Michael C. McKenna University of Virginia

1. Effective Interventions Sharon Walpole University of Delaware Michael C. McKenna University of Virginia

2. Today’s Goals • Deepen understanding of the characteristics of effective interventions • Introduce the response-to-intervention model • Critically consider your current system for providing intensive intervention

3. Back in School For one grade level: • Review intensive intervention materials • Observe an intensive intervention session in action • Use progress-monitoring data to evaluate response to intervention Prepare a reflection to share at the next meeting

4. Struggling Readers • Most struggling readers struggle with decoding • Struggling beginning readers tend to focus attention on context/meaning/syntax cues to compensate for poor decoding skills • Struggling readers often fail to develop skills to automaticity Pressley, 2002, Chapter 3

5. Struggling readers often fail to focus on useful background information • Struggling readers often struggle to make inferences • Struggling readers often have weak strategic knowledge and weak metacognitive knowledge But it all usually begins with weak word recognition! Pressley, 2002, Chapter 3

6. Causes of Reading Problems

7. Some GARF Assumptions • We are designing and redesigning our Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruction to provide effective, preventive instruction • Some children will need Tier 3 as well – intensive intervention – in addition to expert classroom instruction • Schools are still struggling to conceptualize and implement Tier 3

8. Grade 1 Intensives 2005-2006

9. Grade 3 Intensives 2005-2006

10. Coaches’ Corner How do you explain the steady decline in the the effectiveness of our instruction for students with Intensive instructional recommendations? Has anyone had especially good success with students in the Intensive category?

11. Is it really possible to do better than we are doing? Can someone tell me exactly what to do? We can’t tell you exactly what to do. But we can share some interesting findings in effective intervention sites in Florida Reading First.

12. Reading First Schools withStrong Intervention Outcomes • Researchers identified schools with strong average “movement” from strategic and/or intensive to benchmark • They narrowed their sample to those with larger populations and > 70% of students qualifying for free or reduced-price lunch • They visited and interviewed to see what these effective schools had in common. Crawford & Torgesen

13. 1. Strong Leadership • Interventions were included in the budget • The schedule was conducive to intervention • There was more time for small-group work • Intervention programs were matched to student needs

14. 2. Positive Beliefs • Teachers believed that all students could learn • Teachers avoided “blame” based on home support

15. 3. Data Analysis • Data were reviewed systematically • Decisions about how to use personnel were made based on data analysis

16. 4. Effective Scheduling • Strong teachers and specialists providing intensive intervention • Grade-level planning times • Set intervention times

17. 5. Intervention Curricula • SBRR intervention materials used • Intervention programs selected to meet specific student needs

18. 6. Parent Involvement • Strong commitment to reaching out to parents • Strong commitment to communication with and about students

19. Coyne, M. D., Zipoli, R. P., & Ruby, M. F. (2006). Beginning reading instruction for students at risk for reading disability: What, how, and when. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41, 161-168. Read this article. It introduces important issues to consider in evaluating the quality of each of your interventions.

20. What Did We Learn? Think about the “how” part of this intervention proposal. • What is conspicuous instruction? • What are the various types of instructional scaffolding? • Why is practice with high-quality feedback important?

21. Response to Intervention (RTI) Once high-quality interventions are in place, we must evaluate their effectiveness for each child • Reading First is leading the way to reform of special education identification strategies by systematically assessing all children, identifying levels of risk, and intervening immediately with hiqh-quality instruction, differentiation, and intensive intervention Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006

22. RTI Once we identify children at risk for failure and assign them to appropriate interventions, we must evaluate the quality of our decisions by testing whether they “respond” to those interventions. The use of DIBELS progress-monitoring subtests, evaluated by examining the slope of progress and the expected scores, is a straightforward way to engage in RTI analysis. After several weeks of instruction and progress monitoring, we can choose to try a different curriculum and/or to use formal diagnostic testing.

23. Let’s Plan . . . Given trends in your school-level data, where is your most urgent need for high-quality intervention? How can you evaluate your current interventions for quality (conspicuous instruction, instructional scaffolding, high-quality practice with feedback)? How can you evaluate your current interventions for effectiveness (using an RTI approach)?

24. Back in School For one grade level: • Review intensive intervention materials • Observe an intensive intervention session in action • Use progress-monitoring data to evaluate response to intervention Prepare a reflection to share at the next meeting

25. References Crawford, E., & Torgesen, J. (no date). Teaching all students to read: Practices from Reading First schools with strong intervention outcomes. Retrieved September 4, 2006, from http://www.fcrr.org/Interventions/pdf/teachingAllStudentsToReadSummary.pdf Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to Response to Intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93-99. Pressley, M. (2002). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York: Guilford Press.