Chapter 1 Introduction: What is RTI?

1. Chapter 1Introduction: What is RTI? Chidsey & Steege 2005 SCPY 699 Problem-Solving Interventions in Schools Fall 2009 Dr. Gerald D. Nunn:

2. RTI Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Simply, the “response” that a student makes to a defined “intervention”. Assume it is the intervention that caused the response. Also assume that a “scientifically-based” intervention was used.

3. History of RTI Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Elements/concepts of RTI have been around a long time. Based upon Problem Solving Model or approach. RTI is current “buzzword” for a more comprehensive model. RTI actually is the part of problem-solving that has to do with measuring the response to intervention, there is a lot more to it.

4. Tiers Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009

5. RTI and Special Education and General Education Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Although RTI and Problem Solving are intended for the General Education setting, most applications have a heavy special education emphasis Throw-back from 30 years of special education taking role of interventions Intent is for RTI to be implemented in General Education setting

6. Big Ideas RTI: We expect thatthe following exist in order to determine RTI… Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 High Quality Instruction Frequent Assessment Data-based decision making

7. IDEAL Problem Solving Model Does problem exist? Evidence that the intervention is working (results)? How important is the problem? Is the intervention being Implemented with integrity? What is the best Solution for the Problem? Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009

8. Chapter 2: NCLB, IDEIA, & RTI Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 • NCLB Primary focus upon accountability and having programs that work in place for students, e.g. Reading First, Prevention Programs. • IDEIAPrimay focus upon “evidence-based practices” • Scientifically-Based Instruction • Evaluation of how well students respond to the intervention • Use of “data” for “decision-making”

9. Chapter 3: RTI & Discrepancy Models Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 IQ vs. Performance Discrepancy RTI Approach Waiting to Fail Admiring the Problem

10. Chapter 4: Evidence-Based Interventions Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009

11. Step 1 Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009

12. Step 2 Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009

13. Where to look? Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009

14. Chapter 5: Single-Subject Experimental Design Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 How SSED is used in problem-solving assessment and evaluation of interventions. Addresses both the assessment and intervention phases. Alternating treatments/interventions, e.g. A/B/A/B, etc.

15. SSED & Internal Validity: Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Baseline measure (dependent variable) of behavior or academic performance. Introduction of intervention (independent variable), hopefully a scientifically-based one. Documenting the effects of intervention through repeated measurement. Either withdrawing or reintroducing intervention to guage effects (RTI) or comparing modifications of the IV (Intervention) upon the DV (measure of behavior or achievement)

16. SSED & Best Practices Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Provides objective documentation of student progress. Ongoing interventions allow tem to quickly identify effective and ineffective components and make adjustment to interventions (data-based decision-making) Practitioners have an ethical responsibility to evaluate the efficac of interventions and single-subject experimental designs. Federal, state, and agency regulations require documentation of intervention effectiveness. SSED interventions are applicable to and easy to use with individuals and small groups. SSED all for comparison of the effectiveness of interventions, permitting team to select the most efficacious interventions that meet the needs of students.

17. SSED as part of RTI Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 • Purpose of using SSED in RTI is to • Compare effectiveness of interventions • Allow team to select best interventions • Test drive interventions for their potential • Document student performance

18. Basic Components of SSED Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 • Data Recording Procedures to obtain accurate and meaningful data. • Types of Recording procedures: • Frequency recording (# of times a behavior occurs) • Duration recording (how long a behavior occurs) • Intensity (the relative magnitude of a behavior) • Whole-interval recording (percent of intervals in which behavior occurs for an entire interval of time). • Partial-interval recording (percent of intervals in which behavior occurs for pat of the interval) • Performance-based recording (Likert ratings estimating relative occurrence of behaviors) • Permanent products recording (tangible outomes such as number of words spelled correctly).

19. Questions to ask about recording methods and objectives of the intervention… Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Is the behavior/measure an expected outcome of the intervention? Is he recording procedure sensitive enough to measure the expected behavior changes? Will the behavior recording capture the magnitude of the behavior, e.g. 15 sec vs. 15 minute tantrum. Are there adequate resources to collect the data needed?

20. Elements of the SSED Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 • Baseline Phase • Pre-intervention level of target behavior • Should describe the typical behavior • Need 3-7 data-points for reliability • Collected in relevant setting for target behavior • Defines the “problem”, e.g. what occurs vs. what is expected. • Defines the “intensity” of the problem or its “significance” • Informs us about predicting the behavior if an intervention was not implemented. • Provides comparison for determining discrepancy ratio (O/E), 10/2 = 5 x’s discrepant. • Confirms RTI

21. General Guidelines for establishing baseline… Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 At least 3-7 data points. Stable, sample without extreme variability. Typical environment, where the behavior is most likely, or most important. No intervention or other mediating strategies that would account for the change in intervention, no or little overlap between baseline and intervention phase. Level of data, serious to warrant intervention with likelihood of improvement or treatment gains. Trends in the data, demonstrated over time, stable trends.

22. Intervention Phase Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Intervention is implemented consistently with precision. Intervention is implemented “intact” with “integrity” Same procedures used to measure intervention as were used to measure baseline. If intervention is changed, then it is a change in the intervention phase and should be noted on the graph.

23. Chapter 7: Using RTI Procedures for Assessment of Academic Difficulties Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 The systematic procedures used in problem-solving underly the process used in “assessment” of academic or behavioral problems presented by students. There is a systematic process to be followed. This chapter provides an overview and materials to accomplish this form of assessment.

24. Problem-Solving Assessment Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Main purpose is to meet the “needs” of learners. Tier Framework conceputalizes the level of “need” demonstrated by the student. Assessment determines how these needs are being or not being met. Interventions are the mechanisms used to meet the needs. Evaluation (via progress monitoring) is how we determine “effects” or “results”

25. Steps in Problem Solving Assessment Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Step 1: Implement Evidence-Based General Education Methods Step 2: Collect Benchmarks of All Students’ Performance a Minimum of 3 x’s a year. Step 3: Identify Which Students Scored Below the Benchmark Targets Step 4: Provide Daily Scientifically-Base Small-Groups Instruction (Intervention) Step 5: Monitor Student Progress Toward the Benchmarks Using Frequent Assessments Step 6: Review, Revise, and or Discontinue Small-Group Instruction/Interventions Step 7: Increase the Intensity, Duration, and/or Frequency of Instruction/Intervention Step 8: Review, Revise, and/or Discontinue Small-Group Instruction/Intervention. Step 9: Comprehensive Evaluation, If Needed Step 10: Special Education Eligibility, If Needed

26. Step 1: Implement Evidence-Based General Education Methods Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Document ongoing, systematic interventions that target the behavior/academic skill. Keep record of the pre and post response of the student. Change interventions based upon results shown by data.

27. Step 2: Collect Benchmarks of All Students’ Performance a Minimum of 3 x’s a year. Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Norms for all students Fall, Winter, Spring Preferably on Reading, Math, Written Language AIMS Web, School Generated Probes showing normative expectations for academic areas. Benchmarks give standards for judging success and progress over time for decision-making.

28. Step 3: Identify Which Students Scored Below the Benchmark Targets Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 After the administration of curriculum-based measures, the student identified below benchmarks, normally around the 10th percentile. Team consider the students in greatest need and what can be done in terms of interventions for them. These are your Tier 2 level interventions.

29. Step 4: Provide Daily Scientifically-Based Small-Group Instruction (Intervention) Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Use interventions with support of efficacy Use interventions systematically Keep data on student growth/progress

30. Step 5: Monitor Student Progress Toward the Benchmarks Using Frequent Assessments Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Measure Baseline, 3-5 points before intervention. Measure median each week Use decision-points (3 point rule) Change if needed.

31. Step 6: Review, Revise, and or Discontinue Small-Group Instruction/Interventions Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 Modify as data indicates. Review each week You can change the interventions by “tweaking”, or changing to new intervention, or increasing intensity of the intervention, or by adding other contingencies, e.g. R+

32. Step 7: Increase the Intensity, Duration, and/or Frequency of Instruction/Intervention Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 You are trying to see how the intervention can be shaped or configured to have its greatest effect. Always ask yourself if the intervention is being applied with “integrity” before throwing it away. Brainstorm with your team about any problems or their ideas about implementation.

33. Step 8: Review, Revise, and/or Discontinue Small-Group Instruction/Intervention. Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 If successful, discontinue the intervention. Follow-up for a few weeks to see if it is maintained or if other less intense intervention, accommodations, etc. will maintain it without team intervention. Always rely on data to make your decisions.

34. Step 9: Comprehensive Evaluation, If NeededStep 10: Special Education Eligibility, If Needed Gerald D. Nunn, Ph.D., NCSP: Problem Solving Interventions: Fall 2009 This is a “due process” or “placement” decision based upon the lack of response to intervention. It assume that you have done all of the steps preceding it. It does not guarantee better results that what you have already done!