Transcript RtI: Response to Intervention and the Problem Solving Model

RtI: Response to Intervention and
the Problem Solving Model
Presented by
Alison Boutcher
Director
Mid-State Special Education
2007-08
Reason for Change




Federal legislation: NCLB & IDEIA,
Reading First
Problems with Traditional Service
Delivery Model
Paradigm shift
We want to continually reassess our
practices to be sure we are
providing the best education for ALL
students
IDEA 2004
Eligibility Determinations

A child shall not be determined
to be a child with a disability if
determinant factor is:



Lack of scientifically-based
instructional practices and
programs that contain the essential
components of reading instruction.
Lack of instruction in math
Limited English Proficiency
IDEA 2004
Specific Learning Disabilities

The LEA shall not be required to take
into consideration whether the 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.
New IL Regulations

Each district shall, no later than the
beginning of the 2010-11 school
year, implement the use of a
process that determines how the
child responds to scientific,
research-based interventions as
part of the evaluation procedure
described in 34 CFR 300.304.
New IL Regulations

In addition to using an identification
process of the type required by
subsection (b) of this Section, a
district may use a severe
discrepancy between intellectual
ability and achievement for
determining whether a child has a
specific learning disability.
Plan for RtI

No later than January 1, 2009, each district shall
develop a plan for the transition to the use of a
process that determines how the child responds
to scientific, research-based interventions as part
of the evaluation procedure described in 34 CFR
300.304. Each district’s plan shall identify the
resources the district will devote to this purpose
and include an outline of the types of State-level
assistance the district expects to need, with
particular reference to the professional
development necessary for its affected staff
members to implement this process.
What is
‘Response to Intervention (RtI)’?
(Batsche, Elliott, Graden, Grimes, Kovaleski, Prasse, Reschly, Schrag, Tilley, 2005)




A 3-tiered process for service delivery that
increases the intensity of services when a
student fails to respond to an intervention
Identifying and providing high quality
instruction and research-based interventions
matched to students’ needs
Measuring rate of improvement (ROI) over time
to make important educational decisions
Educators use ongoing student performance
data to determine if an intervention is working.
If it is not, it is time to do something different.
Response to Intervention is Not:



An instructional program. It is a framework
to make decisions about instructional needs
based on student data
Intended to focus only on students who are
below expected levels of proficiency
Just an eligibility system – a way of finding
students eligible and/or reducing the
numbers of students placed into special
education.
Advantages of Using Response to
Intervention

RtI will help you to:





Know immediately, “Is what we are
doing working?”
Know which students need more
Know what each student needs
Provide structures to deliver what
students need
Raise student achievement
Without Response to Intervention
Special Education
Sea of Ineligibility
General Education
With a 3-Tiered Model:
Bridging the Gap
Amount of Resources
Needed to Solve Problem
Special Education
Interventions
General Education
Intensity of Problem
4 Critical Core Principles




Universal Screening
Intervention
Progress Monitoring
Intervention Efficacy and Fidelity
Universal Screening





3 times each year – establish
benchmarks
Tied to state academic standards
and aligned to curriculum
Designed to measure basic
academic skills
Typically administered school-wide
to groups or individuals
Brief, reliable, valid
What Universal Screening Provides




Benchmark data norms for classrooms,
grade levels, schools, districts
Information on the effectiveness of the
core curriculum for most students
Information on the effectiveness of the
core curriculum for subgroups
Data on which students are lagging well
behind their peers
Interventions





Must be research-based
Should involve active engagement
Should modify the mode of task
presentation
Should modify direct instruction
time, pacing, guided and
independent practice
Should include more cues and
prompts
Progress Monitoring



Brief, frequent assessments
Evaluate student response to the
intervention
Informs instruction
Intervention Efficacy and Fidelity




Teacher self-report/implementation
logs
Ratings scales/checklist of steps
Direct observation
Permanent products created by
teacher/student
School-Wide Systems for Student Success
Academic Systems
Behavioral Systems
Intensive, Individual Interventions
•Individual Students
•Assessment-based
•High Intensity
•Of longer duration
1-5%
5-10%
Targeted Group Interventions
•Some students (at-risk)
•High efficiency
•Rapid response
Universal Interventions
•All students
•Preventive, proactive
80-90%
1-5%
Intensive, Individual Interventions
•Individual Students
•Assessment-based
•Intense, durable procedures
5-10%
Targeted Group Interventions
•Some students (at-risk)
•High efficiency
•Rapid response
80-90%
Universal Interventions
•All settings, all students
•Preventive, proactive
Identify the Concern
and Define the Problem
Monitor and
Evaluate
Intervention(s)
PROBLEM
SOLVING
PROCESS
Develop and Implement
Intervention(s)
Problem
Analysis
Often Some Steps are
Skipped in the Process
Identify the Concern and
Define the Problem
Monitor and Evaluate
Intervention(s)
PROBLEM
SOLVING
PROCESS
Develop and Implement
Intervention(s)
“we want to help children
as quickly as possible”
Problem Analysis
Identify the Concern
A mismatch between the student’s
performance and the learning
environment expectations
Example: The expectation is for students
to complete seat work. The identified
student’s work is incomplete.
Operationally Define the Behavior
• Objective
• Observable
• Measurable
•addressing Frequency, Duration and
Intensity
Operationally Defining Behavior
(Target behavior) ________________ means that the
student (action verbs) ______________________ .
Examples of the behavior include:
1) _____________________________
2) _____________________________
3) _____________________________
Non-examples of the behavior include:
1) _____________________________
2) _____________________________
3) _____________________________
Analyze the Problem
The Use of a Scientific Method of Hypothesis-driven
Questioning and Answer Seeking
• Why is this problem situation occurring?
• What factors (student characteristics, classroom/school
environment, teacher/learner interaction, curriculum, peer
relations, home and/or community issues) are contributing to
the mismatch that exists between actual and desired levels of
performance for each problem?
Develop and Implement
Interventions
What are interventions?
 Planned strategies designed to change
(improve) the behavior of a specific learner
 Includes the documenting and analyzing of
data
Monitor Interventions: Progress Monitoring
 Systematic procedure for the frequent and
repeated collection and analysis of student
performance data
 It may be used to monitor any academic or nonacademic behavior
 It allows for the examination of student
performance across time to evaluate intervention
effectiveness
EXAMPLE: “MARCO”
Marco is in fifth grade. He was retained in kindergarten.
Often he tells the teacher he doesn’t care about school.
Marco has been earning D’s and F’s in all subjects.
In 1st through 4th grades Marco earned B’s, C’s and D’s. He
usually did better in Math and Science. Reading and
Language Arts were always the most difficult.
Marco has two older brothers and a younger sister in third
grade. The brothers have a history of poor school
attendance and poor school performance, however his
sister typically earns B’s and C’s.
“MARCO”
Assistance
Problem Solving
Using a
Process

Identify the Concern/Define the Problem

Analyze the Problem

Develop and Implement an Intervention

Monitor and Evaluate the Intervention
“MARCO”
Identify the Concern
Marco is not performing as expected in
class. He is expected to earn C’s or above
in all subjects at the 5th grade level.
Marco is earning D’s and F’s.
“MARCO”
Defining the Problem:
Not performing in class as expected means
a) Marco is completing less than 100% of his
paper and pencil classroom assignments,
quizzes and tests
b) He is scoring at less than 70% accuracy
“MARCO”
-Narrow the Focus (Examine the Data) -
Examples of Target Behavior:
1. He has completed 8 of the last 16 in-class assignments
2. Of the last 12 in-class assignments he has completed 3/4 of the
work leaving 1/4 not completed
3. On the past 3 tests and 6 quizzes he has earned an average of 65%
accuracy - on the tests he averaged leaving seven items blank and on the quizzes
he left an average of four items blank
Non-examples include:
- lack of homework completion
- performance in small group work
- in-class assignments in which there is not sufficient time to complete work
“MARCO”
Analyze the Problem
Factor #1
Student Characteristics
- language, cognitive, health,
self-perception, behavior/motivation
The records reflect average-to-above grades through 4th grade and group test
scores ranging from the 25th to 65th percentile. The teacher and students fully
understand Marco when speaks and he appears to completely understand others.
Health records reflect no concerns. There is a question about how he feels about
himself and his motivation. - The team agrees to gather more information by
interviewing Marco.
“MARCO”
Analyze the Problem
Factor #2
Classroom/School
Environment
- physical arrangements, instructional setting, presence
and/or absence of resources, professional expertise
There are 23 students in the classroom with a classroom aide helping with three
“lower functioning” students. She also helps others in the class depending on the
situation. The teacher has ten years of experience and has successfully worked
with other students in the past with a background similar to Marco’s. - No
concerns.
“MARCO”
Analyze the Problem
Factor #3
Teaching/Learning
Interaction
- teacher expectations, presentation style, instructional
routine
The school psychologist has observed in the classroom numerous times. She
reports that Marco consistently follows along and is attentive. The teacher notes
that her classroom expectations are consistent with district specified grade level
learning objectives. She mentions that all the other students are “keeping pace”. This is not an identified area of concern.
“MARCO”
Analyze the Problem
Factor #4
Curriculum
- subjects, types of tasks, curricular expectations
The teacher notes Marco performed better in the first quarter, his poorer
performance started at the beginning of the second quarter. The curriculum is no
longer review, it has gotten more challenging. She believes it now may be too
hard for Marco. This leads the team to a hypothesis. - If the curriculum is modified
Marco will complete all his in-class work with 70% or higher accuracy.
“MARCO”
Analyze the Problem
Factor #5
Peer Relations
The classroom teacher reports that she has observed Marco interacting
age-appropriately with many other students. The playground supervisor
notes Marco plays well with other boys at recess. - Not an area of
concern.
“MARCO”
Analyze the Problem
Factor #6
Home and/or
Community Issues
There are questions about support and assistance and home. There are
further concerns about possible negative influence by older brothers. The
team determines these are secondary issues and will not address them at
this time.
“MARCO”
Develop and Implement an Intervention
What to do next:
1. The school social worker will speak with Marco during the next week. She will interview
him trying to better understand his feelings about himself and his performance at school.
She will determine what kind of correlation exists between his thoughts and feelings related
to this and his school performance.
2. The special education teacher and school psychologist will meet with the classroom teacher
during the next week to modify the math and language arts curriculum (the teacher
prioritized these two are
INTERVENTION:
After math and language arts are modified, the teacher will instruct Marco using
these modifications.
“MARCO”
Monitor and Evaluate the Intervention
Monitor
 In-class paper and pencil tasks
 Quizzes
 Tests
 Amount completed
 % Correct
NEXT STEPS
After reviewing the data from the interventions the
team will determine:
a) It’s working - continue
b) It’s sort of working - refine it and continue
c) It’s not working - analyze why, consider other
hypotheses and develop a different intervention
d) It’s not working - there are no other reasonable
hypotheses and/or resources to assist, so consider
other programs/services
What To Do With Egbert??





1st Grade, falling behind in reading
Slow progress compared to peers
Likely to miss benchmarks related to
passing 3rd Grade reading test
Distractible, inattentive, disruptive
Sound Familiar
Graph Current Status
Class
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Goal
Egbert
80
60
40
Class=24
20
Egbert=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
12
14
16
18
20
Determine Goal: Class=1.5 wd growth per
week; Egbert Goal: 2 wd growth per week
Class
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Goal
80
60
Class Growth
40
Class=24
20
Egbert=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
Egbert goal line
12
14
16
18
20
Monitor Egbert’s Progress Relative to Goal
Class
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Goal
Egbert
80
60
Class Growth
40
Class=24
20
Egbert=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
Egbert goal line
12
14
16
18
20
Formative Evaluation: Change Intervention
Class
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Goal
Egbert
Change
Intervention
80
60
Class Growth
40
Class=24
20
Egbert=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
Egbert goal line
12
14
16
18
20
Continue Intervention and Monitor Progress
Class
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Goal
Egbert
Change
Intervention
80
60
Class Growth
40
Class=24
20
Egbert=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
Egbert goal line
12
14
16
18
20
Raise Goal to 2.5 WCM Growth
Class
Goal
Egbert
Goal 2
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Change
Intervention
Change Goal
80
60
Class Growth
40
Class=24
20
Egbert=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
Egbert goal line
12
14
16
18
20
Continue Intervention and Monitor Progress
Class
Goal
Egbert
Goal 2
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Change
Intervention
Change Goal
80
Discontinue Tier II
60
Class Growth
40
Class=24
20
Egbert=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
Egbert goal line
12
14
16
18
20
Decisions Re: Egbert



Fade Tier II academic intervention
 Reduce number of weekly sessions
 Monitor progress to ensure continued
progress
Evaluate behavioral intervention (not shown
here)
 Depending on results, consider
enhancing, fading, or discontinuing
Do NOT consider more intensive
interventions
Case II: Egberta, Academic Intervention

Egberta (Egbert’s twin sister)
 Similar performance in reading
 No behavioral issues, described as quiet,
cooperative child who tries hard and does
not disrupt the class
 Would not have been referred by teacher,
but discovered through universal
screening
Words Correct Per Minute
Egberta: Determine Goal: Class=1.5 wd growth per
week; Egberta Goal: 2 wd growth per week
Class
100
Goal
80
60
Class Growth
40
Class=24
20
Egberta=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
Egberta goal line
12
14
16
18
20
Monitor Egberta’s Progress Relative to Goal
Class
Goal
Egberta
Words Correct Per Minute
100
80
60
Class Growth
40
Class=24
20
Egberta=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
Egberta goal line
12
14
16
18
20
Change Egberta’s Intervention
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Class
Goal
Egberta
Change
Intervention
80
60
Class Growth
40
Class=24
20
Egberta=11
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
Egberta goal line
12
14
16
18
20
Implement Revised Intervention and
Continue to Monitor Progress
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Change
Intervention
Class
Goal
Egberta
80
60
Class Growth
40
20
Egberta goal line
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
12
14
16
18
20
Implement Second Intervention Revision
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Class
Goal
Egberta
Change
Intervention
80
60
Class Growth
40
20
Egberta goal line
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
12
14
16
18
20
Gap Not Closing: Consider Eligibility
and More Intensive Interventions
Change
Intervention
Words Correct Per Minute
100
Class
Goal
Egberta
80
Class
WCM=54
60
Class Growth
40
20
Egberta
WCM=32
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Weeks
12
14
16
18
20
It isn't where you came from; it's where
you're going that counts.
Ella Fitzgerald