Transcript www.illinoisrti.org

Implementing an Integrated MultiTiered System of Supports
District-/School-Level Action Planning
I-RTI Network Fall Conference
September 23, 2013
Dr. George M. Batsche
Institute for School Reform
University of South Florida
www.floridarti.usf.edu
www.florida-rti.org
The Cultural Context Within Which We Are Trying to
Facilitate Systems Change
• Challenging Times In Which to Educate America’s
Children and Youth
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Transition to Common Core State Standards
Transition to Common High Stakes Assessments
Performance Evaluations Tied to Student Growth
Economic Crises-greater efficiency of operations needed
Alternatives to Public K-12 Education
AYP Projections and Expectations
Recruitment and Retention of Qualified Professionals
Common Language/Common Understanding with
Educators, Parents and the Community
What Do We Know?
What Does the Research Tell Us
About Effective Delivery Models?
Highly Effective Practices:
Research
• The evidence of a transactional relationship (confined, collateral,
combined) with reading and behavioral interventions. (Bruhn & Watt,
2013; Cook et al., 2013)
• High quality academic instruction (e.g., content matched to student
success level, frequent opportunity to respond, frequent feedback) by
itself can reduce problem behavior (Filter & Horner, 2009; Preciado,
Horner, Scott, & Baker, 2009, Sanford, 2006)
• Implementation of school-wide positive behavior support leads to
increased academic engaged time and enhanced academic outcomes
(Algozzine & Algozzine, 2007; Horner et al., 2009; Lassen, Steele, & Sailor,
2006)
• “Viewed as outcomes, achievement and behavior are related; viewed as
causes of the other, achievement and behavior are unrelated. (Algozzine,
et al., 2011)
• Children who fall behind academically will be more likely to find
academic work aversive and also find escape-maintained problem
behaviors reinforcing (McIntosh, 2008; McIntosh, Sadler, & Brown, 2010)
5
School-wide Behavior & Reading Support
The integration/combination of the two:
•are critical for school success
•utilize the three tiered prevention model
•incorporate a team approach at school level, grade
level, and individual level
•share the critical feature of data-based decision making
•produce larger gains in literacy skills than the readingonly model
–
(Stewart, Benner, Martella, & Marchand-Martella, 2007)
6
MTSS
• A Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) is a term used to
describe an evidence-based model of schooling that uses
data-based problem-solving to integrate academic and
behavioral instruction and intervention.
• The integrated instruction and intervention is delivered to
students in varying intensities (multiple tiers) based on
student need.
• “Need-driven” decision-making seeks to ensure that
district resources reach the appropriate students (schools)
at the appropriate levels to accelerate the performance of
ALL students to achieve and/or exceed proficiency .
Multi-Tiered System of Student Supports
Mission and Vision
The vision of a Multi-Tiered System of Supports is to:
•Enhance the capacity of school districts to successfully
implement and sustain a multi-tiered system of student
supports with fidelity in every school
•Accelerate and maximize student academic and socialemotional outcomes through the application of data-based
problem solving utilized by effective leadership at all levels
of the educational system
•Inform the development, implementation, and ongoing
evaluation of an integrated, aligned, and sustainable system
of service delivery that prepares all students for postsecondary education and/or successful employment within
our global society.
What Does It Look Like?
• Decisions made using a data-based, problem-solving
process
• All problem-solving considers academic and behavior
(student engagement) together
• A school-based team is responsible for monitoring
student performance to determine overall “health”
of the school environment
• Parents are engaged in the problem-solving and
instruction/intervention process
What Does It Look Like?
• Student engagement is a primary priority
• Lesson Study (Planning) is the focus for
effective instruction
• Early Warning Systems are in place to ensure a
focus on prevention
• Strong leadership exists at all levels
• The school (Principal) is held accountable for
high quality implementation of MTSS as well
as student outcomes
Student Achievement
Student Performance
• Academic Skills
– Goal setting tied to state/district standards
– Common Core State Standards
– Developmental Standards
• Academic Behaviors-Student Engagement
– Behaviors associated with successful completion of the
academic skills
– On-task, listening, following-directions, ignoring distractions,
self-monitoring, goal setting, content of private speech
• Inter-/Intra-Personal Behaviors
– Behaviors that support social skills
– Social/emotional development
What Elements MUST Be Present to Have
and Integrated MTSS Model?
• Academic Skills and Academic Behaviors are identified for
all students (Skill Integration)
• The data are presented in a way that reflects the
relationship between academic skills and behaviors (Data
Integration)
• The instruction provided in Tiers 2 and 3 integrates Tier 1
instruction (materials, performance expectations.) (Tier
Integration)
• The instruction provided in Tier 1 integrates the effective
instructional strategies and performance expectations from
Tiers 2 and 3 (Tier Integration)
Table Top Activity #1
• Identify an instructional strategy that you use
frequently in your classroom.
• What student “behaviors” are necessary or
expected in order to “engage” those strategies?
• What do you do when some students do not
possess the engagement behaviors necessary for
the instructional strategies that you selected?
http://vimeo.com/fcim/review/6
0200090/5e5ff3bc3e
Has Your District Embraced an
Evidence-Based Model of Service
Delivery?
How Does a District Engage in
Strategic Planning and ProblemSolving to Implement an Effective
MTSS?
Strategic Planning:
Today’s Work
• District/School Action Planning and ProblemSolving Process (DAPPS)
– 8-Steps
– Collaborative
– Focused
– Leads to Doable Action Plans
• Will Guide Our Work Today
Process
• Review/Discussion of the Critical Elements for
Implementation of RtI2/MTSS
• Identification of Your Top 2 Priorities in each
of the Element Areas
• Identify Your Final (Answer ) 2 Priorities
• Use These in the DAPPS Process
What Do We Know About
Successful Implementation of an
Integrated MTSS System?
It’s About
LEADERSHIP
Every system is perfectly
aligned for the results it gets.
20
MTSS
•
Academics
T
Behavior
Technology
How Do We “Do” MTSS
• Organized by a Plan
• Driven by Professional Development
• Supported by Coaching and Technical
Assistance
• Informed by Data
Sustainable Scaling-Up
Framework for Change
**Consensus Building
throughout the Phases
Stages of Implementing MTSS
• Consensus
– Belief is shared
– Vision is agreed upon
– Implementation requirements understood
• Infrastructure Development
–
–
–
–
Regulations
Training/Technical Assistance
Model (e.g., Standard Protocol)
Tier I and II intervention systems
• e.g., K-3 Academic Support Plan
–
–
–
–
Data Systems and Management
Technology support
Decision-making criteria established
Schedules
• Implementation
Why have past initiatives failed?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Failure to achieve CONSENSUS
School culture is ignored
Purpose unclear
Lack of ongoing communication
Unrealistic expectations of initial success
Failure to measure and analyze progress
Participants not involved in planning
Participants lack skills and lack support for the
implementation of new skills
Critical Elements
Implementation:
Critical Elements Checklist
•
•
•
•
•
Common Language, Common Understanding
District and School Infrastructure
Problem-Solving Process
Realistic Data Sources/Matrix
Delivering the Goods
– Effective Instruction
– Integrating the Tiers
– Schedules
– Intervention Support
– Student Engagement/Lesson Study
• Evaluating the Outcomes
Critical Element #1:
Do We Have A Common Language
Common Understanding of MTSS?
PreK-12 Alignment
Comparing Elementary to Middle- and
High-School Application of MTSS
• SAME critical components should be present K12
• Implementation of the critical components will
look different at the middle-and high-school
levels.
• The differences are influenced by the
organization of the level, type and focus of
curriculum, logistics of scheduling at the
middle- and high-school levels.
Comparing Elementary to Middle- and HighSchool Application of MTSS
Same
• Problem-Solving Process
• School-Based Leadership
Teams
• Data Days to Evaluate
“Health and Wellness”
• Data Matrix
• Multi-Tiered System
• Fidelity
Different
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Consensus
Monitor Skills & Content
Types of data
Schedule Development
Integration of the Tiers
Student Involvement
Fidelity
Needed: A working definition
and consensus
MTSS
• A Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) is a term used to
describe an evidence-based model of schooling that uses
data-based problem-solving to integrate academic and
behavioral instruction and intervention.
• The integrated instruction and intervention is delivered to
students in varying intensities (multiple tiers) based on
student need.
• “Need-driven” decision-making seeks to ensure that district
resources reach the appropriate students (schools) at the
appropriate levels to accelerate the performance of all
students to achieve and/or exceed proficiency .
What are the characteristics of an effective
school?
Guess what? These characteristics comprise
the critical elements of an MTSS.
What Are the Evidence-Based
Characteristics of Effective Schools
• Characteristics
– Strong Leadership
– Positive Belief and Teacher Dedication
– Data Utilization and Analysis
– Effective Scheduling
– Professional Development
– Scientifically-Based Intervention Programs
– Parent Involvement
(Crawford and Torgeson)
•
(
It's a Frame,
Not a Box
Parts of the “Frame”
• 3 Tiers of service delivery into which all
academic and behavioral
instruction/intervention “fit.”
– Content is not been defined by the model
• Use and regular review of data to ensure
students are responding to the tiered
instructional delivery.
Parts of the “Frame”
• Instruction/interventions are modified
and intensified based on student
performance data
• Instruction is integrated and
systematically planned across the tiers
Multi-tier System of Student Supports (MTSS):
Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)
An Overview of Data-based Problem-solving within a Multi-tier System of
Student Supports in Florida’s Public Schools
Intensive, Individualized Supports
•Intensive interventions based on individual student needs
•Students receiving prolonged interventions at this level may be several grade levels behind or
above the one in which they are enrolled
•Progress monitoring occurs most often to ensure maximum acceleration of student progress
•If more than approximately 5% of students are receiving support at this level, engage in Tier 1
and Tier 2 level, systemic problem-solving
Targeted, Supplemental Supports
•Interventions are based on data revealing that students need more than core, universal
instruction
•Interventions and progress monitoring are targeted to specific skills to remediate or enrich, as
appropriate
•Progress monitoring occurs more frequently than at the core, universal level to ensure that
the intervention is working
•If more than approximately 15% of students are receiving support at this level, engage in Tier
1 level, systemic problem-solving
Core, Universal Supports
•Research-based, high-quality, general education instruction and support
•Screening and benchmark assessments for all students
•Assessments occur for all students
•Data collection continues to inform instruction
•If less than approximately 80% of students are successful given core, universal instruction,
40
engage in Tier 1 level problem-solving
Problem Solving Process
Define the Problem
•Defining Problem/Directly Measuring Behavior
Problem Analysis
•Validating Problem
•Identify Variables that
contribute to problem
•Develop Plan
Evaluate
•Response to
Instruction &
Intervention (RtI2)
Implement Plan
•Implement As Intended
•Progress Monitor
•Modify as Necessary
Self Reflection:
Think-Share-Discuss
• What has been presented that affirms what you
already know and are comfortable with?
• What has been presented that makes you
uncomfortable or would be a barrier to
consensus in your school/district?
• What supports, strategies or resources would be
necessary to eliminate or reduce the
discomfort/barriers?
Foundations of MTSS:
Fundamental Principles of Teaching
and Learning
Some Fundamental Principles
• Academic Engaged Time (AET)
– AET predicts student performance better than any
other variable, including:
•
•
•
•
•
IQ
Language
SES
Disability
Culture/Race
– Amount of time students are engaged in quality
instruction
– Includes evidence-based instructional strategies
– Matched to student context, culture and relevance
– With student engagement in the process
AET
• Academic Engaged Time (AET)
– 330 minutes of instruction/day
– 1650 minutes/week
– 56,700 minutes/year
– 15,700 minutes for Reading
• Minutes are finite in number
• Loss of minutes=Loss of achievement
• Minutes are the currency we use for
instruction
Some Fundamental Principles
• Standards Based Instruction
– What students should know and be able to do
– Clearly defined for each grade level and subject
area
– Serve as the content for high-stakes assessment
– Utilizes benchmark assessment to determine if
students and the curriculum is “on-track”
– Assists in the identification of “essential elements”
of instruction
Some Fundamental Principles
• Essential Elements Instruction
– The critical skills required to progress to the next
grade level
– Typically, critical skills are those required to be
successful at the beginning of the next year
– Not all skills taught during the year are the
“critical skills” necessary for student progression
– When we are “running out of time” with some
students, prioritizing “critical skills” can accelerate
student performance
Some Fundamental Principles
• Rate of Growth
•
•
•
•
Where is the student now?
Where is the student supposed to be?
How much time do we have to get there?
Is that time realistic?
– Rate of growth is the best measure of student response to
instruction and intervention
– Rate of growth is used within an early warning system to
determine if students will attain benchmarks before time
runs out and while we have time left to modify
instruction
– Rate of Growth is the best measure of effectiveness of
instruction AND the most fair measure.
MTSS: Are We All On
The Same Page?
Measuring Common
Language/Common Understanding
• Florida PS/RtI Project Tools
–Beliefs Survey
–Perception of Practices Survey
–Perception of Skills
–Self Assessment of Problem-Solving
Implementation (SAPSI): Consensus
Section
• www.floridarti.usf.edu
• Technical Manual
Critical Element #1
Table Top Activity
• Identify your top 2 priorities around developing a
common language/common understanding with
your staff--Consensus
Critical Element #2
District and School
Infrastructure
Roles of District- and SchoolBased Leadership Teams
Key Points
•
•
•
•
Unit of implementation is the building level.
Implementation process takes time.
Implementation progress must be monitored
Must be guided by data indicating implementation
level and integrity
• Must be supported by professional development and
technical assistance
• Driven by a strategic plan
• It is a journey, not a sprint
Implementation Structure
District-based leadership team (DBLT)
School-based leadership team (SBLT)
School-based coaching
Process Technical Assistance
Interpretation and Use of Data
Evaluation Data
District-Level Structure
• District Leadership
– Common Language/Common Understanding
– Is there a “unified” system of instruction at the district
level?
• District Plan Requirements
– Consensus, Infrastructure, Implementation
– District Policies
– Professional Development and Technical Assistance
– Implementation Monitoring
– Implementation Fidelity
– Evaluation Plan
District Responsibilities
• Ensure that a common language/common
understanding exists around the rationale for and the
purpose and expected outcomes of MTSS
• Communicate clearly that MTSS is the “way of work”
at the district and school levels
• Organize work groups at the district level around
integrated functions (academics, behavior and
technology at planning table together) and multi-tier
representation (gen ed, supplemental instruction,
intensive instruction
• Clearly identify who has the responsibility for what
and how these individuals will be held accountable
District Responsibilities
• Ensure that district policies are supportive of and
not barriers to the implementation of MTSS
• Provide sufficient support (professional
development, technical assistance, data systems) to
ensure that the implementation plan and timelines
can be achieved
• Identify clearly the district- and school-level
leaders who will have implementation expectations
as part of their annual performance reviews
Role of District Administrators
• Communicate a clear and common vision-Always
• Demonstrate effective leadership practices to create a climate that
supports and sustains staff during a reform process
– Communicate frequently
– Seek representative input
– Monitor staff satisfaction
– Use data to make decisions
– Provide flexibility at building level, consistent with the overarching goal of
using MTSS
– Monitor pace of implementation
• Provide personnel resources and logistical support for the
implementation of the model
• Ensure district and school implementation rates and fidelity are
part of leadership annual performance evaluation
Role of District Administrators
• Modify training, technical assistance and
support to sustain implementation
• Model the problem-solving process at the
District level through the consistent use of
data for decisions that improve student
performance and the skills of the professional
staff
• Ensure the use of program evaluation to
evaluate the impact of implementation
School-Based Infrastructure
School-based leadership team (SBLT)
School-based coaching
Process Technical Assistance
Interpretation and Use of Data
Master Calendar
Data Days
Evaluation Model
School-Based Leadership Team
• Responsible for monitoring the “health and
wellness” of the school
– Regular Data Checks
•
•
•
•
Facilitate building level problem solving
Align PD with student-centered data
Ensure teachers have supports
Ensure integration of academic and behavior
instruction at all tiers
• Ensure integration of the tiers
Principal’s Role in Leading
Implementation of MTSS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Models Problem-Solving Process
Expectation for Data-Based Decision Making
Scheduling “Data Days”
Schedule driven by student needs
Instructional/Intervention Support
Intervention “Sufficiency”
Communicating Student Outcomes
Celebrating and Communicating Success
Core Skill Areas for ALL Staff
•
•
•
•
•
Data-Based Decision Making Process
Coaching/Consultation
Problem-Solving Process
Data Collection and Management
Instruction/Intervention Development, Support
and Evaluation
• Intervention Fidelity
• Staff Training
• Effective Interpersonal Skills
Critical Question:
Does The District Have Clear
Guidelines and Expectations For
Both the Infrastructure and
Roles/Responsibilities At the District
and School Levels?
How To Assess Infrastructure
• Perception of Practices Survey
• SAPSI-Infrastructure Domain
www.florida-rti.usf.edu
Technical Manual
SAPSI: Infrastructure Section
• Needs assessment &
progress monitoring
tool evaluating
Consensus,
Infrastructure, &
Implementation of
PS/RtI
• 18 Infrastructure Items
– Range from Not Started
to Maintaining
• Completed by SBLT 2
times per year
Capacity to Implement MTSS
District Level
Self-Assessment of Problem Solving Implementation (SAPSI)
Infrastructure Development: Data Utilization
3.00
Status
2.00
Year 1_BOY
Year 1_EOY
Year 2_EOY
Year 3_EOY
Year 4_EOY
1.00
.00
6. Data is
collected
7. Data used
8. Data
9. Data used 10. Data used 11. CBM data 12. ODR data 13. Data used 14. Data used
to make presented to to evaluate to evaluate used to ID
used to ID to evaluate to determine
decisions
staff
core acad
core beh
students
students
Tier 2
Tier 3 RtI
programs
programs
needing
needing beh interventions
interventions interventions
Item
3= Maintaining
2= Achieved
1= In Progress
0= Not Started
Critical Element #2
Table Top Activity
• Top 2 priorities for district/school-based
infrastructure
Critical Element #3:
Problem-Solving Process
Problem-Solving Process:
Critical Elements
• Structured and Evidence-Based
– Desired Behavior Focused
– Analysis Includes Internal and External Factors
– Interventions Valid and Supported
– Progress Monitored Appropriately
• Protocol used consistently for all 3 Tiers
• Implemented with Fidelity
• Focused on Instruction/Intervention
Problem Solving Process
Goal Oriented:
•What Do We Want Students to Know and Be
Able to Do? (Standards Driven)
Analysis
•Why are they unable to do
it? (Hypotheses)
•Validate Hypotheses
(Assessment)
•Links to Intervention
Strategies
Evaluate
•Response to
Instruction &
Intervention (RtI2)
Instruction/Intervention
•Implement As Intended
•Progress Monitor
•Modify as Necessary
•Implementation Support
Steps in the Problem-Solving Process
1. Goal Identification
– Identify replacement behavior
– Data- current level of performance
– Data- benchmark level(s)
– Data- peer performance
– Data- GAP analysis
2. Analysis
– Develop hypotheses (brainstorming)
– Develop predictions/assessment
3. Instruction/Intervention Development
– Develop interventions in those areas for which data are available and
hypotheses verified
– Proximal/Distal
– Implementation support
4. Evaluate (Response to Intervention-RtI)
– Frequently collected data
– Type of Response- good, questionable, poor
Integrated Problem-Solving: Problem
Identification Critical Elements
• Academic Productivity
– Accuracy (Standards/Skill Based)
– Assignments Turned In
– Amount of Assignment Completed
• Student Engagement Behaviors
– Following Directions, Oral Responding, Turn Taking,
Sharing with Peers, Reading Independently, Ignoring
Distractions, Persistence to Task for ___ Minutes
Integrated Problem-Solving
• Goal Identification
– Increase appropriate student engagement
behaviors from 20% of the time to 80% of the
time
– Increase academic productivity from:
• 50% of assignments turned in to 80%
• 40% of assignments complete to 70%
• 45% accuracy to 75% accuracy
Analysis
– Student engages in disruptive behavior when not
engaged in academic tasks
• When the student is engaged in an academic task then
disruptive behaviors will occur less than 10% of the time
– Student lacks the engagement behaviors required
for academic tasks
• When the student posses the appropriate engagement
behaviors, the academic productivity will be increased
AnalysisAssessment/Data Collection
– When the student is engaged in an academic
task then disruptive behaviors will occur less
than 10% of the time
• Identify academic areas student “likes” and “does
not like”
• Collect data in both situations
– Level of Engagement
– Level of Appropriate Behavior
AnalysisData Collection
– Student lacks the engagement behaviors
required for academic tasks
• Identify academic tasks that the student can do and
cannot do.
• Analyze engagement behaviors for each task and
determine student capacity
– Observe engagement in tasks where
accuracy/productivity levels are at least 75%
– Observe engagement in tasks where
accuracy/productivity levels are less than 50%
Conclusions from Analysis
• When student is engaged, disruptive
behaviors do not occur.
• Student responds to instruction when
engaged.
• Student engagement behaviors occur when
direct guidance is provided, but only for “solo”
activities.
• Student lacks engagement behaviors in large
and small group activities
Instruction/Intervention
• Direct instruction of engagement behaviors using
individual and small group format
–
–
–
–
–
–
Listening
Asking questions
Asking (teacher, peers) for help
Sharing oral responses
Accepting feedback
Self-monitoring
• Implement structured, frequent positive
feedback/reminders for using engagement behaviors
• Home-School collaboration plan that sets
expectations for and values engagement
Intervention Support
• Direct Instruction of engagement behaviors
support
• Facilitate instruction of engagement behaviors
by teachers
• Twice weekly (first 2 weeks) meetings with
teachers to review, evaluate data, identify
barriers
• Weekly meetings (next 3 weeks) with teachers
Evaluation
• Academic Productivity
– Accuracy of work
– Number of assignments turned in
– Completion rate of assignments
• Engagement
– Academic engaged time
– Rate of disruptions
– % of time appropriate engagement demonstrated
Evaluation-Data Collection
• Academic Productivity (Teacher)
– Accuracy of work-DAILY
– Number of assignments turned in-DAILY
– Completion rate of assignments-DAILY
• Engagement
– Academic engaged time (TEACHER/SUPPORT STAFF)
– Rate of disruptions (TEACHER)
– % of time appropriate engagement demonstrated
(TEACHER/SUPPORT STAFF)
INTERVENTION INTENSITY PLAN
• Progress monitoring/evaluation
– Aim line/Trend line
• Intensity remains same until benchmarks
achieved and for 2 weeks after benchmark
achieved
• Establish fading schedule
•
•
•
•
Monitoring the Fidelity of the
Problem-Solving Process
Monitoring occurs during all problemsolving sessions (self/group)
Evidence-based relationship exists
between number of steps completed
accurately and student outcomes
Documentation of the process
Source of data for PD
Problem-Solving Team Meeting Checklist
(Initial)
Problem-Solving Team Meeting Checklist
(Follow-Up)
Item
11. Plan to continue, modify, or terminate interventions
provided
10. Decision regarding student RtI was documented
Intervention Development &
Implementation: Tier II
9. Progress monitoring data scheduled/collected
8. Criteria for positive RtI were defined
7c. Supp. instruction developed or modified- Implementation
doc.
7b. Supp. instruction developed or modified- Support
documented
Intervention Development &
Implementation: Tier I
7a. Supp. instruction developed or modified- Plan documented
6c. Modifications made to core instruction - Implementation
documented
6b. Modifications made to core instruction - Support
documented
Problem Analysis
6a. Modifications made to core instruction - Plan documented
5. Data used to determine hypotheses for not making
benchmark
Problem Identification
4. Team uses hypotheses to identify reasons for not making
benchmark
3. Universal screening used to id groups needing intervention
2. Decisions made to modify core or develop interventions
2.00
1. Data to determine effectiveness of core
Implementation Level
0 = Absent
1 = Partially Present
2 = Present
Florida PS/RtI Project Pilot Schools
Tier I & II Critical Components Checklist Data: Reading
Prog Eval/RtI
2004-05
2005-06
1.00
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
.00
Critical Element #3
Table Top Activity
• Identify your top 2 priorities around
implementation of the Problem-Solving Process
Critical Element #4:
Data Sources/Matrix
Types of Data
• Universal Screening
• On-Going Progress Monitoring
• Diagnostic
• High Stakes
Table Top Activity
• Identify one type of data that you collect for
each of these methods:
– Screening
– Progress Monitoring
– Diagnostic
– High Stakes
• Discuss HOW you use these data to inform
instruction/intervention and HOW OFTEN
these data are used.
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Academic performance
Discipline data- Office discipline referrals (ODR)
Records
Referral history
Observation-Student Engagement Behaviors
PBS benchmark assessment
School climate surveys
Attendance data
End of year assessments (EOCs/High Stakes)
93
Screening
Assessment
Diagnostic
Assessment
Administered to all students
as an initial baseline
While relatively lengthy,
they provide an indepth, reliable
assessment of targeted
skills
Help to identify students
who do not meet grade
level expectations
Are quick and efficient
measures of overall
ability and critical skills
known to be strong
indicators that predict
student performance
Indicate a need for further
evaluation
Progress
Monitoring
Assessment
Outcome
(Summative)
Assessment
Given periodically to
determine whether
students are making
adequate progress
Given at the end of the
school year
[and/or end of a unit of
instruction]
Purpose is to provide
information for more
effective instruction and
interventions
Data should be collected,
evaluated, and used on
an ongoing basis
Group-administered tests of
important [skills and/or
standards]
Because these assessments
are time consuming and
expensive, they should
be administered far less
frequently than the other
assessments
Provide information on the
effectiveness of
instruction and to
modify the intervention
if necessary
Often used for school,
district, and/or state
reporting
Specific subtests from these
instruments might be
used to provide
information not
assessed by [other
assessments]
Used to analyze and interpret
gaps between
benchmark and
achievement
Give feedback of the overall
effectiveness of the
instructional program
Modified from 6 Components of RtI²– Assessment/Progress Monitoring
Colorado Department of Education
www.cde.state.co.us/RtI/AssessMonitor.htm
Possible Ways to use Current School Assessments
•MAP (Prior year)
•DIBELS
•SRI
•CBM
•Degrees of Rdg Power
•EPAS
•Vision/Hearing
•Behavior
•Behavior Screeners
•ODRs
•EWS
•MAP subscore
•Diagnostics
• DIBELS
•ITBS
•PLAA/ PMA
•Teacher tests/quiz
•Specific skills
Assessments
Behavior
Observations
Checklists
Ratings
•DIBELS
•AIMSWEB
•Degrees of Rdg Power
•Teacher test/quizzes
•Common
Assessments
Behavior
Observations
Checklists
Ratings
•WKCE
•MAP
•Final exams
• Common Finals
•Post Tests
Possible Ways to use Current
School Assessments
Using the Data
Characteristics
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Must answer YOUR questions
Part of the culture of the school/district
Easy to collect with fidelity
Directed relevant to the goal behaviors
Used immediately upon collection
Valued by the staff
Used, not admired
Directly related to instruction
How To Use Data:
It must Be Integrated
• Data are used to answer the questions that
you want to answer
– “What percent of student receiving only Tier 1
instruction are proficient?”
– “What percent of students have X number of Fs?”
– “What percent of students with high behavior
referrals are proficient?”
– “What is the impact of interventions on different
student demographic groups?”
District Example
XXX High School
ODR Progress and Goal
8000
7615
7000
5414
6000
5000
4000
ODRs
3000
2000
2000
1000
0
2008-2009
2009-2010
Goal
More than 2100 Hours (351 Days) of Instructional Time Recouped
during 2009-2010 School Year
School is on-track to meet 2010-2011 Goal
XXX High School
% of Students with Excessive Absences
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
20 or More
40 or More
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008-2009
2009-2010
Goal
School is not currently on-track to meet absenteeism goal
and is in the process of revising the intervention plan
Integrated
Academic and Behavior Data
Good Attendance
Fair Attendance
Poor Attendance
= Less than 5% of school days missed throughout the school year (8 or fewer days)
= 5%-10% of school days missed throughout the school year (8.5-16.5 days)
= 10% or more of school days missed throughout the school year - i.e. chronically absent (17+ days)
Good Attendance
Fair Attendance
Poor Attendance
= Less than 5% of school days missed throughout the school year (8 or fewer days)
= 5%-10% of school days missed throughout the school year (8.5-16.5 days)
= 10% or more of school days missed throughout the school year - i.e. chronically absent (17+ days)
Chronic PBRs = top 25% of all students with PBRs. Elementary = 3+; Middle School = 6+; High School = 4+
Chronic PBRs = top 25% of all students with PBRs. Elementary = 3+; Middle School = 6+; High School = 4+
or habitual offenders, but also for those students who are otherwise well behaved but receive
even one isolated suspension.
Table 4 – High School and Post-Secondary Outcomes by 9th Grade Behavioral Indicators
0 Suspensions
1 Suspension
2 Suspensions
3 Suspensions
4 or more
Suspensions
Attendance >=
95%
Attendance 9094%
Attendance 8589%
Attendance 8084%
Attendance <80%
0 Failures
1 Failure
Co
urs
e
M
ar
ks
Attendance
Behavior
Characteristic
# of Students
With
Characteristic
133,044
25,821
11,693
5, 833
% Who
Dropped
Out
16%
32%
42%
49%
% Who
Graduated
75%
52%
38%
30%
% Who
Enrolled in
PS
58%
39%
31%
26%
Average PS
Terms
Completed
4.0
1.9
1.2
0.9
5,506
53%
23%
23%
0.7
101,296
11%
81%
62%
4.3
34,601
25%
63%
47%
2.7
16,210
39%
44%
35%
1.6
7,307
47%
31%
26%
1.1
14,386
93,626
18,500
57%
8%
23%
15%
85%
66%
19%
67%
44%
0.6
4.9
2.3
8
Classroom Observation Data
CONTENT
BASIC
Knowledge and Comprehension
(approaching grade level)
56%
PROFICIENT
Application and Analysis
(grade level)
39%
ADVANCED
Synthesis and Evaluation
(above grade level)
5%
BOARD CONFIGURATION
Yes including Essential Question,
Lesson Agenda, and Homework
50%
Yes including Essential Question
30%
No or Incomplete
20%
ENGAGEMENT
Off-Task
14%
Compliant/Passive
53%
Active Participation
25%
Authentic Engagement
8%
What Are The Questions You Want The
Data To Answer Most Frequently?
• Identify your Top Two Questions
Critical Element #4
Table Top Activity
• Identify your top 2 priorities around the use of
data
Critical Element #5
Delivering the Goods
TIER I: Core, Universal
Academic and Behavior
GOAL: 100% of students achieve
at high levels
Tier I: Implementing well researched
programs and practices demonstrated to
produce good outcomes for the majority of
students.
Tier I: Effective if at least 80% are meeting
benchmarks with access to Core/Universal
Instruction.
Tier I: Begins with clear goals:
1.What exactly do we expect all students
to learn ?
2.How will we know if and when they’ve
learned it?
3.How you we respond when some
students don’t learn?
4.How will we respond when some
students have already learned?
Questions 1 and 2 help us ensure a
guaranteed and viable core curriculum
113
Characteristics of Effective Instruction
(Foorman et al., 2003; Foorman & Torgesen, 2001; Arrasmith, 2003; & Rosenshine, 1986)
Characteristic
Guiding Questions
Well Met
Somewhat
Met
Not Met


Goals and Objectives
Are the purpose and outcomes of instruction clearly evident in
the lesson plans? Does the student understand the purpose for
learning the skills and strategies taught?
Explicit
Are directions clear, straightforward, unequivocal, without
vagueness, need for implication, or ambiguity?



Systematic
Are skills introduced in a specific and logical order, easier to
more complex? Do the lesson activities support the sequence of
instruction? Is there frequent and cumulative review?



Scaffolding
Is there explicit use of prompts, cues, examples and
encouragements to support the student? Are skills broken down
into manageable steps when necessary?



Corrective Feedback
Does the teacher provide students with corrective instruction
offered during instruction and practice as necessary?



Modeling
Are the skills and strategies included in instruction clearly
demonstrated for the student?



Guided Practice
Do students have sufficient opportunities to practice new skills
and strategies with teacher present to provide support?



Independent Application
Do students have sufficient opportunities to practice new skills
independently?
Pacing
Is the teacher familiar enough with the lesson to present it in an
engaging manner? Does the pace allow for frequent student
response? Does the pace maximize instructional time, leaving
no down-time?



Instructional Routine
Are the instructional formats consistent from lesson to lesson?




What Does Core Instruction Look Like
for Behavior?
• School-wide Positive Behavior Support
• School-wide social skills/character skill education
(e.g., Boys Town, Skillstreaming)
• School-Home collaboration and partnerships
• Active student engagement in promoting a
prosocial environment (e.g., bully prevention)
• Active student engagement skill development—
Academic Behaviors
• School-wide discipline plan that can be explained
by both staff and students
Calendar?
• Does the district expect schools to engage in
regular data reviews and provide
documentation?
– Frequency for Tier 1?
– Frequency for Tier 2?
– Frequency for Tier 3?
• Does the district aggregate those data and
follow-up with district-level data reviews?
Critical Data Questions:
Tier 1?
• For students who are receiving ONLY Tier 1
services:
– What percent are proficient?
– What percent are not proficient?
– What are we doing about those who are not
proficient?
– What are the trend data for those students who
receive only Tier 1?
TIER II: Supplemental, Targeted
Tier II
For approx. 20% of students
Core
+
Supplemental
…to achieve benchmarks
Tier II Effective if at least 70-80% of
students improve performance (i.e., gap is
closing towards benchmark and/or
progress monitoring standards).
1.Where are the students performing
now?
2.Where do we want them to be?
3.How long do we have to get them
there?
4.How much do they have to grow per
year/monthly to get there?
5.What resources will move them at that
rate?
118
Critical Questions/Issues
Tier 2
• Purpose and expectation of Tier 2 services
should be explicit and understood by
providers:
– Increase performance of students relative to Tier 1
standards
– Link curriculum content and strategies with Tier 1
– Assess against Tier 1 expectations
– 70% of students receiving Tier 2 should attain
proficiency.
Tier 2: Getting TIME
• “Free” time--does not require additional
personnel
– Staggering instruction
– Differentiating instruction
– Cross grade instruction
– Skill-based instruction
•
•
•
•
Standard Protocol Grouping
Reduced range of “standard” curriculum
After-School
Home-Based
Tier 2:
Curriculum Characteristics
• Standard protocol approach
• Focus on essential skills
• Most likely, more EXPOSURE and more FOCUS of
core instruction
• On average 50% more time than Tier 1 allocation
for that subject area
• Linked directly to core instruction materials and
benchmarks
• Criterion for effectiveness is 70% of students
receiving Tier 2 will reach benchmarks
Developing A Schedule
• How many students require how many
minutes of WHAT?
• Build schedule around the:
– How many students need X number of minutes?
– What will occur during those minutes?
– Who is available to deliver?
– When can they deliver?
– How do we use the resources we have?
Example of Grade Level Schedule
Intervention Support
• Intervention plans should be developed based on
student need and skills of staff
• All intervention plans should have intervention
support
• Principals should ensure that intervention plans
have intervention support
• Teachers should not be expected to implement
plans for which there is no support
Critical Data Questions:
Tier 2?
• For students who are receiving Tier 2 services:
– What percent are proficient? 70%?
– What percent are not proficient?
– What rate of growth for those students who
receive Tier 2?
– What are the decision rules for problem-solving
those students which insufficient rates of growth?
– How do we intensify Tier 2 services—Tier 2 is not
a point/level but a continuum?
Does You District Have Explicit
Criteria for What Tier 2 Instruction
Looks Like?
TIER III:
Intensive, Individualized
Tier III
For Approx 5% of Students
Core
+
Supplemental
+
Intensive Individual Instruction
…to achieve benchmarks
1.Where is the student performing
now?
2.Where do we want him to be?
3.How long do we have to get him
there?
4.What supports has he received?
5.What resources will move him at
that rate?
Tier III Effective if there is progress (i.e.,
gap closing) towards benchmark and/or
progress monitoring goals.
128
Tier III
• Focus of School-based Intervention Team
– Identify individual academic and behavioral
issues through data analysis
– Develop intensive individual interventions &
supports
– Ensure that these interventions and supports
are linked to core instruction
– Assess integrity and intensity of
interventions
129
Ways that instruction must be made
more powerful for students “at-risk”
for reading difficulties.
More powerful instruction involves:
More instructional time
Smaller instructional groups
resources
More precisely targeted at right level
Clearer and more detailed explanations
More systematic instructional sequences
More extensive opportunities for guided practice
More opportunities for error correction and feedback
skill
Critical Data Questions:
Tier 3?
• For students who are receiving Tier 3 services:
– What percent are proficient?
– What percent are not proficient?
– What is the rate of growth for those students who
receive Tier 3?
– What are the decision rules for problem-solving
those students which insufficient rates of growth?
– What does the district DO for intractable
students? What is the district policy that guides
decision-making for these students?
Integrating the Tiers
Basic Principles
•
•
•
•
•
•
Generalization
Transfer of training
Common stimuli (materials, “signs”)
Common assessments
Common standards
Training “loosely” or “specifically”?
Instructional Integration
• Focus of Tiers 2 and 3 is specialized instructional
strategies, time and focus of instruction
• Application of instructional strategies should
include application to core instructional materials
and content
• Single intervention plan with focus, activities and
content contributed by each provider
• Agreement on progress monitoring level and
content (Should be Tier 1)
Summary
• Instruction/Intervention Decision Making
– TIME: how much time needed to achieve goal?
– WHAT: what will be covered during the time?
– WHO: who has the skills to teach the WHAT?
– WHERE: the best setting that will accommodate
the time, what and who
Lesson Study:
Integrating Academic Instruction
and Student Behavior
• What are the evidence-based instructional
strategies that will attain the academic skill set?
• What academic engagement behaviors will be
necessary to translate the academic skill into
academic performance?
• What social/emotional behaviors are resources
and obstacles to the skill and performance goals?
• HOW WILL WE MATCH THE INSTRUCTIONAL
STRATEGIES WITH ENGAGEMENT FACTORS?
Critical Questions
• How do we ensure that Tier 2 and Tier 3
instruction aligns with the Learning
Goals/Standards that are the focus of
instruction in Tier 1?
• How do we ensure that the instructional
strategies and student engagement skills
expected in Tier 1 are incorporated into
Tier 2 and Tier 3 instructional planning?
Critical Questions
• How do we ensure that the focus of instruction in
Tiers 2 and 3 incorporates CCSS student
engagement/performance expectations—critical
thinking, reasoning, problem-solving?
• How do we ensure that the
supplemental/intensive instructional strategies
and specially designed instruction are
incorporated into Tier 1 setting?
Final Question
• How do we ensure that all of the providers of
instruction (across all Tiers) have their act
together so that it is not the student’s
responsibility to integrate instruction across
tiers?
Final Answer!
LESSON STUDY
LESSON PLANNING
Effective Instruction is the
Product of Effective Planning
Poor Planning, Poor Instruction
Characteristics of
Effective Planning-Tier 1
• All providers of instruction and support are in
attendance at the lesson study-general
education, remedial education, special
education and appropriate related services
– Question: at YOUR grade level lesson planning
meetings, do ALL providers of instruction attend or
just the general education teachers?
Characteristics of
Effective Planning-Tier 1
• The Learning Goal/Standard/Progression levels is/are
identified explicitly
• Instructional strategies (evidence-based) for the goal/level
and student skill levels are identified
• The explicit student performance behaviors necessary to
engage the instruction are identified—GAPS for individual
students identified
Characteristics of
Effective Planning-Tier 2/3
• Tier 2/3 providers meet separately to lesson plan
their instruction within the context of the Tier 1
lesson study meeting
• Instructional strategies, engagement behaviors,
instructional materials that support student success
in Tier 1 are identified
Characteristics of
Effective Planning-Tier 2/3
• Alignment with the scope and sequence/pacing chart
for Tier 1 is always a priority when identifying the
focus of instruction on a weekly basis
• This alignment permits a strategic focus for issues
such as vocabulary, background knowledge, preteaching/review/re-teaching, etc. that results in “just
in time” readiness for students to integrate what
they have learned into Tier 1
Characteristics of
Effective Planning-Tier 2/3
• Assessments in Tier 2/3 incorporate characteristics of
assessments in Tier 1
• The goal here is to not only ensure that students
strengthen needed skills and accelerate their growth
BUT ALSO to ensure that the students can explicitly
identify how the instruction in Tiers 2/3 relates to
their work in Tier 1
Characteristics of
Effective Planning-Tier 2/3
• Tier 2/3 providers observe their students in the Tier 1
environment to ensure alignment of instruction across Tiers
• Tier 2/3 providers increasingly take an active role in the Tier 1
Lesson Study to share specially designed instructional
strategies and student engagement supports during the Tier 1
Lesson Study meetings
Good News/Bad News
• Good News
– Integrated instruction CAN occur
– Transfer of learning from Tiers 2/3 to Tier 1 CAN
happen at greater levels
– Students CAN become active partners in this
integration process IF they see the integration
• Bad News 
– This takes time to do well
– Adults have to play well together
– Check egos at the door! Everyone is a critical player
here
Critical Element #5
• Identify your top 2 priorities around:
– Effective Instruction
– Integrating the Tiers
– Schedules
– Intervention Support
– Student Engagement/Lesson Study
What Outcomes Do You Want To
Evaluate?
Evaluating the effectiveness of Core
and Tier 2/3
•
•
•
•
•
151
Is the intervention evidence-based?
How “intense” is the intervention?
What can we “expect” the intervention to do?
Was the intervention implemented as planned?
How effective is this intervention with students from
similar and different backgrounds?
152
Critical Element #6
• Identify your top 2 priorities areas around
which to report outcomes next year.