorized the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA 2004), including landmark language in that law to encourage schools to break free of their reliance on the discredited IQ-Achievement Discrepancy method for identifying Learning Disabilities. The U.S. Department of Education then developed regulations based on IDEIA 2004 to guide state practices. These regulations (34 C.F.R. 300 & 301, 2006) direct that states cannot “require the use of a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement for determining whether a child has a specific learning disability” [Discrepancy Model]Furthermore, states “must permit the use of a process based on the child’s response to scientific, research-based intervention” (34 C.F.R. 300 & 301, 2006; p. 46786). [RTI Model]

13. IDEIA 2004-05 Federal (US Dept of Education) Regulations: What do they say about LD diagnosis? (Cont.) The federal regulations also require that schools “ensure that underachievement in a child suspected of having a specific learning disability is not due to lack of appropriate instruction” (34 C.F.R. 300 & 301, 2006; p. 46787) by: • demonstrating that “the child was provided appropriate instruction in regular education settings, delivered by qualified personnel” and; • collecting “data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction.”

14. What does RTI look like when applied to an individual student? A widely accepted method for determining whether a student has a Learning Disability under RTI is the ‘dual discrepancy model’ (Fuchs, 2003). • Discrepancy 1: The student is found to be performing academically at a level significantly below that of his or her typical peers (discrepancy in initial skills or performance). • Discrepancy 2: Despite the implementation of one or more well-designed, well-implemented interventions tailored specifically for the student, he or she fails to ‘close the gap’ with classmates (discrepancy in rate of learning relative to peers).

15. Avg Classroom Academic Performance Level Discrepancy 1: Skill Gap (Current Performance Level) Discrepancy 2: Gap in Rate of Learning (‘Slope of Improvement’) Target Student ‘Dual-Discrepancy’: RTI Model of Learning Disability(Fuchs 2003)

16. The steps of RTI for an individual case… Under RTI, if a student is found to be performing well below peers, the school will: • Estimate the academic skill gap between the student and typically-performing peers • Determine the likely reason(s) for the student’s depressed academic performance • Select a scientifically-based intervention likely to improve the student's academic functioning • Monitor academic progress frequently to evaluate the impact of the intervention • If the student fails to respond to several well-implemented interventions, consider a referral to Special Education

17. How can a school restructure to support RTI? The school can organize its intervention efforts into 3 levels, or Tiers, that represent a continuum of increasing intensity of support. (Kovaleski, 2003; Vaughn, 2003). Tier I is the lowest level of intervention and Tier III is the most intensive intervention level. Universal intervention: Available to all students Example: Additional classroom literacy instruction Tier I Individualized Intervention: Students who need additional support than peers are given individual intervention plans. Example: Supplemental peer tutoring in reading to increase reading fluency Tier II Intensive Intervention: Students whose intervention needs are greater than general education can meet may be referred for more intensive services. Example: Special Education Tier III

18. Tier I Interventions Tier I interventions are universal—available to all students. Teachers often deliver these interventions in the classroom (e.g., providing additional drill and practice in reading fluency for students with limited decoding skills). Tier I interventions are those strategies that instructors are likely to put into place at the first sign that a student is struggling. Tier I interventions attempt to answer the question: Are routine classroom instructional modifications sufficient to help the student to achieve academic success?

19. Tier II Interventions Tier II interventions are individualized, tailored to the unique needs of struggling learners. They are reserved for students with significant skill gaps who have failed to respond successfully to Tier I strategies. Tier II interventions attempt to answer the question: Can an individualized intervention plan carried out in a general-education setting bring the student up to the academic level of his or her peers?

20. Tier II Interventions There are two different vehicles that schools can use to deliver Tier II interventions: Standard-Protocol (Standalone Intervention). Group intervention programs based on scientifically valid instructional practices (‘standard protocol’) are created to address frequent student referral concerns. These services are provided outside of the classroom. A middle school, for example, may set up a structured math-tutoring program staffed by adult volunteer tutors to provide assistance to students with limited math skills. Students referred for a Tier II math intervention would be placed in this tutoring program. An advantage of the standard-protocol approach is that it is efficient and consistent: large numbers of students can be put into these group interventions to receive a highly standardized intervention. However, standard group intervention protocols often cannot be individualized easily to accommodate a specific student’s unique needs. Problem-solving (Classroom-Based Intervention). Individualized research-based interventions match the profile of a particular student’s strengths and limitations. The classroom teacher often has a large role in carrying out these interventions. A plus of the problem-solving approach is that the intervention can be customized to the student’s needs. However, developing intervention plans for individual students can be time-consuming.

21. Tier III Interventions Tier III interventions are the most intensive academic supports available in a school and are generally reserved for students with chronic and severe academic delays or behavioral problems. In many schools, Tier III interventions are available only through special education. Tier III supports try to answer the question, What ongoing supports does this student require and in what settings to achieve the greatest success possible?

22. Tier I‘School-Wide Screening & Group Intervention’ Tier II ‘Non-Responders’ to Tier I Are Identified & Given ‘Individually Tailored’ Interventions (e.g., peer tutoring/fluency) RTI: School-Wide Three-Tier Framework (Kovaleski, 2003; Vaughn, 2003) Tier III ‘Long-Term Programming for Students Who Fail to Respond to Tier II Interventions’ (e.g., Special Education)

23. Levels of Intervention: Tier I, II, & III Tier I: Universal100% Tier II: Individualized10-15% Tier III: Intensive5-10%

24. RTI: We’re in Dragon Country Now!Jim Wrightwww.interventioncentral.org

25. Hic sunt dracones. [Latin for “Here be dragons…”] Phrase appearing on the Lenox Globe circa 1503, denoting unknown dangers on the unexplored east coast of Asia. This term now is used to describe any instance in which decision-making or action is difficult because the situation is so complex or because so many variables are unknown. Source: Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_be_dragons#Dragons_on_maps

26. Two Ways to Solve Problems: Algorithm vs. Heuristic • Algorithm. An explicit step-by-step procedure for producing a solution to a given problem. Example: Multiplying 6 x 2 • Heuristic. A rule of thumb or approach which may help in solving a problem, but is not guaranteed to find a solution. Heuristics are exploratory in nature. Example: Using a map to find an appropriate route to a location.

27. MODERN DARYOLS RECIPE (ALGORITHM):INGREDIENTS 2 (9 inch) unbaked pie crusts 1/2 cup blanched almonds 1 1/4 cups cold water 1 cup half-and-half cream 1 pinch saffron powder 1 teaspoon ground cinnamon 5 eggs 3/4 cup white sugar 1 teaspoon rose water DIRECTIONS Preheat the oven to 350 degrees F (175 degrees C). Press pie crusts into the bottom and up the sides of two 9 inch pie pans. Prick with a fork all over to keep them from bubbling up. Bake pie crusts for about 10 minutes in the preheated oven, until set but not browned. Set aside to cool. Make an almond milk by placing almonds in the container of a food processor. Process until finely ground, then add water, and pulse just to blend. Let the mixture sit for 10 minutes, then strain through a cheesecloth. Measure out 1 cup of the almond milk, and mix with half and half. Stir in the saffron and cinnamon, and set aside. Place the eggs and sugar in a saucepan, and mix until well blended. Place the pan over low heat, and gradually stir in the almond milk mixture and cinnamon. Cook over low heat, stirring constantly until the mixture begins to thicken. When the mixture is thick enough to evenly coat the back of a metal spoon, stir in rose water and remove from heat. Pour into the cooled pie shells…. Bake for 40 minutes in the preheated oven, or until the center is set, but the top is not browned. Cool to room temperature, then refrigerate until serving. As Knowledge Base Grows, Heuristic Approaches (Exploratory, Open-Ended Guidelines to Solving a Problem) Can Sometimes Turn into Algorithms (Fixed Rules for Solving a Problem )Example: Recipes Through History DARYOLS: ORIGINAL14th CENTURY ENGLISH RECIPE (HEURISTIC):Take cream of cow milk, or of almonds; do there-to eggs with sugar, saffron and salt. Mix it fair. Do it in a pie shell of 2 inch deep; bake it well and serve it forth.

28. RTI is a Work in Progress: Some I\Areas Can Be Managed Like an Algorithm While Others Require a Heuristic Approch • Reading Fluency. Can be approached as a fixed algorithm. • DIBELS allows universal screening and progress-monitoring • DIBELS benchmarks give indication of student risk status • Classroom-friendly research-based fluency building interventions have been validated • Study Skills. A complex set of skills whose problem-solving approach resembles a heuristic. • Student’s basic set of study skills must be analyzed • The intervention selected will be highly dependent on the hypothesized reason(s) for the student’s study difficulties • The quality of the research on study-skills interventions varies and is still in development

29. Scarcity of research demonstrating the effectiveness of RTI vs. traditional methods of special education identification(Fuchs, Mock, Morgan, & Young, 2003) Indeterminate decision rules for length of time an intervention should be implemented, number of intervention trials required, etc.(Barnett, Daly, Jones, & Lentz, 2004; Gresham 2001) Gaps in the intervention literature—limited information about effective interventions for certain target concerns (e.g., reading comprehension) andfor higher age-groups (e.g., high school)(Gresham 2001; Gresham, 1998; Kratochwill & Shernoff, 2003; Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003) Questions of how scalable and cost-effective the RTI model is(Gresham 2001; Gresham, 1998; Kratochwill & Shernoff, 2003; Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003) Lack of clarity regarding how RTI fits in to the Special Education referral process(34 C.F.R. 300 & 301, 2006) What Are 5 ‘dragon regions’ of RTI?

30. References • 34 C.F.R. 300 & 301 (2006). Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities and Preschool Grants for Children With Disabilities. • Barnett, D. W., Daly, E. J., Jones, K. M., & Lentz, F.E. (2004). Response to intervention: Empirically based special service decisions from single-case designs of increasing and decreasing intensity. Journal of Special Education, 38, 66-79. • Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-Intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(3), 157-171. • Gresham, F. M. (2001). Responsiveness to intervention: An alternative approach to the identification of learning disabilities. Paper presented at the Learning Disabilities Summit, Washington DC. • Gresham, F. M. (1989). Assessment of treatment integrity in school consultation and prereferral intervention. School Psychology Review, 18, 37–50

31. Establishing RTI in Your School or District: First Steps

32. “Any mule can kick down a barn but it takes a good carpenter to build one.”--Lyndon Johnson

33. RTI Can Serve as the Organizing ‘Umbrella’ Under Which a District’s Efforts Are Organized to Support Struggling Learners of Any Age

34. Establishing RTI in Your School or District: First Steps • Establish an ‘RTI Steering Group’

35. Establishing RTI in Your School or District: First Steps • Educate Staff and Other Stakeholders to Build Support for RTI

36. Establishing RTI in Your School or District: First Steps • Create an Inventory of the District/School’s RTI Resources

37. Establishing RTI in Your School or District: First Steps • Establish an ‘RTI Intervention Team’

38. Establishing RTI in Your School or District: First Steps • Train Staff in Techniques to Monitor Short-Term Student Academic and Behavioral Progress