Transcript Document

The RTI Revolution:
School-wide Reform to Improve
Achievement for All Students
A Problem Now
• 13 million kids are
vulnerable
(Title I + LD).
• Nearly 3 million kids
have learning
disabilities.
A Problem Tomorrow
LD
Minority
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
All
High School Drop Out Rate
• Nearly 10% of all
students drop out of
high school.
• 21.3% of minority
students drop out.
• 38.7% of students with
learning disabilities
drop out.
HR 1350:
The Improving Educational Results for
Children with Disabilities Act
S 1248:
The Individuals with Disabilities
Education Improvement Act
PL 108-466: The Individuals with Disabilities
Education Improvement Act
•IEP
•Discipline
•Research
•Early intervening services
•LD identification-RtI
•Numerous formal ties to NCLB – we are ALL at the table!
IDEA 2004 and
Specific Learning Disabilities
Section 614 (b)
(6) Specific Learning Disabilities
(A)…when determining whether a child has a specific
learning disability as defined in section 602(29), a local
educational agency shall not be required to take into
consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy
between achievement and intellectual ability in oral
expression, listening comprehension, written expression,
basic reading skill, reading comprehension, mathematical
calculation, or mathematical reasoning.
(B) Additional Authority
In determining whether a child has a specific learning
disability, a local education agency may use a process
that determines of the child responds to scientific,
research-based intervention as part of the evaluation
procedures described in paragraphs (2)&(3).
Early Intervening Services
• IDEA allows an LEA to use 15% of funds
• Purpose: minimize over-identification
and unnecessary referrals to special
education
• Provide academic and behavioral
supports; and professional development
re: early literacy and behavior
• MUST use the 15% if LEA has
“significant” disproportionality
What is RTI?
• RtI is the practice of providing…
– high-quality instruction and intervention
– matched to student need
– monitoring progress frequently
– to make decisions about change in
instruction or goals
– and applying child response data to
important educational decisions.
NCLB and IDEA
– both are focused on early intervention.
Core 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
Core Principles – Cont.
• Use evidence based
interventions/instruction
• Monitor student progress to inform
instruction
• Use data to make decisions
• Use assessment in screening,
diagnosis, and progress monitoring
Essential Components
• Multiple tiers of evidence based
intervention service delivery—such
as a three-tier model
• Problem-solving method
• An integrated data
collection/assessment
system to inform decisions
at each tier of service delivery
Schoolwide Response to Intervention
(RtI)
Intensive Intervention
Individualized, functional
1-5% assessment, highly specific
Targeted Intervention
Supplemental, some
7-15% students, reduce risk
Universal Intervention
Core Instruction,
all students
Preventive
80%
Behavior
Reading
FL Three Tiered Model of
School Supports
Behavioral Systems
Academic Systems
Tier 3: Intensive, Individual
Interventions
Individual Students
Assessment-based
High Intensity
Of longer duration
Tier 2: Targeted Group
Interventions
Some students (at-risk)
High efficiency
Rapid response
Tier 1: Universal
Interventions
All students
Preventive,
proactive
1-5%
Tier 3: Intensive, Individual
Interventions
Individual Students
Assessment-based
Intense, durable procedures
1-5%
5-10%
5-10%
Tier 2: Targeted Group
Interventions
Some students (at-risk)
High efficiency
Rapid response
Students
80-90%
80-90%
Tier 1: Universal
Interventions
All settings, all
students
Preventive,
proactive
Early Intervention Changes Reading Outcomes
5
Reading grade level (GE)
5.2
Low risk on
early screening
4.9
With researchbased core but
with extra
instructional
intervention
3.2
With researchbased core but
without extra
instructional
intervention
4
3
2.5
2
High risk on
early screening
1
1
2
3
4
Grade level corresponding to age
Reading First Assessment Committee 2000, based on Torgesen data
Student Performance in Montgomery, AL
Grade K DIBELS Fluency 2003-2005
100
96
90
88
80
70
Percent of
Kindergarten
Students at
Benchmark
on DIBELS
Fluency
scores
60
50
40
42
30
20
10
0
Beg Of YR '03-'04
End Of YR '03-'04
End Of YR '04-'05
Student Performance in Montgomery, AL
Grades 1-3 DIBELS Fluency 2003-2005
100
90
81
80
Percent of
1st – 3rd
Grade
Students at
Benchmark
on DIBELS
Fluency
scores
70
65
60
57
59
50
40
30
32
20
10
0
Beg Of YR '03-'04
End Of YR '03-'04
End Of YR '04-'05
Effect on Math Assessment
Percent of Students Passing
Mathematics
5th Grade Math Performance
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
School 1
Vail School District, AZ
School 2
School 3
School 4
School 5
Percentage of Risk Category Classified
Minority or Caucasian
What Proportion of those At-Risk Before
and After Intervention are of Minority
Ethnicity?
100
90
80
70
60
Minority
Caucasian
50
40
30
20
10
0
Before
Intervention
Vail School District, AZ
After Intervention
Expected
VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2005
Percent of Minority and Caucasian
Students in Risk Category
What Proportion of Ethnicity Represented
Before and After Intervention in Risk
Category?
100
90
80
70
60
Minority
Caucasian
50
40
30
20
10
0
Before
Intervention
Vail School District, AZ
After Intervention
Expected
VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2005
Cost Reduction
160,000
Cost in Dollars
140,000
120,000
100,000
Baseline
STEEP
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
Assessment
Placement
Why RTI?
2 reasons…
EARLY
INTERVENTION
and
AYP
AND,
despite our
system wide
efforts, there
are still
many children
who are at-risk
for school
failure and
successful in
acquiring basic
skills
What do we know?
• We know far more about the causes of learning
disability and reading problems
• We know more about effective instruction
• We know more about the limitations of our
current systems and have viable alternatives
What do we know?
• We have far better models for data based decision
making
• We have far better tools to help us make instruction
effective
• It is not so much the issue any longer of “what works?”
It is an issue of how we deploy it so that it can
work.
• RTI is the most critical component if prevention and
early intervention efforts are to be successful.
So…what does it look like???
LBUSD District Profile
Third largest school district in CA
Over 46 languages spoken
Most diverse city according to Census 2000
Over 8,000 faculty, second largest employer in the city
There are over 89 Schools
56 elementary
8 K-8
14 Middle Schools
11 High Schools (six of which are large
comprehensive high schools)
3 Charter Schools
A Tiered Approach to Instruction
Tier
3
Targeted
Intervention
s
Tier 2
Comprehensive
School Wide Universal
Interventions
Tier 1
Intensity of needs
Individualized Interventions
~5-10% of students
INTENSIVE
~10-15% of Students
STRATEGIC
~75-85% of students
CORE
A Tiered Approach to Literacy:
Core Interventions
• Options that are provided to students as
a part of the general curriculum with
specific intent
Comprehensive/School
Wide Interventions
Tier 1
In LBUSD = 81%
A Tiered Approach to Literacy:
Strategic Interventions
• Targeted
interventions focus
on students who
need more
assistance
Targeted
Intervention
s
Tier 2
Comprehensive/School
Wide Interventions
Tier 1
LBUSD =
8%
A Tiered Approach to Literacy:
Intensive Interventions
• Intense and often
individualized
interventions are for
the smallest group of
students with the
most extreme needs
Tier
3
LBUSD = 6%
Targeted
Intervention
s
Tier 2
Comprehensive/School
Wide Interventions
Tier 1
English-Language Arts Placement
Content Standards Test
All Students
ELA Core
Diagnostic Test
All Students
Classroom Grades
Language! Assessment
Only those 2 or more years
below grade level
“Benchmark/Core”
(Tier I)
• .5 years below to above grade level
• Regular Core English classes
“Strategic”
(Tier II)
• .5 – 2.0 years below grade level
• Double Block consisting of:
– Regular core English classes
– Literacy Workshop course
• Use of additional support materials to
scaffold core materials
• After school reading program, if needed
“Intensive”
(Tier III)
• 2.0 or more years below grade level
• Double Block consisting of:
– Intensive ELA Program
• LANGUAGE!
• Lindamood-Bell
API Reading Gains
Reading Interventions
General Education (including RSP)
700
600
500
400
API 03
API 04
API 05
300
200
100
0
Lang! I
Lang! II
Lang! III
LMB
Lit.Wksp
API Reading Gains
Reading Intervention Programs
Special Education Students Only
600
500
400
API 03
API 04
API 05
300
200
100
0
LANG! 1
LANG! 2
LMB
Lit Wksp 1-2 Lit Wksp 3-4
API Reading Gains
Reading Intervention Programs
9th-12 Graders: SPELL Students
450
400
350
300
250
API 03
API 04
API 05
200
150
100
50
0
ELD Rdg I
ELD Rdg II
ELD Rdg III
LBUSD SST Data for
Elementary Schools 2001-2005
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
SST referrals
SST referrals - NO
SPED
Initial Evaluations
Initial EvaluationsSPED
2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- Total
2002 2003 2004 2005
Portland Public Schools (PPS)
District Population = 47, 000
- 14% Hispanic
- 16% Black
- 56% White
- 11% Pacific Islander
- 11.4% ELL
- 28% ELL and FEP combined
- 45% Free & Reduced Lunch
PPS Special Education Demographics
- 14%
- 36% LD
- 10% Special Education/ELL
- 72% spend 79% of the day in general education
Portland District Profile
The largest school district in OR
Over 80 languages spoken
Over 6,600 faculty, seventh largest employer in the city
There are over 85 Schools
53 Elementary
4 K-8*
17 Middle Schools
10 High Schools (One K-12)
6 Charter School
4 Special Education Schools
* 27 schools in process of converting to K-8
PPS SST Data for Elementary
Schools 2001-2005
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
SST referrals
SST referrals - NO
SPED
Initial Evaluations
Initial EvaluationsSPED
2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- Total
2002 2003 2004 2005
NCLD & Education Law
NCLD works to strengthen legislation to better serve children in
need. We have convened national organizations, developed
consensus and provided recommendations for legislation and
regulations.
Individuals with
Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA)
IDEA 2004 adopted the LD Roundtable recommendations to promote RTI and
to improve how we identify students with learning disabilities. NCLD
supported including new Early Intervening Services funding for early
academic and behavior intervention.
No Child Left Behind
(NCLB)
NCLB and IDEA should be further aligned to allow Title I, Title II and
Reading First funds to coordinate with Early Intervening Services funding as
found in IDEA Sec. 613(f).
.
NCLB Language
• Allow coordination of funds between Title I, Title
II and Reading First with IDEA Early Intervening
Services Sec. 613(f)
• Include a description of ‘evidence-based
intervention model’ to ensure use of funds
incorporates core principles of a multi-tiered
model
• Require schools that fall into ‘needs improvement’
to implement such a model to better identify and
serve struggling learners
• Laura Kaloi, Public Policy Director
[email protected]
703-922-5039
• RTI Resources and More
www.LD.org