June 2009 Reading Cohort

1. Response to Intervention – Making Interventions Systematic and EffectiveMatthew Burns, Ph.D.Co-Acting Director, Minnesota Center for Reading Research June 2009 Reading Cohort

3. RTI The systematic use of assessment data to most efficiently allocate resources in order to enhance learning for all students. Burns & VanDerHeyden, 2006

4. Accountability and proficiency Concerns about special education Research into human learning How did we get here?

5. Accountability • Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act • RTI was born in special education, but it was conceived in NCLB

6. RTI and NCLB • 300.309 – Diagnosing LD • (i) The child fails to achieve a rate of learning to make sufficient progress to meet State-approved resultsin one or more of the areas identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section when assessed with a response to scientific, research-based intervention process;

7. Concerns about special education

8. Prevalence of Disabilities Disability 1991 2001 % Change LD 2,247,004 2,887,217 28.5 MR 553,262 612,978 10.8 EBD 400,211 473,663 18.4 Deaf-Blind 1,427 1,320 -7.5 OHI 58,749 291,850 396.8 Autism 5,415 78,749 1,354.3

9. DREPETOMANIA First reported in 1851 by Dr. Samuel Cartwright in the New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal

10. Interventions for Children with LD • Reading comprehension 1.13 • Direct instruction .84 • Psycholinguistic training .39 • Modality instruction .15 • Diet .12 • Perceptual training .08 • Kavale & Forness, 2000

11. Special Education Meta-Analysis • d = -.12 • What is special education???

12. Individualized instruction unique needs , at no cost to the parents or guardians, to meet the of a child with a disability.

13. Research into human learning

14. Table Demographic information group Sex Pre Post* IQ ADD? Medication 1/D M 13 55 103 Yes Adderal 2/D M 02 59 95 Yes Ritalin 3/D M 02 38 110 No Ritalin 4/D F 03 55 105 Yes Ritalin 5/D F 02 50 110 Yes Ritalin 6/D M 18 60 101 No — 7/D M 01 38 98 Yes Ritalin 8/D M 01 45 102 No — 9/NI M 38 39 99 No — 10/NI F 50 48 107 No — 11/NI M 85 83 122 No — 12/NI M 82 85 101 No — 13/NI M 60 60 113 No — 14/NI M 52 50 95 No — 15/NI M 49 53 99 Yes Ritalin 16/NI M 75 74 121 No — * Follow-up testing was performed using alternate forms. Simos et al., 2001

15. Group Results • Experimental group increased 44.75 points (SD = 7.22) • Correlation between growth and IQ • r = -.29

16. Before Intervention

17. After Intervention

18. What is the answer????

19. Pine River El: Pine River – Backus J.W. Smith: Bemidji Sebeka El.: Sebeka Harrison El.: Brainerd Lincoln El.: Brainerd Longfellow Choice: Rochester McGregor El.: McGregor Laura MacArthur El.: Duluth Nettleton Magnet School: Duluth Dayton’s Bluff El.: St. Paul Farnsworth Magnet School: St. Paul Museum Magnet/Rondo School: St. Paul Roosevelt Magnet School: St. Paul

20. Keys to SuccessSt. Paul Pioneer Press June 4th 2006 Reading Above All Else Emphasize reading and writing especially K-2 Beyond the Classroom After school programs and social services Continuous Assessment/Small-Group Instruction Formal and informal assessments to provide an appropriate level of challenge Effective Staff Strong leadership and cohesive staff with co-planning Structured, Disciplined Environment

21. R (or R or R) – t – I (or I) Response or responsiveness or resistance T = to Instruction or intervention Standard protocol or problem solving

22. Multi-Tiered Academic Interventions (Burns, Jimerson, & Deno, 2007) Tier I: Universal screening and progress monitoring with quality core curriculum: All students, Tier II: Standardized interventions with small groups in general education: 15% to 20% of students at any time Tier III: Individualized interventions with in-depth problem analysis in general education : 5% of students at any time

23. INTERVENTIONS

24. What makes an intervention effective?? • Correctly targeted • Explicit instruction • Appropriate challenge • Opportunities to respond • Immediate feedback • With contingent reinforcers Burns, VanDerHeyden, & Boice (2008). Best practices in implementing individual interventions. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.) Best practices in school psychology (5th ed.). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.

25. RTI and Problem-Solving TIER III Measurement Precision TIER I I Measurement Frequency Problem-Analysis TIER I

26. Problem Solving • Tier I – Identify discrepancy between expectation and performance for class or individual • Tier II – Identify discrepancy for individual. Identify category of problem. Assign small group solution. • Tier III – Identify discrepancy for individual. Identify causal variable. Implement individual intervention.

27. Tier I

31. Reading Instruction in Elementary School • Two hours each day • Explicit instruction • Free-choice reading • Word study • Writing

32. Classwide Interventionhttp://kc.vanderbilt.edu/pals

35. Tier II Interventions

36. Reading Interventions for Tier II PROFICIENT READING PALS HOSTS Read Naturally Rewards Reading Rockets Etc., etc., etc.

37. Tier II Interventions Phonemic Awareness Phonics Fluency Vocabulary and Comprehension PALS HOSTS Read Naturally Rewards Reading Rockets Etc., etc., etc.

38. National Reading Panel • Is phonemic awareness instruction effective in helping children learn to read? • Reviewed 52 studies of PA instruction. • Three general outcomes were explored • PA tasks such as phoneme manipulation, • Reading tasks such as word reading, pseudoword reading, reading comprehension, oral text reading, reading speed, time to reach a criterion of learning, and miscues, and • Spelling

39. National Reading Panel Results • PA instruction demonstrated better efficacy over alternative instruction models or no instruction • Improved PA measures (strong), reading (d = .53) and spelling skills • Teaching one or two PA skills was preferable to teaching three or more • PA instruction benefited reading comprehension (Ehri et al.).

40. Means and Ranges of Effect Sizes by Reading Outcome Measure

41. Assess 4 NRP Areas • Phonemic Awareness • Phoneme segmentation fluency • Phonics • Nonsense word fluency • Fluency • Oral reading fluency • Vocabulary/Comprehension

42. Tier II • Effective – at least moderate ES • Costs – Low as possible, cost/ES, cost effective (comes with a lot), dedicated teacher time • Delivery • Group/individual (two to six considering efficiency) • Total students (20%) • Who - teacher supervision with some peer and or adult tutoring • Pull out – in addition to, some pull out component, 3 to 5 X/week, approximately 30 minutes (kinder – 20min tops). No less than 8 weeks. • Grades of kids – earlier better, certainly K-2. • Measure – fluency measure of reading at least monthly • Materials • Ease – much easier if compiled, but not prerequisite • Availability – standardized (manual)

43. Logistics Teacher A 3rd Grade 25 Kids Teacher B 3rd Grade 25 Kids 5 Kids 5 Kids 10 Kids 3rd Grade – 60 Kids Total

44. Logistics Teacher A 3rd Grade - 40 Kids 5 Kids 5 Kids 10 Kids 3rd Grade – 60 Kids Total Teacher L 5 Kids Teacher B 5 Kids Teacher D 5 Kids Teacher J 5 Kids Teacher F 5 Kids Teacher H 5 Kids Title 1 Teacher 5 Kids Itinerate 5 Kids Parapro A 5 Kids Reading Specialist 5 Kids Parapro C 5 Kids Parapro B 5 Kids

45. Logistics Lower Elementary Grade K 2 Classrooms – 50 kids Reading 8:30 to 9:00 & 10:30 to 11:00 Grade 1 2 Classrooms – 50 kids Reading 9:00 to 11:00 Grade 2 2 Classrooms – 50 kids Reading 10:00 to 12:00 Grade 3 2 Classrooms – 50 kids Reading 9:00 to 10:00 & 1:00 to 2:00

46. Logistics Lower Elementary Grade K 2 Classrooms – 50 kids Reading 8:30 to 9:00 & 10:30 to 11:00 Grade 1 2 Classrooms – 50 kids Reading 9:00 to 11:00 Grade 2 2 Classrooms – 50 kids Reading 10:00 to 12:00 Grade 3 2 Classrooms – 50 kids Reading 9:00 to 10:00 & 1:00 to 2:00 Title 1 and Reading Specialist 10:30 9:30 11:00 1:30

47. Tier III

48. Why do kids fail??? • They don’t want to do it • They have not spent enough time on it • They have not had enough help with it • It is too hard Daly et al., 1997

49. Long radians were forming when Matthew arrived. He tried to phindate the amount of time it would take to get to the convorster. Vort it would be too long, plast he would miss the game. He vraxated for a moment until the raidans became even longer. He decided that he would ordrul in the raidanopet see vort it would start moving more expeditiously. No sooner had he started fleedjuul, when it began opetmostulalag quite hard. Matthew became disgusted, zipped up his ornaforger, and walked back to this car. He drove home ov the mostul. By the time he put the car in the garage, the mostul was droim, and the faedos was out. Matthew was doubly disgusted now. Sullenly, he went inside to watch the game. He turned on the television set but nothing happened. Matthew said to himself, “What a lousy frol.” Hargis, 1995

50. Task Completion On-Task Behavior Task Comprehension Baseline 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10