May 18, 2007

1. Reaching All Students: A Conversation about Response to Intervention May 18, 2007 Webinar sponsored by: The Northeast Regional Resource Center The New England and New York Comprehensive Centers

2. Reason #1 The need to engage educators from special and general education in dialogue and work using RtI to improve outcomes for all students. Reason #2 Research and practice point to the promise of RtI for preventing chronic learning problems, for helping students make continuous progress, and for accurate diagnosis of learning difficulties. Why this seminar

3. Operated by RMC Research Corporation with three partners: Education Development Center, Inc. Learning Innovations at WestEd The Education Alliance at Brown University The New England and New York Comprehensive Centers provide technical assistance to help build state capacity to meet the goals of NLCB

4. NECC USED Comprehensive Centers ProgramOffice of Elementary and Secondary Education Assessment and Accountability Instruction NYCC Teacher Quality High School Reform Innovation and Improvement

5. Regional Resource Center NetworkOffice of Special Education

6. Dr. Greg Roberts, Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts at the University of Texas at Austin, is Principal Investigator and Director of the Special Education strand of the Center on Instruction. Joe Sassone, Senior Program Associate at WestEd and former Assistant Superintendent for Instruction, Assessment, and Professional Development for the Vail Unified District in Arizona. John Carruth,Asst. Superintendent, Vail Unified School District, Vail, AZ Merri Greenia, Principal of Wolcott Elementary School, Wolcott, VT Presenters

7. Carol Keirstead, Director of the NECC at RMC Research Corporation Kate Gill Kressley, Senior Research Associate at RMC Research Corporation Kristen Reedy, Director of the NERRC at WestEd Rich Reid, RtI Consultant for the NERRC at WestEd Center Staff

8. Response to Intervention: Models, Methods, Musings Greg Roberts, Ph.D. Vaughn Gross Center The University of Texas at Austin

9. gregroberts@mail.utexas.edu Contact

10. What is response to intervention? How does RTI work? How is it implemented? Purposes

11. `(A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding section 607(b), when determining whether a child has a specific learning disability as defined in section 602, a local educational agency shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension, mathematical calculation, or mathematical reasoning. `(B) ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY- In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, a local educational agency may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as a part of the evaluation procedures described in paragraphs (2) and (3). IDEA 2004 614(b)

12. Model for preventing failure Framework for improving schools Specific learning disability identification Prevention and Identification

13. Universal screening “Generally Effective” core instruction Progress monitoring Increasingly intense instruction based on student need Features of RTI

14. Primary Level: All students receive instruction and monitoring within the general education classroom Secondary Level: Students not meeting benchmark goals on monitoring receive intervention Tertiary Level: For students non-responsive to secondary level Prevention and Improvement

15. Primary Prevention Reduce number of new cases Secondary Prevention Reduce duration of existing cases Tertiary Prevention Reduce complications from established cases of severe difficulty learning Prevention and Improvement Simeonsson, R. J. (1994). Promoting children's health, education, and well being. In R. J. Simeonsson (Ed.), Risk, resilience, and prevention: Promoting the well-being of all children (pp. 3-12). Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks.

16. Early identification Risk model rather than deficit model Reduction of identification biases Focus on student outcomes Advantages

17. Immediate corrective feedback Mastery of content before moving to next lesson More time on activities that were especially difficult More opportunities to respond Fewer transitions Setting goals and self-monitoring progress Evaluating Instruction

18. How are students identified to receive support? Who will provide the support? How much time and when? What program components or adjustments will be used? What are the characteristics of the tasks? How intensive is the intervention? Planning Intervention

19. Example of System Change Using RTI Joseph Sassone John Carruth

20. Average of 12% student growth rate over past 10 years Over 60% of Vail teachers have less than 3 years experience in the district 12% special education population Total K-12 population: approx. 8200 Vail Unified School District “Snapshot”

21. K-8 Protocol-based model (versus problem-solving model) Screening to Enhance Educational Placement - STEEP is Vail’s RtI Model “In Action”

22. Three-Tiered Model Addressesthe Needs of All Learners Specialized Instruction 5% Individual Intervention 15% Effective Instructional Practices 80%

23. No grade-wide reading problems observed; 2 classwide reading problems observed out of 60 classrooms measured Pervasive Math problem Address basic fact fluency problems as supplemental activity Provide concentrated problem-solving practice with feedback at the correct skill level Use an appropriate monitoring system to track growth and to guide instructional efforts Do these things in the simplest, most cost-effective, and least intrusive way possible One District’s Story

24. “How do you feel when you have the lowest test scores in the valley?” The dreaded summer of ‘02

25. “Fourth Grade Math Screening indicates math problem grades 3-5

26. Math our greatest Challenge School-wide Math Issues No fluency in Basic Skills Low Student Achievement Little Student Interventions Students entering High School with Little basic skills No system response No Accountability

27. What do we expect students to learn? How will we know what students have learned? How will we respond to students who aren’t learning? Professional Learning Communities

28. How will we respond to students who aren’t learning? Essential Standards Unpacked Standards Instructional Calendar Enrichment Activities Instruction on Essential Standards Common Formative Assessments Re-Teach Activities Data Conference Parallel Formative Assessment Tutoring

29. Before the journey begins

30. 1st year of implementation

31. 2nd year of implementation

32. 3rd year of implementation

33. 4th year of implementation

34. Mesquite Math AIMS* 2006

35. Intervention Effectiveness

36. “Fourth Grade Math Screening indicates math problem grades 3-5

37. “Fourth Grade Math Re-screening Indicates No Systemic Problem

38. Schoolwide Math Intervention Integration Gen & Sp Ed • Weekly probe to check retention • Weekly probe to track intervention growth and to make decisions about increasing task difficulty classwide (increase level when class median reaches mastery range) • Monthly multi-skill probe to track year-long progress • Daily Intervention, 15 minutes as supplemental activity

39. 5TH GRADE – Weekly Math Probes • 3 digit addition/subtraction July • multiplication facts 0-12 • division facts 0-12 • missing numbers multiply/divide 0-12 • multiply 2 and 3 digit October • 1 digit divisor into 2 digit dividend • 1 digit divisor into 2/3 digit dividend • add and subtract decimals January • multiply and divide decimals • reduce fractions to simplest form • add/subtract fractions/mixed numbers • multiply and divide fractions March • 2 digit divisor into 4 digit dividend

40. For example, at oneelementary school: STEEP is a research-based model, but we continually test our procedures & outcomes... • 2002- 30 evaluated, 19 qualified • 2003 - 24 evaluated, 12 qualified • 2004 - 10 evaluated, 100% match with STEEP RtI (9 failed intervention and qualified, 1 successful intervention and did not qualify)

41. Effects of STEEP on Special Education in Vail 01/02 05/06 Total K- 12 Population 4582 7326 Total K-12 SE Population 12.6% 12% (578) (896) Total K-8 SLD Count 6% 3% (277) (211)

43. Creating and Sustaining Systemic Change • Made external and internal pressure work for us • Created a culture where research-based practices are utilized/welcomed • Explicitly addressed long-term sustainability issues (e.g., training, finances, materials, procedures) • Determined how best to “reallocate” resources

44. “RtI gives substance and form to our school’s efforts to become a Professional Learning Community. The model is giving us the tools necessary to answer the three central questions of PLC.” Response to InterventionAt Wolcott Elementary School What do we want children to know? Research-Based Curriculum What will we do if they don’t? Research-Based Interventions based on Assessment Data How will we know if they know it? Benchmarks for all. Weekly Probes for Struggling Learners.

45. 75% of staff have year long professional development in reading research “Big Five” and use of data Principal “morphing” into reading expert Training is dynamic Professional development provides common beliefs, expectations, language Professional Development

46. Entire staff trained in web based universal screening, benchmarking, and progress monitoring--reading State department personnel helped with initial screening Efficiency and effectiveness of the tool makes it reinforcing to teachers, parents—and students Data based decision making at EST meeting Data Driven Instruction

47. Core curriculum defined as research based rather than as “canned programs” Focus on Integrity and Fidelity of implementation emerged from staff Staff concern lead naturally to another RTI component—monitoring for Integrity and fidelity Staff saw monitoring as the principal’s job, so it became the principal’s job Core Curriculum

48. Requires content knowledge for person monitoring No tool existed for both integrity and fidelity – I created one Comprehensive document – teacher interview and observation, and a program summary Opened dialogue – has led to program improvements even as the process occurred Power lies in positive assumptions – My question is “how do you teach phonemic awareness systematically and directly” rather than “Do you...” or “Do you believe you should…” Not used for evaluative purposes Currently piloting a web-based tool as another source of data about fidelity and integrity of core curricula Monitoring for Fidelity and Integrity of Implementation

49. Principal – monitoring v. evaluating Learning Specialist – leadership, use of new sped. procedures Teachers – action research, leadership Role Redefinition

50. The EST process Planning time for staff Student progress is reported more frequently, more objectively Structural Changes