Transcript RtI: One Principal’s Journey - Dolores RE-4A

RtI: One Principal’s Journey
SW Superintendent Summit
October 17, 2008
Sherri Maxwell, Principal Dolores Elem.
School
[email protected]
As an elementary teacher…
• What I taught was primarily my decision
within the parameters of our reading and
math series.
• I “melded” what I wanted to teach with
our grade level standards.
• My grade level peers and I worked
together to develop our program.
• Our program was “staff specific.” When
teachers moved on, the program
changed to reflect new team members.
• Struggling students were referred “out” to
Title One or Special Ed. .
As a special education
teacher…
• We viewed struggling students as lacking
as learners rather than investigating the
efficacy of our curriculum or our teaching.
• The referral process was a formality with
the goal of “getting” students “into” the
special education program.
• As a teacher I worked within six different
grade-level standards for each core
subject and fifteen individual classroom
curriculums.
• IEPs were often developed around the
needs of the teachers (schedules) and
often reflected differing educational
philosophies.
As an elementary principal..
• I knew we needed to come together
as a staff to develop a common
philosophy about our teaching and
student achievement.
• I knew we needed to articulate our
core curriculum so it would become
“guaranteed and viable.”
• I knew that we needed a systems
approach to student achievement …
including behavioral expectations
• I knew we needed a systematic
approach to providing prescriptive
interventions for students who were
not meeting the standards.
My questions to my staff…
– What are our common beliefs
about student learning?
– What are the essential skills for
each grade level in the core
content areas?
– How do we guarantee our
curriculum is taught with fidelity?
– What do we do when students
don’t make adequate progress in
meeting their grade-level
expectations?
– How can I support our students
and our staff as we embark on this
journey?
Outcomes for today:
• Share our vision and our
journey in implementing
RtI, PLC, and PBS by:
– Sharing our understanding of
the RtI construct.
– Sharing how we welded
PLCs, PBS, and RtI into a
comprehensive “package.”
– Sharing organizational ideas
and frameworks.
Disclaimers…
• We are partially proficient in implementing
a comprehensive RtI program. There are
many obstacles we have yet to
overcome. I will do my best to illustrate
these as we go.
• I do not have a lot of practical knowledge
of secondary school systems, however I
firmly believe many of our applications
could be implemented by core
departments.
First Question…
• What is it that we want our
students to learn?
– Belief statements
• Reading, math, student writing,
and interventions.
– Yet to go: Science, PBS
– Curriculum Alignment:
• PLCs 2006-2007, 2007-2008
– Colorado Model Content
Standards
– Assessment frameworks (CSAP)
– NWEA guidelines
– Other sources/materials
PLC Construct: Student Writing
• 2006-2007
– Align standards two and three
– Identify grade level “knows and dos”
• 2007-2008
– Develop grade-level writing rubrics
• 2008-2009
– Use a PLC model to identify students as “beyond,
on, approaching, and intensive
• Yet to do:
– Develop CBM measures (common assessments)
– Use RtI to develop interventions for students
identified as intensive.
– Identify intervention resources
PLC Construct: Reading
• 2006-2007
– Develop the “What We Believe About
Reading” statement
– Begin to align standards one, four, five and six
• 2007-2008
– Begin to identify grade level “knows and dos”
for standards one, four, five, and six
– Develop the “What We Believe About
Interventions” statements
• 2008-2009
– Complete standards one, four, five, and six
• Yet to do:
– Assessments: Benchmark and CBM
– Identify intervention resources
PLC Construct: Science
• 2006-2007
– Begin to align standards
– Identify grade level knows and dos
• 2007-2008
• 2008-2009
• Yet to do:
–
–
–
–
Everything!!
What We Believe Statement
Assessments: Benchmarks and CBM
Identify intervention resources
PLC Construct: Math
• 2006-2007
• 2007-2008
– Develop the “What We Believe About
Math” statement
– Begin to align standards
• 2008-2009
– Complete alignment of standards to State
Standards (CSAP)
– Identify grade level knows and dos
• Yet to do:
– Assessments: Benchmark and CDM
– Identify intervention resources
PLC Construct: Positive Behavior
Support
• 2007-2008
– Identify school-wide construct: Respect,
responsibility, relationships, and safety
– Teach expectations on a regular basis
– Identify and recognize students who meet and
exceed expectations
– Develop a protocol for students entering tier
two
• 2008-2009
– In-serve teachers on common concerns
• Behavior plans
• Functional Behavior Assessments
• Yet to do:
– Community involvement
Next Question…
• What do we do when students
have not yet learned what we
have identified as essential
skills?
• Answer: RtI- Response to
Intervention
RtI: Universal Level
• Critical benchmarking occurs three to
four times per year to identify student
proficiency.
• Collect group data within PLCs using
formal and informal CBM (the quiz)
based assessments. Students are
categorized as being beyond level, on
level, approaching level, and intensive
level.
• PLC teams identify the successful
strategies used to meet the needs of
students (80%).
RtI: Intervention Level
• Within the PLC, identify the learning needs
of students scoring less than proficient.
We pay particular attention to students in
the intensive category.
• Problem-solving strategies and supports
needed to boost individual student
performance.
• Develop a plan to meet the identified
needs.
– Formal plans: ILPS, behavior plans, IEPs
count!
– Alpine Achievement: Plan builder
– Paper and pencil
Progress Monitoring
• Identify how student progress will be
monitored.
• Schedule specific intervals to take
“probes.” Record projected dates on the
plan prior to beginning the plan.
• Probes need to be specific and constant.
Work samples count!!!
• Provide students with intensive support in
accordance to their plan. In order to be
considered intensive, the intervention
needs to occur on a regular basis and with
fidelity.
• Complete and record data in
accordance to the plan.
What now?
• If the student continues to not meet the
learning target after a minimum of 8 probes,
the plan may be rewritten.
• We may refer the student to the RtI team for
further support.
• The RtI team may recommend targeted
assessment to help identify student needs.
This is not a special education process or
referral: it is strictly problem solving.
• If sufficient interventions have been identified
and implemented, a formal referral may be
recommended by the RtI team. This occurs
only after all other avenues have been
exhausted.
The Truth…
• Where we actually are with this….
– Benchmarking
– Record keeping
• Identified interventions
• Responsibilities
– Progress monitoring
• Barriers…
– Leadership
– Teacher commitment
– Teacher workload
– Teacher training
– TIME!!!!
Organization organization…
• Data Team
– Meets every other week
– Oversees the vertical alignment
– “Gear” that runs the PLCs (PLC meet weekly)
• RtI Team
– Meets weekly
– BOY and EOY meets with every grade level
team to review assessments, RtI plans, and
students new to the school
– Meets throughout the year to support RtI and
classroom teachers
• Identify intervention and supports
• Identify further assessment needs
• Refer to Tier Three if needed
Management
• Curriculum Notebooks GradeLevel Specific
–
–
–
–
Standards
Grade level “Knows and Dos”
Content area benchmarks
CBM as developed
• Yellow Notebooks (Language
Arts):
– Due quarterly
– Benchmarks
– “No Excuses” spelling words
– Fluency
Scheduling
• Academic Calendar
–
–
–
–
Set at the start of the year
Includes all academic activities
Includes assessment windows
Sets critical PLC topics
• Master schedule
– Block scheduling for reading and
math
– Sets intervention period
• Intervention schedule
Resources
• Jim Wright: RtI Toolkit: A Practical Guide for
Schools
• Larry Ainsworth: Unwrapping the
Standards: A Simple Process to Make
Standards Manageable
• Bruce Wellman and Laura Lipton: Data
Driven Dialogue: A Facilitator’s Guide to
Collaborative Inquiry
• Mike Smoker: Results Now: How We Can
Achieve Unprecedented Improvements in
Teaching and Learning
• Gayle H. Gregory and Lin Kuzmich:
Teacher Teams that Get Results: 61
Strategies for Sustaining and Renewing
Professional Learning Communities
Resources Continued
• CDE Resources
– RtI Comprehensive Evaluation Tool: CDE
Website download
– (RtI) Response to Intervention: Meeting the
needs of All students (CD 2008)
– Response to Intervention (RtI): Strategies for
Reading and Math (CD Videoconference,
March 14, 2007)
– Response to Intervention (RtI) NonAcademic Barriers to Achievement
Addressing School Based Mental Health
and Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports (CD NASDE Videoconference May
9, 2007)