R.T. Why?: RTI 101

1. R.T. Why?: RTI 101 PBIS Conference March 2010 Jon Potter & Lisa Bates

2. Objectives: • Participants will be familiar with the “Big Picture” of RTI • Participants will understand system requirements for a strong RTI system.

3. RTI Misconception: What it is and what it’s not

4. Defining Terms: Multi-Tiered Instruction (MTI) Response to Intervention (RTI) • Is a system of organizing gen. ed. curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of all students • Integrates all support programs to use resources more efficiently • Applies to all students • Can exist without using RTI • Is an evaluation procedure identified in IDEA for identifying learning disabilities • Is a special education procedure that is limited to assessment • Applies only to children suspected of having LD • Cannot be implemented without a system like MTI in place

5. Purposes of RTI • To increase the achievement for ALL students by providing them with appropriate instruction matched to their needs • To better identify and instruct students who may have a learning disability

6. RTI focus is on General Education! • Teachers don’t fail students, systems do. • RTI is a system for differentiation of instruction! • RTI is a system that is predicated on the general education teachers’ skill and knowledge of instruction, assessment, curriculum, and children.

7. Assumptions in RTI-land • Every child can and will learn • IQ and intelligence are not the same thing • People are first • Flexible skill grouping changes (frequently) based on data (about skills) • “Ability” grouping implies tracking, tracking = bad news

8. Core RTI Principles • We can effectively teach all children • Intervene early • Use a multi-tier model of service delivery • Use a problem-solving method to make decisions within a multi-tier model • Use research-based, scientifically validated interventions/instruction to the extent available • Monitor student progress to inform instruction • Use data to make decisions • Use assessment for 3 different purposes • Screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring NASDSE, 2006

9. One Perspective on History Our education system has grown up through a process of “Disjointed Incrementalism” (Reynolds, 1988) Gifted SPED The current Education System’s Programmatic Evolution Title 1 K-12 Education Migrant At Risk ELL

10. In The Past Title Reading or Other Reading Support General Education Special Education Some “Fell’” Through Some “Fell’” Through

11. Jessie participates in the curriculum Jessie’s teacher does his best to differentiate instruction and keeps anecdotal data Jessie isn’t doing well Teacher tries again Jessie doesn’t improve Jessie improves The pre referral/discrepancy approach Pre-referral team (CARES) reviews what teacher has tried Resumes regular program Teacher’s effort is deemed sufficient Teacher is told to try again Special Education referral is initiated by the teacher Jessie is tested, usually by special education personnel, using IQ, achievement, and other tests

12. The RTI Way….. Does the child find the system, or does the system find the child?

13. How does RTI SYSTEMATICALLY help to teach all students effectively? • Builds a unified (collaborative) system • Identifies students who need help EARLY • It helps students receive instruction that they NEED • RTI leads to a seamless INSTRUCTION focused evaluation process for students who may have a Specific Learning Disability

14. RTI: Full Continuum of Support Title Reading & Reading Support, Gifted Ed. General Education Special Education, Gifted Ed. I I I I I I I I Interventions all along the continuum! = I

15. Words Per Minute Selecting screening measures to identify at-risk students early is key: Need for Screening

16. RTI prevents students from falling behind at the start.. • Reading is a crucial skill not optional • Teach reading early • Days and weeks matter

17. Reading Is Not An Optional Skill • Poor readers in 4th grade struggle in literacy in Kindergarten (Torgeson, 2004) • Children who struggle K-3 rarely achieve average reading skills (Torgeson, Rashotte, Alexander, 2001) • Children who cannot read drop out of school • Over 60% percent of people without a high school diploma do not currently have a job. (underemployed, incarnated, self employed, raising families, ect.) (Bureau of Labor Statistics) • Academic success or failure is strongly related to adaptive functioning as an adult

18. Days and Weeks Matter • Is it a skill deficit or developmental lag ? Can’t we wait for them to “bloom?” • Without intervention, kids who are behind stay behind (Juel, 1988; Francis, et al., 1996, Shaywitz, 1999) • Skill deficits can be erased—especially if you catch them early! • Good reading builds reading AND cognitive skills!

19. Reading makes you Smarter Independent Reading %tile Minutes Per Day Words Read Per Year 98 65.0 4,358,000 90 21.1 1,823,000 70 9.6 622,000 50 4.6 282,000 30 1.3 106,000 10 0.1 8,000 2 0.0 0 Adapted from Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding (1988).

20. RTI helps students receive instruction that they need

21. Daisy participates in the general core curriculum with strong instruction EBIS Team reviews screening data and places Daisy in group intervention Daisy isn’t doing well Second Group Intervention Daisy doesn’t improve Daisy improves How RTI Works from a Student’s Perspective EBIS Team designs individualized intervention Resumes general program Daisy improves Daisy doesn’t improve Improvement is good and other factors are suspected as cause Intervention is intense and LD is suspected Special Education referral is initiated by the team Progress monitoring and intervention data is used Parents Notified

22. RTI Process differs from Pre-Referral Process systematic Not Systematic

23. Shared Responsibility • Teacher • “RTI really advocates for the student. The data really needs to be gathered and assessed. Are the child’s academic needs really being met? Are they making progress? If not, what is the problem and what instructional strategies need to be changed? It seems that the child’s issues becomes one of the team’s and not solely the responsibility of the classroom teacher. Also, in many cases I am sure, some individual students just need some intervention to be successful and NOT special education!” • Nancy Greene, 2nd grade teacher

24. Shared Responsibility • Teacher • “RTI is designed to help target a specific deficit in a student’s learning and through collaboration with others design a plan to meet that particular need. This has helped to improve my teaching.” • Jeff Kelley, 4th grader teacher

25. Discussion Does the child find the system, or does the system find the child?

26. RTI improves our identification & instruction of students who may have LD • Seamless “instruction focused” evaluation process

27. In the Past….. • Evaluations were based on… • Discrepancy between cognitive abilities and achievement • Psychological processing deficits

28. Discrepancy Based Evaluation • IQ: 100 • Achievement in Reading is : 80 • Qualify for special education

29. Discrepancy Based Evaluation • What does a discrepancy based evaluation tell you about what instruction a student needed to make progress?

30. Psychological Processing Deficit Evaluation • What does a psychological processing deficit evaluation really tell you?

31. The Psychological Processing Problem: • Performance on tests that measure psychological processing are biased • No patterns have been found that differentiate LD/not LD

32. The Psychological Processing Problem: • Patterns on psychological processing tests do not predict outcomes • Patterns on psychological processing tests do not lead to treatment

33. Psychological Processing Based Evaluation • What does a psychological processing based evaluation tell you if it does not. . . • differentiate LD students from non-LD students or • lead to recommendations that improve achievement?

34. Special Education Outcomes • Special education placements tend to stabilize the reading growth of students with reading disabilities rather than accelerate it. (Vaughn, 1998, Moody, 2000) • Students who enter special education 2+ years below age mates can be expected to maintain disparity or fall farther behind.

35. What do you really want to know when a student gets evaluated? What’s wrong with them? Vs. What can I do to instruct them effectively?

36. RTI Based Evaluation • Evaluation focused on teaching and learning • Information is gathered in classroom context • “Response” is objective and measurable • Process leads to effective plan • Intervention eligibility IEP • Nature and intensity of service is identified • Tells you what the child needs for instruction!

37. How do you plan and implement a RTI based system? • Build CONSENSUS amongst the staff • PLAN to develop your system requirements (Infrastructure) • IMPLEMENT your system requirements • EVALUATE how your system is working and make changes as needed

38. CONSENSUS INFRASTRUCTURE CONSENSUS IMPLEMENTATION CONSENSUS INFRASTRUCTURE The Process is Ongoing and Long-Term

39. Assumptions Writing Math Behavior Reading Data based teaming Leadership Professional Development

40. System Requirements • Decision Rules • Procedures for LD evaluation & eligibility • Professional development & Fidelity • Leadership • Teaming • Research based core reading • Universal Screening • Research based interventions • Progress Monitoring

41. 1. Leadership • District Level Strong administrative support to ensure commitment and resources AND • School Level Strong teacher support to share in the common goal of improving instruction

42. 2. Teaming District School Principal Classroom Teachers Specialists Counselor Psychologist • Classroom teachers & Specialists (representing different levels and schools) • District office leaders • Principals The Team is only as strong as the least invested member

43. Research-Based CORE Program RTI is predicated on effective, research-based programs that include the BIG 5 components of reading: • Phonemic Awareness • Phonics • Fluency • Vocabulary • Comprehension Phonics Phonemic Awareness Comp r hens i on F luency Vocabulary For all students!

44. How does it help a struggling reader to be in core? • They need the most instruction • Need to be exposed to grade level material • If they miss grade level material, they will never catch up • Just because there is a deficit in one area, does not mean there is a deficit in all areas of reading • Interventions are limited in scope

45. Differences in Learning to ReadEstimates from NICHHD research

46. Differences in Learning to Read-Discussion • How does this research match up with your own experience of learning to read? Your children’s? Your students’?

47. More about the core Important Facts: • Students cannot be identified as LD if their difficulty is due to lack of instruction in the BIG 5. • Research-based program must be implemented as designed (fidelity)

48. Universal Screening • Procedures must identify which students are proficient (80%) and which are deficient (20%). • Good screening measures: • Are not intended to measure everything about a student, but provide an efficient an unbiased way to identify students who will need additional support (Tier 2 or Tier 3) • Help you assess the overall health of your Core program (Are 80% of yours students at benchmark/proficiency?)

49. Why Use Fluency Measures for Screening? • Oral Reading Fluency and accuracy in reading connected text is one of the best indicators of overall reading comprehension (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001) • We always examine fluency AND accuracy • Without examining accuracy scores, we are missing a BIG piece of the picture • Students MUST be accurate with any skill before they are fluent. Oral reading fluency (ORF) does not tell you everything about a student’s reading skill, but a child who cannot read fluently cannot fully comprehend written text and will need additional support.

50. Interventions • Must be designed to match identified needs • Should always be based on student data • Almost always given in small groups (Not necessarily 1:1) • On-going data determines need to continue, discontinue, or change curriculum, instruction, and/or assessment • Uses more explicit instruction • Provides more intensity • Additional modeling and guided feedback • Immediacy of feedback • Does NOT replace core