1 / 25

Teachers Are Still The Test: Limitations of Response To Instruction Strategies For Identifying Children With Learning Di

Teachers Are Still The Test: Limitations of Response To Instruction Strategies For Identifying Children With Learning Disabilities. Michael M. Gerber University of California, Santa Barbara. Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium December 4-5, 2003 • Kansas City, Missouri

anika
Télécharger la présentation

Teachers Are Still The Test: Limitations of Response To Instruction Strategies For Identifying Children With Learning Di

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Teachers Are Still The Test:Limitations of Response To Instruction Strategies For Identifying Children With Learning Disabilities Michael M. Gerber University of California, Santa Barbara Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium December 4-5, 2003 • Kansas City, Missouri The National Research Center on Learning Disabilities, a collaborative project of staff at Vanderbilt University and the University of Kansas, sponsored this two-day symposium focusing on responsiveness-to-intervention (RTI) issues. The symposium was made possible by the support of the U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs. Renee Bradley, Project Officer. Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the U.S. Department of Education. When citing materials presented during the symposium, please use the following: “Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.”

  2. RTI: Could We? Should We? “ [Special education] is implicitly concerned with questions of efficiency, for the only solution to the problems of normalization is to speed up the rate at which handicapped children learn… (p. 25).” Gerber & Kauffman, Journal of Special Education Technology, 1979 “From a policy perspective, what school sites appear to need is a way of acquiring or shifting resources and teaching technology in response to students whom teachers perceive as difficult to teach without the burden of labeling such students handicapped (p. 221).” Gerber, Exceptional Children, 1984 Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  3. Teachers-as-Test(Gerber & Semmel, Educational Psychologist, 1984) • “…current policy assumes that teachers’ referrals represent suspicions, not conclusions, about referred students’ exceptionality (p. 139).” • “…agreement between teachers and ‘objective’ instruments may not be an acceptable test of concurrent or predictive validity of teachers-as-test (p. 143).” • “…referral behavior may indeed reflect an underlying lawfulness in how teachers form judgments about teachability, how these judgments are translated into referrals…and how teacher identification … can appear at once so idiosyncratic but at the same time reliable (p. 145).” Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  4. Theory of Instructional ToleranceGerber, Exceptional Children, 1988 • Teachers embody the most critical instructional resources • Students vary in their responsiveness to instruction • Achievement varies with “teachability” • Teachers cannot be greater resources – or use their knowledge/skills more efficiently – unless greater investment is made in them Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  5. Theory of Instructional ToleranceGerber, Exceptional Children, 1988 • “…children come to be viewed by teachers as extremely difficult to teach or manage as a result of environmental transactions in specific instructional contexts.” • “The validity of such a tolerance is socially and historically constructed, not psychometrically derived.” • “…judgments about the validity of referral and assessment practices reflect judgments about … the elasticity as well as about the legitmacy of the instructional tolerance.” Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  6. Students Vary in Responsiveness to Instruction Student A Achievement Student B Achievement Teaching Effort Teaching Effort No or only small gains without instructional effort Some to substantial gains without instructional effort Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  7. Students Vary in Responsiveness to Instruction Slow rate of achievement with increasing effort Rapid rate of achievement with increasing effort Student A Achievement Student B Achievement Teaching Effort Teaching Effort Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  8. Achievement varies becauseresponsivenessvaries Maximum effort for B Achievement for Student B Maximum effort for A Effects of instructional effort when teaching students in groups vary because of differential response to each particular teacher’s instruction Achievement for Student A Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  9. It is important to realize that these outcomes represent optimal outcomes for a given teacher Achievement for Student B Most teachers perform far below an optimal effort most of the time P Achievement for Student A Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  10. Even with optimal effort, the distribution of outcomes is influenced by • Policy, • Conscious Choice,, or • Simple Accumulation of • Contingent Responses Achievement for Student B P Bp Achievement for Student A Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  11. Teachers can avoid the choice, butnotthe trade-off as long as students differ ininstructionally significant waysand teaching resources – and technology --are limited Achievement for Student B P2 P Loss for A Gain for B Achievement for Student A Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  12. Teachers can avoid the choice, butnotthe trade-off as long as students differ ininstructionally significant waysand teaching resources – and technology --are limited Achievement for Student B P2 P P1 Gain for A Loss for B Achievement for Student A Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  13. In actual classrooms, teachers identify and instruct a number of students who are “tolerably” similar in their response to instruction Achievement for Modal Students P Achievement for Highest Risk Student(s) Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  14. Solution: Requires new resources (e.g., professional development, new technologies) How can schools change things? Achievement for Modal Students P2 P! P Teachers want to be here! P1 Gains for A, no loss for B Achievement for Highest Risk Student(s) Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  15. RTI and Classroom “Tolerance” RTI implies new professional development, new in-class assessment procedures, and new primary, secondary, and perhaps tertiary interventions The net effect is to increase classroom “tolerance.” Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  16. Requirements for Response-to-Instruction at National Scale • Baseline professional development for classroom teachers • Selection of suitable assessment targets • Identification of 15% –30% who fail to meet learning criteria • Supplemental (“strategic”) intervention (e.g., 30 min x 2 x 10 weeks) • Identification of 2% - 6% requiring further intervention • Supplemental (“intensive”) intervention (e.g., 30 min x 10 x 10 weeks) Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  17. Assumptions for Estimating Cost of RTI for K-3 First Year at Scale • Average teacher salary $45,930 Est. hourly pay $32/hr • Est. hours of baseline professional development 40 hrs • Number of K-3 students 30,001,243 • Est. Tier II students (18%) 5,400,224 • Est. Tier III students (4%) 1,200,050 • Est. hrs intervention II/III, 10 wks 50/10 • Estimated K-3 teachers 255,709 Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  18. Assumptions for Estimating Cost of RTI for K-3 First Year at Scale (Overhead) • Estimating with 1:5 instructional grouping • Estimating costs of professional development using teacher pay rate • Estimating reasonable costs for administration, monitoring, evaluation, and materials Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  19. K-3 RTI at National Scale Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  20. 2003 Federal Appropriations for NCLB (Title II, Part A)$1,780,825,000 Estimated Costs for RTI for K-3, First Year, at National Scale$2,033,228,291 Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  21. Source: Torgesen, J. K. (2002). Lessons learned from intervention research in reading: A way to go before we rest. Learning and Teaching Reading. British Psychological Society. Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  22. But Who is Learning Disabled? RTI either redefines learning disability, …or simply instantiates a more systematic and universal method for allocating scarce resources to reach certain achievement goals for as many students as possible. However, recent data from fMRI studies suggests discrete, identifiable, and general brain activation differences. Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  23. “ Children with dyslexia showed a correlation between the magnitude of increased activation in left temporo-parietal cortex and improvement in oral language ability (Temple et al., 2003, p. 2860). Treatment was associated with improved reading scores and increased brain activation during both tasks, such that quantity and pattern of activation for children with dyslexia after treatment closely resembled that of controls (Aylward et al., 2003, p 212).” Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  24. Further research is needed to determine how students identified via RTI compare neurologically with those identified by other means, including teachers-as-tests. E. Paulesu, J.-F. De´monet, F. Fazio, E. McCrory, V. Chanoine, N. Brunswick, S. F. Cappa, G. Cossu, M. Habib, C. D. Frith, & U. Frith (2001). Dyslexia: Cultural Diversity andBiological Unity. Science, 291, 2165-67. Elise Temple, Gayle K. Deutsch, Russell A. Poldrack, Steven L. Miller, Paula Tallal, Michael M. Merzenich, and John D. E. Gabrieli (2003). Neural deficits in children with dyslexia ameliorated by behavioral remediation: Evidence from functional MRI, PNAS, 100, 2860–2865. E.H. Aylward, T.L. Richards, V.W. Berninger, W.E. Nagy, K.M. Field, A.C. Grimme; A.L. Richards, Thomson, & S.C. Cramer (2003).Instructional treatment associated with changes in brain activation in children with dyslexia. Neurology, 61, 212–219 Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

  25. Old/New Recommendations(Gerber & Semmel, 1984) • Assessment functions and expenditures should be removed from the district level to the school site. • School site staff should organize problem-solving teams whose purpose is to assist teachers with direct interventions in response to teacher-identified instructional problems. • School site administrators, in conjunction with their site problem-solving teams, should determine which students will require resources over and above what would normally be provided to the site – that is, special education. • Requests for assistance from either teachers or school sites do not necessarily connote substandard performance or capability, but should be viewed as a very direct form of needs assessment. Gerber, M. M. (2003, December). Teachers are still the test: Limitations of response to instruction strategies for identifying children with learning disabilities. Paper presented at the National Research Center on Learning Disabilities Responsiveness-to-Intervention Symposium, Kansas City, MO.

More Related