RtI Because It Is Right for Kids

Download Report

Transcript RtI Because It Is Right for Kids

RtI Because It Is Right for Kids

OCMBOCES Syracuse, New York November 15, 2010 John E. McCook, Ed.D

[email protected]

865-693-5884 Copyright© 2010 John E. McCook

WHY RTI?

• • • Einstein’s definition of insanity: “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results” USDOE has written the obituary for the discrepancy model – Based upon President’s Commission on Excellence – Based upon IDEIA 2004 – Based upon LDA research findings New York K-4 Reading July 1, 2012

WHY RTI?

• • • • • Discrepancy has developed into a “wait to fail” model Discrepancy model has not proven to be effective Over identification Congress in 1975 placed a 2% limit on prevalence if USDOE did not determine criteria by Jan 1, 1978 – USDOE sets criteria Dec 29, 1977 – – Almost 2% 1977 and almost 6% 2001 Widespread variance of prevalence • KY 2.96%, GA 3.29% …..CT 4.93%......MA 7.88%, NM 8.41%, RI 9.46% Disproportionality

Why RTI?

• Use information that makes sense to school personnel –

Logical

Research based

Discussion is based on school staff experience

Utilize teacher’s daily data as part of the problem solving method

Is this the best we can do?

"The question is not, Is it possible to educate all children well? But rather, Do we want to do it badly enough?" D. Meier

Why RTI?

• “The United States is the

only

country in the industrialized world where children are less likely to graduate from high school than their parents were.” New York Times, page A29, Nicholas D. Kristof, November 13, 2008. (study by Education Trust, advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.) emphasis added

National Literacy Crisis

8 th Grade Students (2005) Reading Math 29% 29% 42% Below Basic Basic Proficient/Advanced 29% 39% 32%

(Source: National Center for Education Statistics)

Teaching Reading is Urgent: Brutal Fact Minutes Per Day Percentile Rank Books Text Words Read Per Year Books Text

98 ~ A student in the 20 th percentile reads books

0.7

minutes a day.

~ This adds up to

21,000

words read per year.

~ A student in the 80 th percentile reads books

14.2

minutes a day.

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 ~ This adds up to

1,146,000

words 20 read per year.

10 2 Torgeson, J.K. 2005 65.0

21.2

14.2

9.6

6.5

4.6

3.2

1.8

0.7

0.1

0 67.3

33.4

24.6

4,358,000 1,823,000 1,146,000 16.9

13.1

9.2

6.2

622,000 432,000 282,000 200,000 4,733,000 2,357,000 1,697,000 1,168,000 722,000 601,000 421,000 4.3

106,000 251,000 2.4

21,000 1.0

8,000 0 0 134,000 51,000 8,000

Early Intervention Changes Reading Outcomes

5 4 3 Low Risk on Early Screening 2 5.2

4.9

With substantial instructional intervention 3.2

2.5

With research-based core but without extra instructional intervention 1 At Risk on Early Screening 1 2 3 4 44

Publishers

Grade level corresponding to age

studies. In A.J. Fawcett and R.I. Nicolson (Eds.). Dyslexia: Theory and Good Practice. (pp. 185-201). London: David Fulton . Slide coursety of W. Alan Coulter http://www.monitoring

center.lsuhsc.edu

Academic Systems

Intensive, Individual Interventions •Individual Students •Assessment-based •High Intensity •Of longer duration Targeted Group Interventions •Some students (at-risk) •High efficiency •Rapid response

The Basics

Any Curriculum Area 5-10% 1-5% 1-5% 5-10%

Behavioral Systems

Intensive, Individual Interventions •Individual Students •Assessment-based •Intense, durable procedures Targeted Group Interventions •Some students (at-risk) •High efficiency •Rapid response Universal Interventions •All students •Preventive, proactive 80-90% 80-90% Universal Interventions •All settings, all students •Preventive, proactive Sagai, Kutash et al

Tier 1 Non-negotiables

Tier 1 • STANDARDS-BASED CLASSROOM LEARNING: All students participate in general education learning that includes: – Universal screenings to target groups in need of specific instructional support.

– Implementation of the Standards through a standards based classroom structure. – Differentiation of instruction including fluid, flexible grouping, multiple means of learning, and demonstration of learning.

– Progress monitoring of learning through multiple formative assessments.

So What Does New York Say?

Tier I in New York • • • • • • • • Interventionist: general education teacher Setting: general education classroom Grouping: variable and flexible grouping formats Curriculum: scientific, research-based instruction aligned to state learning standards in core academic areas Duration: year-long Length of Instructional Sessions: involves a minimum of 90 minutes of uninterrupted, ELA instruction per day Assessment: all students are screened at least 3 times per year (Fall, Winter, Spring) Progress Monitoring: students initially identified as at-risk on screening measures are progress monitored on a weekly basis for 5-6 weeks

Tier 2 Non-negotiables

• NEEDS-BASED LEARNING: In addition to Tier 1, targeted students participate in learning that is different by including: – Standard intervention protocol process for identifying and providing research based interventions based on need and resources.

– On-going progress monitoring to measure student response to intervention and guide decision-making.

So What Does New York Say? Tier II

• • • • • • • • Interventionist: trained, skilled and knowledgeable school personnel Setting: variable, can occur in and/or outside of general education classroom Grouping: small, homogeneous grouping (1:3 – 1:5) Curriculum: scientifically research-based instruction designed to remediate skill deficits of targeted students Duration: varies – based on rate of progress and performance of students; 10 to 30 weeks minimum Length of Intervention Sessions: 20 – 30 minutes, 3 to 4 times per week Assessment: may include formal and informal measures to inform instruction Progress Monitoring: twice monthly* to examine rate and level of performance

Tier 3 Non-negotiables

• DRIVEN LEARNING: Targeted students participate in learning that is different by including: – Intensive, formalized problem solving to identify individual student needs.

– Targeted research based interventions tailored to individual needs.

– Frequent progress monitoring and analysis of student response to intervention(s).

New York Tier III

• • • • • • • • Interventionist: highly trained, skilled and knowledgeable school personnel Setting: most often takes place outside of the general education classroom Grouping: small, homogeneous grouping (1:1 – 1:2) Curriculum: customized, intensive, systematic and research-based instruction that targets academic areas of greatest need Duration: varies- a minimum of 10-30 weeks Length of Intervention Sessions: 30 – 60* minutes, five times per week Assessment: may include formal and informal measures to inform instruction Progress Monitoring: minimum once per week 15

From K-3 We Learn to Read The Rest of Our Lives We Read To Learn!!!

What Taboos Do We Face

• • • The curricula can not be responsible The settings can not be responsible The adults can not be responsible • What does this leave us?

The child must have a disability

The Five Phases of Implementation

• • • • • Awareness Commitment Capacity Implementation Evaluation 18

Non Negotiable Components of RTI

1. Universal screening 2. Multiple tiers of intervention 3. Progress monitoring 4. Problem-solving or standard protocol approach – the SAT Team 5. Integrated data collection/assessment system 6. Scientific, research-based interventions 7. Fidelity 8. Professional Development 19

Do I Really Have To?

• Federal Language 1) Data that demonstrates that prior to, or as a part of, the referral process, the child was provided “appropriate instruction in regular classroom settings,” delivered by qualified personnel; and 2) Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at “reasonable intervals” which were provided to the child’s parents.

34 C.F.R. 300.309

20

Do I Really Have To?

• Section 300.307(a)(2)-(3) requires that a state’s criteria for identification of SLD: – Must permit the use of a process based upon a child’s response to scientific, research-based intervention; and – May permit the use of other alternative research based procedures…. FAQ OSEP Question E-1: 21

So What Does New York Say?

Effective July 1, 2012, all school districts in NYS must have an RtI program in place as part of its evaluation process to determine if a student in grades K-4 is a student with a learning disability in the area of reading. (NYSED, 2009)

New York

• • Authorizes the use of RtI in the State's criteria to determine learning disabilities (LD) and requires, effective July 1, 2012, that all school districts have an RtI program in place as

part of the process to determine if a student in grades K-4 is a student with a learning disability in the area of

reading. “Effective on or after July 1, 2012, a school district

shall not use the severe discrepancy criteria to determine that a student in kindergarten through grade four has a learning

disability in the area of reading.”

[8 NYCRR section 200.4(j)]

23

• • • • Requires each school district to establish a plan and policies for implementing school-wide approaches and prereferral interventions in order to remediate a student’s performance prior to referral for special education, which may include the RtI process as part of a district’s school wide approach. The school district must select and define the specific structure and components of its RtI program, including, but not limited to the: – criteria for determining the levels of intervention to be provided to students, – types of interventions, – – amount and nature of student performance data to be collected, and manner and frequency for progress monitoring.

[8 NYCRR section 100.2(ii)]

Requires each school district implementing a RtI program to take appropriate steps to ensure that staff have the knowledge and skills necessary to implement a RtI program and that such program is implemented consistent with the specific structure and components of the model.

[8 NYCRR section 100.2(ii)] 24

Interventions are

NOT • • • • • • • • Preferential seating Shortened assignments Parent contacts Classroom observations Suspension Doing MORE of the same / general classroom assignments Retention Peer-tutoring

Example of Benchmark Data

26

Positive Response to Intervention

Elementary Students Rate of Growth LD Students and RTI/Intervention Students R-CBM Growth

1 0.8

0.78 0.78

0.84 0.81

0.62

0.53

0.61 0.58 0.57

0.6

0.4

0.3

0.2

0 1 2 3

Grade

4 5 LD Students RTI/Intervention Students 28