Transcript Secondary RtI Implementation: Diving in a Little Deeper

Maximizing Student Outcomes
Through the Development of a
Multi-Tiered Student Support System
Rebecca Sarlo, Ph.D.
Secondary RtI Coordinator
Shelby Robertson, Ph.D
Secondary RtI Math Specialist
Pam Sudduth, MA
Secondary RtI Literacy Specialist
Florida PS/RtI State Implementation Project
Objectives
Participants will leave with:
• Knowledge of specific key infrastructure
components necessary for full PS/RtI
implementation at the secondary level.
• Strategies and plans for developing these key
infrastructure pieces to best support PS/RtI
implementation within their district/school
• An expanded network of other secondary
educators who can serve as a regional PS/RtI
professional learning community.
Topics
• Effective team development, processes, and
organization.
• Building consensus with all stakeholder groups.
• Utilizing EWS data to identify students and/or
systems in need of intervention.
• Strategies for including all stakeholders in the
identification of barriers and the planning of
interventions
• Selecting and scheduling interventions.
Critical Elements of an RtI Model

School-Based Leadership Team (SBLT)







Principal involvement is critical
Problem-Solving
Multi-Tiered System of Supports
Data Based Decision Making (Progress
Monitoring, Formative, Diagnostic, Summative)
Schedules to Support Multi-Tier System
Instructional/Intervention Fidelity
Student/Parent Involvement
Middle- and High-School
Application of RtI



SAME critical components should be present K-12
Implementation of the critical components will
look different at the middle-and high-school levels
The differences are influenced by organizational
structure, focus on content and credits, and the
logistics of scheduling
Areas of “Same” and
“Different” At the Secondary Level
Same
 Problem-Solving Process
 School-Based Leadership
Teams
 Data Days to Evaluate
“Health and Wellness”
 Data Based Decisions
 Multi-Tiered System
 Importance of Fidelity
Different
 Monitor Skills AND
Content
 Types of data
 Schedule Development
 Integration of the Tiers
 Student Involvement
 Monitoring of Fidelity
Some “Givens”




Middle- and High-School teams “inherit” the
strengths and weaknesses (and Gaps) students bring
to the level
Successful high school performance begins with
kindergarten
Most successful high school “intervention” is to
ensure that students enter with as much strength as
possible
The best high-school “screening” tool is the
compilation of data in K-8
Some “Givens”



Vertical Programming—articulation K-12- is the
most effective way of ensuring that students are
prepared for high school
Middle- and High-School staff should know student
needs at least 6-9 months ahead of time.
An agreed upon “method” of vertical
communication of student data/needs—that leads to
vertical programming– is critical
Secondary School Dilemma



Deadly combination
 Poor Skill Development
 Limited or No Productivity (work completed,
practice)
How do you remediate gaps AND provide students
with access to content simultaneously?
How do you sustain student engagement when skill
gaps are significant?
Let's Chat


How has your district’s training in PS/RtI, as it
relates to elementary school implementation,
prepared you for implementation at the
secondary school level?
What additional training/supports will your
secondary schools need to fully implement a
PS/RtI framework?
Developing effective team
structures, processes, and
communication plans
Three Cornerstones of
Productive Collaboration
People
Tasks
Process
Conzemius, A. & O’Neill, J. (2002). The Handbook for SMART School Teams
Let's Chat



Review the “purpose”, “people”, “tasks, and
“process” scenario slips
As a group, determine to which school team
the scenario best aligns (i.e., leadership,
content/engagement teams, specialist
teams)
Post your scenario on the appropriate team
poster
School Based Leadership Team
 Purpose: Establish and monitor the school-wide learning and development
goals, the instructional/intervention plans (tier 1 and 2) developed to achieve
goals, and allocate the resources needed to fully implement
instructional/intervention plans with fidelity.
 Activities:







Determine school-wide learning and development areas in need of improvement
Identify barriers which have or could prohibit school from meeting improvement goals
Develop action plans to meet school improvement goals (e.g., SIP)
Distribute and assign resources to implement plans
Monitor fidelity and effectiveness of core and tier 2 instruction
Manage and coordinate efforts between all school teams
Support the problem solving efforts of other school teams
 Avoid:
Individual student progress monitoring
Meeting without a clear agenda or goals
Making decisions without input from key stakeholder groups
Developing action plans without communicating the purpose, goals, and responsibilities to other
stakeholders
 Delegating school-wide action planning responsibilities to teams with less decision making power or
control over resource allocation




Recommended SBLT Meeting
Schedule
 Meet Weekly
 60 to 90 minute meeting times
 Utilize a revolving schedule to make sure that major goal
areas are addressed at least once per month
 Example
 Week 1: Reading and Writing
 Week 2: Mathematics
 Week 3: Attendance and Behavior
 Week 4: 9th Grade Cohort or 12th Grade Cohort
Team Membership
 Selection of team members should aim at creating a well-
rounded team with specific skill sets represented
 Critical skills needed for effective team functioning include:
 Instructional leadership
 Data management and analysis
 Content specialization (minimally Reading, Math, Behavior)
 Student advisement, mentoring, and guidance
 Knowledge of evidence-based instruction/intervention
 Exceptional Student Education specialist
 English Language Leaning specialist (if warranted by population)
 Parent/Community involvement strategies
Content/Engagement Area Teams
 Grade Level Teams
 Department Level Teams
 Content Area Teams
 Course Alike Teams
 Behavior/Positive Behavior Support Team
 Attendance Team
 Literacy Leadership Team
 Administrative Team
 Coaching Team
 Etc., Etc., Etc.
Content/Engagement Area Teams
 Purpose: Implement instructional/intervention plans with fidelity to
achieve established content/engagement area goals utilizing the allocated
resources while monitoring student response to instruction/intervention
 Activities:
 Review and analyze student data to build consensus around the content/engagement area goals
 Discuss identified barriers and provide feedback to leadership team
 Review action plans and provide feedback to leadership team
 Implement action plans with fidelity
 Collect and analyze student data to determine student response to intervention
 Recommend programming changes to leadership team as necessary
 Engage in professional development which allows for continuous improvement
 Avoid:
 Implementing action plans without understanding their purpose, goals and assigned responsibilities
 Individual student intervention planning
 Meeting without a clear agenda or goals
 Making changes to instructional/intervention plans without communicating with the leadership team
 Implementing action plans without monitoring the impact on student learning and development
The effectiveness of Content/Engagement Area
teams will be maximized when the members…




Share clear goals for students (focus) which are tied
to the School Improvement Plan
Collaborate and perceive a collective responsibility
for achieving goals (collaboration)
Engage in professional inquiry to address the
challenges they face (reflection)
Have opportunities to influence the school’s
activities and policies (leadership capacity)
Specialist Teams
 Purpose: Identify barriers to academic/developmental progress for
individual students, implement individualized intervention plans with
fidelity to achieve established goals while monitoring each student’s
response to intervention
 Activities:





Meet with specialists, teachers, and parent to identify barriers to individual student progress
Develop individualized action plans to address identified barriers to meeting core goals.
Implement intervention plans with fidelity
Collect and analyze student data to determine the student’s response to intervention
Make adjustments to intervention plans as indicated by the student data
 Avoid:




Developing action plans without clear purpose, goals and assigned responsibilities
Developing action plans without the direct involvement of the parent and student
Developing action plans which are not aligned with core expectations and goals
Implementing action plans without monitoring the impact on student learning and development
People: Determine Roles and
Responsibilities
All school teams are problem solving teams and will
benefit from members with the following skills/roles:
 Coordinator
 Meeting Facilitator
 Content Specialists
 Behavior Specialist
 Resource Specialists
 Data Analyst
 Time Keeper
 Recorder
 Consultant
Conzemius, A. & O’Neill, J. (2002). The Handbook for SMART School Teams
Process: Developing a Way of Work
SAME
 Both the Leadership Team and other school teams utilize the problem
solving process to plan, implement, and monitor
instruction/intervention
 All teams communicate with each other to ensure consistency and
cohesion (typically through shared membership and formal
communication plan)
DIFFERENT
 Focus of problem solving
 Leadership Team- focus heavily on Tier 1 issues, allocate resources for
Tier 2 intervention, and monitor the impact of both.
 Content/Engagement Area Teams- focus on implementing Tier 1
instruction, planning and implementing Tier 2 interventions and
monitoring the effectiveness of instruction/intervention.
 Specialist Teams- focus on designing, implementing, and monitoring Tier
3 intervention plans.
Process: Developing a Way of Work
To work within a PS/RtI Framework ALL teams need:
 Ready access to student academic and behavior data
 To be skilled in managing student data (e.g., data collection, data
entry, graphing of group and/or individual student data)
 To be skilled in the problem solving process
 Knowledge of research-based instructional/intervention strategies
Let's Chat
Understanding your current SBLT
structure…
 Reflecting on your current SBLT, are all of the skills critical to
working within a PS/RtI framework present on your team?
 If not, which components are missing?
 What are the implications of the missing skill sets?
 Are all key stakeholder groups represented on the team or
consulted on a regular basis (e.g., students, parents, teachers)?
 Is the team meeting regularly enough to maintain momentum
and provide timely monitoring and feedback to staff and
students?
 Are team processes clearly articulated so that team meetings
run efficiently and accomplish the pre-set goals?
Calendar
Schedule:
 SBLT Meetings
 Grade-/Department-Level Meetings
 Data Days (Minimum of 3 per year)
 Professional Development and Support
 Outcome Sharing Events (Communication and
Celebration)
Find and Make Time to Collaborate
Reduce the aggregate time spent in meetings by identifying and
collapsing teams which have the same purpose
Protect Scheduled Time:
 Begin and end on time
 Set and stick to agendas
 Complete all preparation activities prior to coming together
 Make sure all the right people are at the table
 Focus only on the “essential few” goals
Team/Meeting Mapping Activity
and Table Talk
Complete the Meeting Map and discuss the following:
1. In an average month, how many minutes are spent in meetings?
2. Were there any teams/committees with overlapping purpose?
Circle or highlight them.
3. Across identified teams with overlapping purpose, how many
members do they have in common?
4. Given the overlap, what actions can be taken to align/merge
teams?
5. What infrastructure can be built for communication between
remaining teams?
Why?
Change initiatives crucial to
organizational success, fail 70% of the
time.
(Miller, 2002)
Overcoming Resistance and
Building Consensus
Mission Statement:
Ridgewood High School
Ridgewood High School creates a
sound educational environment that
provides all students the opportunity
to develop their individual talents, to
meet and exceed graduation
requirements, and to become
productive citizens in an increasingly
complex and global society
Mission Statement:
Ridgewood High School
Ridgewood High School creates a
sound educational environment that
provides all students the opportunity
to develop their individual talents, to
meet and exceed graduation
requirements, and to become
productive citizens in an increasingly
complex and global society
Mission Statement:
Ridgewood High School
Ridgewood High School creates a sound
educational environment that provides
all students the skills and habits of mind
to meet and exceed graduation
requirements and to become productive
citizens in an increasingly complex and
global society
All RHS
8%
4%
On Track
At Risk
Off Track
15%
High Risk
Extremely off Track
14%
59%
Consensus Building in
Secondary Schools
 The “Compelling Why” of RtI Implementation is different for
Secondary Schools
 Consensus is more difficult to develop at the secondary level
where most personnel are content specific and generally
most interested only in their own content area
 Even cross-content problems (e.g., student literacy) do not
typically constitute a strong enough hook to build consensus
around the need for RtI Implementation
 For behavior, there is often an expectation that students
should already know how to behave and thus behavioral
problems warrant discipline not intervention
The Power of Common
Vision and Data
 Developing an Early Warning System will assist schools in
establishing a need for early identification of at-risk students,
tiered intervention, progress monitoring, and data-based
decision making
 This approach will help to unite all staff members around a single goal
(i.e., graduation) and emphasize the importance of all team members
 Consensus building often begins by redefining the mission of
the school to include graduation for all students.
 Redefining Middle School’s mission to include preparing
students to successfully complete high school will help to
strengthen vertical articulation and the effectiveness of feeder
patterns
What are Early Warning Systems?
Systems which:
 Utilize routinely available data housed at the school
 Help identify students at-risk for dropping out utilizing highly
predictive data
 Allow districts and schools to target interventions that support off-
track or at-risk students while they are still in school
 Allow districts and schools to uncover patterns and root causes that
contribute to disproportionate drop-out rates at a particular school or
within a particular group of students
What we know…
 The best predictor of future failure is current failure and
disengagement
 Identifying at-risk secondary students does not typically require
additional Universal Screening measures beyond a review of
existing data
 Assessment resources are better spent understanding why are or typically
become off-track for graduation
 Assessing risk across multiple variables allows teams to provide
early intervention and prevent disengagement from school and
course failures
 At-risk and off-track students are identified through analyzing a
combination of engagement and academic data.
Let’s Look At An Example…
Dropout Early Warning Indicators
Disengagement
 Most students dropout mentally before ever physically leaving
the school
 A lack of engagement with school is a precursor to dropping
out
 Indicators of disengagement:
 Academic Indicators of Disengagement
 Behavioral Indicators of Disengagement
 Social-Psychological Indicators of Disengagement
 Disengagement is the most powerful predictor of risk at the
middle school level
“The Rich Get Richer”
Time Spent
Academically
Engaged
Feelings of
Connection and
Identification w/
School
Successful
Performance
Participation in
School Activities
Perceive more
teacher and
peer support
Feelings of
competence
and control
Dropout Early Warning Indicators
Middle School Indicators
 School systems should focus on dropout prevention efforts in the
beginning of the middle grades
6th grade indicators
 Attend school less than 80% of the time
 Receive a low final grade for behavior
 Fail either math or English
 8th grade indicators
 Miss 5 or more weeks of school during a year
 Fail math or English
 Retention
 64% of students repeating a grade in elementary school
eventually drop out
 63% of students held back in middle school eventually drop
out
Kennelly & Monrad, 2007

Dropout Early Warning Indicators
High School Indicators
 9th grade is a “make or break” year
 More students fail 9th grade than any other grade level
 9th grade failure is the biggest risk factor for high school drop
out
 Powerful early signs of dropout are evident during the first
semester and year of high school (even within the first 20 school
days
 Early intervention has proven effective for maintaining students
in school
Dropout Early Warning Indicators
Attendance
 Missing more than 10% of instructional time is significant
 Translates to roughly 10 days of school per semester in most high
schools
 Students who miss more than 10% of the first 20 days of school
(2 days) are particularly at-risk for high school dropout
 Any student missing more than 10% of instructional time (at
20 day mark or at each quarter) should be flagged for
intervention
Dropout Early Warning Indicators
Course Performance Indicators
 Course grades and failure rates are highly predictive of which
students will or will not graduate from high school.
 Students who fail one or more courses in the fall semester of
their first year of high school are significantly more likely to
eventually drop out
 85% of students with 0 semester failures in their freshmen year
graduated in 4 years
 70% of students with 1 semester F during 9th grade graduate in 4 years
 Only 55% of students with 2 semester Fs in 9th grade graduated in 4
years
 Students with 3 or more semester Fs are not likely to graduate from high
school
Middle School
Early Warning Systems
 Identify all students who miss more than 20% of the available
instructional time
and/or
 Identify students through engagement scales or operationalized
behavior indicators
 Identify all students who fail their math course
 Identify all students who fail their English course
 Flag students who display both engagement and academic failure as
high risk
High School
Early Warning Systems
Academic indicators
 GPA less than 2.0
 Failed Courses
 Behind in Credits
Engagement indicators
 Attend school less than 80% of the time
 Consistently miss instruction due to behavioral issues
 Psychological or Social disengagement
 Lack of peer group
 Lack of involvement in school extracurricular activities
 Low educational expectations
 Lack of personal relationship with adults at school
Retention
 Retained 1 or more years
Mobility
 Multiple schools during educational career
Extreme Off Track
2-3 Years Behind
No chance for graduation in a
traditional school setting
Disengagement
Risk Factors:
1. Disengagement
•20% absenteeism
2. Behind in Credits
•Particularly Core
Course Failures
3. GPA less than 2.0
4. Failed FCAT
High Off Track
3 or more risk factors
Off Track
2 of 4 risk factors indicated
Students entering with 20%
absenteeism and/or 2 or more
F’s in 8th Grade
At Risk for Off Track
1 of 4 risk factors indicated
On Track
No risk factors indicated
Hendry County Schools
Extreme Off Track
2-3 Years Behind
No chance for graduation in a
st
1 Semester
traditional school setting
Disengagement
09-10 < 3 Credits
High Off Track
Lacking 2 or more graduation requirements
08-09 < 9 Credits
Behind 4 or more Credits
Currently failing 3 or more classes
07-08 <15 Credits
Excessive Referrals and/or Absences
Off Track
06-07 < 21 Credits
Lacking 2 graduation requirements
Behind 1-3 Credits
10% Absences
3 or less Level 2 referrals or 2 Level 3 Referrals
9th graders indentified “at high risk” (3 F’s in
8th grade)
At Risk for Off Track
Lacking 1 of 3 Graduation requirements
< 5%Absences
3 or less Level 1 or 2 referrals
Example: Credits
Earned
On Track
Exceeding or Meeting all graduation requirements (Credits, FCAT Score,
GPA)
6 or less Absences
Pasco County Schools
No referrals
Ridgewood High School Semester 1 EWS Data
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
Grad Plan 07-08
0.00%
Grad Plan 08-09
On Track
At Risk
Grad Plan 09-10
Off Track
High Risk
Extremely off
Track
Early Warning Systems Data
12th Grade"
80%
11th Grade
60%
10th Grade
40%
9th Grade
20%
9th Grade
Grade 9
On Track:
348
At Risk: 39
Off Track: 53
Dropout: 0%
off-track
on-track
0%
Grade 10
On Track:
147
At Risk: 53
Off Track:
157
Dropout: 1%
12th Grade"
Grade 11
On Track:
150
At Risk: 27
Off Track: 95
Dropout: 8%
Grade 12
On Track:
200
At Risk: 26
Off Track: 49
Dropout: 6%
Moving From Students to Systems
in Need of Intervention
Targeted School Example: Percent of Students Failing by Course
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
English 1- 83 students (20%)
Algebra 1- 152 students (37%)
Intensive Math- 78 students (19%)
Reading- 63 students (16%)
English 2- 111 students (32%)
Biology 1- 101 students (29%)
World History- 87 students (25%)
Reading 2- 70 students (20%)
English 3- 96 students (25%)
Marine Science- 67 students (17%)
Early Warning Systems Data
Targeted School Example
52.8% (210) of last year's 9th graders are off-track
for graduation
• 19% (75) are off-track due to failed FCAT, Credits and GPA
• 13% (52) of exiting 9th graders failed 3 or more courses
o
o
o
Almost all of these students are part of the lowest 25%
Many of these students will count in the total graduation and at-risk
graduation rates
These students have less than a 15% chance of graduating without
significant intervention
Course Failures
• Algebra 1 - 43.5%
• Spanish 1 - 45%
• World History- 29%
• English 1 - 28%
• Hope (Health and PE) - 58 students- 17%
Using Early Warning Systems
to Target Interventions
Courses which result in 20% or higher failure rates should be identified so
that Leadership Teams can provide targeted intervention to these
classrooms and the students within them






increasing available instructional time and personnel support within the
classrooms
providing tutoring and course recovery options outside of the classroom
It is not enough to simply identify at-risk students, leadership teams must
follow identification with effective and appropriate dropout-prevention
strategies
Schools should develop a continuum of intervention supports which are
readily accessible as soon as a student is indicated as at-risk or off-track
Creating a comprehensive prevention/intervention program which
addresses academic, behavioral, and social-psychological disengagement as
indicated by data is critical
Using Early Warning Systems to
Monitor Progress
 The indicators in the Early Warning System can continue to be
used to monitor the progress of students participating in
prevention and intervention services
 Interventions should be considered effective for students who
move back on-track or remain on-track for graduation
 Students who continue to be identified as off-track for
graduation may require more intense drop out prevention
interventions.
Using Early Warning Systems to
Monitor Progress
 Data is used to determine not only the response of students to
intervention but ultimately how responsive the system is to
students’ needs.
 Effectiveness of core instruction/curriculum/environment
 Timely data-informed scheduling
 Effectiveness of transition (6th and 9th grade) supports
 Effectiveness of intervention courses/programs
 Is there a need for more and more or less and less intervention classes?
 Do intervention courses improve the outcomes for students in core
content courses?
Table Talk
•How could the implementation of an early
warning system improve your school’s ability
to provide timely intervention services to students?
•How could your school utilize early warning system
data to promote and guide vertical articulation?
Including all stakeholders in the
identification of barriers
Data Chats
 Data chats between administrators and teachers should occur at least
quarterly to:
 Set and monitor student outcome goals
 Problem Solve barriers to achievement such as skill deficits and behavior
or attendance problems
 Identify the professional development and resource needs of teachers
 Building consensus with secondary students is facilitated by frequent data
chats which focus on their progress:
 In specific courses,
 On state assessments, and
 Toward graduation
Relate data chats to the student’s personal goals
Utilizing data to identify students and/or
systems in need of intervention
1) District to School
2)Administration to Teacher
3)Teacher to Student
4)Teacher and Student to Parent
Involving Students is VITAL!
 Secondary students must be involved in the identification
of barriers and as much as possible in the selection of
strategies to address barriers
 Effort spent personalizing instruction/intervention is
typically well spent
 At the very least, secondary students must understand
the “compelling why” of programming changes
Involving Students is VITAL!

Secondary students who understand their current
levels of performance and are active participants in
setting performance goals tend to be more motivated
and engaged in the learning process
Facilitating Problem Analysis

Survey students regarding barriers to their
attendance, engagement, work completion, etc.





All Students or a Subset of students (e.g., at-risk)
Survey Monkey
Open ended
Multiple Choice
Hold focus groups with at-risk and high performing
students to identify barriers and potential strategies
for addressing the barriers.
Problem Analysis
Targeted School Compilation
Percent Indicating Barrier to Attendance
80%
70%
60%
Percent
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Student
Motivation
Authentic
Engagement
Academic
Issues
Relationships Operational
Issues
Barrier
Teachers
Students
Peer Issues
Parent
Support
Don’t Assume--Go to the Sources!


School assumed that source of dropout/underachievement
problems were a lack of family support and a lack of future
aspirations and goals
Students showed strong agreement with all of the following
items
25. When I do well in school it’s because I work hard.
1. My family/guardian(s) are there for me when I need them.
11.
29.
30.
17.
19.
8.
Going to school after high school is important.
My family/guardian(s) want me to keep trying when things are tough at school.
I am hopeful about my future.
I plan to continue my education following high school.
School is important for achieving my future goals.
My education will create many future opportunities for me.
Don’t Assume--Go to the Sources!


School principal also spoke regularly of his commitment to
developing a family/community climate at his school and in
fact felt strongly that the goal had already been accomplished
Students showed strong disagreement with all of the
following items
5. Adults at my school listen to the students.
10. The school rules are fair.
21. Overall adults at my school treat students fairly.
14. Students here respect what I have to say.
6. Other students here care about me.
13. Most teachers at my school are interested in me as a person, not just as a student.
7. Students at my school are there for me when I need them.
3. My teachers are there for me when I need them.
28. I feel like I have a say about what happens to me at school.
2. After finishing my schoolwork I check it over to see if it’s correct.
27. I feel safe at school.
Facilitating Problem Analysis


Secondary school staff typically require significant
support for problem analysis in order to move past
student motivation and parent involvement barriers
Without this shift in thinking, school staff often feel
helpless in improving student outcomes




Consensus wanes
Fidelity suffers
Data collection and analysis become less frequent and less
valid
Developing effective intervention plans is dependent
upon a team’s ability to take a transparent look at
the instructional, curricular, and environmental
barriers to student engagement and achievement
Facilitating Problem Analysis

Research instructional, curricular, and
environmental variables related to student
engagement.



Engaging Schools: Fostering High School Students’
Motivation to Learn—National Research Council.
Many excellent research articles available online
Always come back to the question:

“If student motivation is a significant problem, what
changes to our instruction, curriculum, and environment
could we make to improve student motivation and
learning outcomes?”
Selecting and scheduling
interventions
Every System Is Perfectly
Aligned for the Results
That It Gets
What Does this Data Seem to Tell Us?
Percent of Proficient Readers
“Low” Performing High School
100%
90%
Without significant organizational
changes, the school should
expect
approx. 68% of its students
to need support in Reading
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1
2
3
4
5
Year
Percent of Proficient Readers
“High” Performing High School
100%
90%
Without significant organizational
changes, the school should
expect
approx. 28% of its students
to need support in Reading
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1
2
3
Year
4
5
What Does this Data Seem to Tell Us?
“Low” Performing High School
Percent of Students with
Excessive Absenteeism
Without significant organizational
changes, the school should
expect
approx. 40% of its students to
demonstrate disengagement by
missing school
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
1
2
3
4
5
Percent of Students with
Excessive Absenteeism
“High” Performing High School
100%
Without significant organizational
changes, the school should
expect
approx. 21% of its students to
demonstrate disengagement by
missing school
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
1
2
3
4
5
Confronting the question,
”How will we respond
when our students don’t learn?”
requires…
a school-wide plan
that guarantees students
the time and support they need
regardless
of who their teachers are.
The Reality of Secondary
Multi-Tiered Systems
 Most interventions provided within secondary schools are invitational,
provided after school or during lunch, and are rarely accessed by students
who really need them
 Interventions provided within the master schedule (e.g., remedial
math/reading) are often not aligned with core instruction and do not result
in better student outcomes within core content classes
 Example: 60% of students enrolled in remedial math course and Algebra 1
fail their Algebra 1 course
 Intervention courses are often treated as their own independent content class
or as an FCAT prep class
 Intervention teachers and core course teachers communicate infrequently
or not at all and virtually never plan together
Developing Effective
Multi-Tiered Systems
 Tiering of instruction/intervention relies on flexible scheduling
 Struggling or at-risk students likely need smaller class sizes and more
time to master grade level standards.
 Schools should develop a continuum of intervention supports which are
readily accessible as soon as a student is indicated as at-risk or off-track
 Dropout prevention strategies which focus on improving school climate,
academic rigor, and student support and monitoring have been found to
reduce dropout rates by as much as 50%
 Freshman with weak academics entering high school who reported having
a positive 9th grade year were almost twice as likely to graduate from high
school than students who entered with strong academics but reported a
negative 9th grade academic experience
Always Begin with TIER I: Core
Effective interventions must be
built on a solid foundation of
effective core instruction
School and district resources
should be directed first and
foremost to improve Tier 1 core
instruction
We CANNOT intervene our
way out of a core instructional
problem
This approach leads only to
overtaxed intervention
providers and diluted,
ineffective intervention
programs
96
Supplemental Intervention
Disengaged learners
 Mentoring programs
Failed Learners
 Targeted, differentiated
 Goal Setting & career





planning support
Frequent progress reports
Targeted rewards
Mandatory study hall
Mandatory homework help
Study skills classes




instruction
Additional instructional time
Pre-teach essential skills, content,
and vocabulary
Review/Reteach prerequisite
skills to address the learning gap
Prevention (requires vertical
articulation with
middle/elementary school and
early identification of at-risk
students)
CAUTION: Failed Learners often become disengaged over time and may
require both categories of intervention support
Table Talk
•How does your school currently address student
engagement needs within your academic intervention
classrooms/programs?
•What are the implications of failing to address
engagement needs of your students?
The Key to Intervention Planning
 The most effective interventions are those that are
designed to meet the specific barriers identified.
 Common Mistake: Teams select strategies which are
not directly linked to identified barriers.
 Example of Common Mistake:
 Indicator: Algebra 1 instruction rarely includes modeled
or guided instruction and is comprised primarily of lecture
and independent work.
 Strategy: School provides math tutorials during extended
learning program (ELP).
Intervention Plans to Close
Significant Gaps

Multi-year intervention plan to close gaps

Integration of interventions across all providers

Integration of core content with all interventions


Intervention focused on accelerating learning rate by
teaching to student’s specific skill deficits
Intervention plans will likely need to include strategies
for meeting nonacademic and learning readiness needs of
students (e.g., mentoring, organization, note taking, study
Data-Informed Schedules

Maximize academic engaged time in critical areas

Reflect needs of students

Maximize use of all staff

Ensure time allocated for Tiers 1, 2 and 3

Provide meeting time for tier integration work

Be flexible enough to provide timely intervention
and re-integration
“We should strive for a school
schedule that is flexible enough to
provide more learning time for
students who need it and more
choices for those who don‘t need
more learning time”
Michael Rettig, Ph.D
James Madison University
Intervention/Enrichment Period



One way to increase opportunities to learn and
increase academically engaged time is to add an
Intervention/Enrichment (I/E) Period to the
master schedule
The I/E period allows for directive and timely reteaching and intervention
Makes intervention systemic rather than
dependent on individual teacher initiatives or
referrals
PROS AND CONS OF I/E PERIODS
Cons
Pros
Students
have room in their
schedules for the 2nd elective
Convenient times are
provided to serve resource
students (SPED, ESL, Reading,
etc.)
Convenient times are
provided for re-teaching or
pre-teaching
Students who need more core
get it; those who need more
choice get it
Most
teachers have an
additional prep class (I/E)
 Basic core instructional
blocks are shortened
Planning time is shortened
(5-10 mins.)
All students must be
productively engaged, which
takes careful preparation and
organization
Master Schedule Examples
Gibbs High School
Pinellas County
Ridgewood High School
Pasco County
Promising Secondary Models




Direct a significant amount of resources to critical transition
years (6th and 9th) to prevent academic and behavioral problems
Provide opportunities for mentoring, advisement, and academic
support within the master schedule for all students
Include classes which provide instruction in organization, study
skills, note-taking, problem solving, and communication in the
school’s master schedule
Intensify instruction by providing additional time and
personnel or smaller class sizes for classes which typically result
in high rates of courses failures
Promising Secondary Models



Build time into the school’s master schedule to allow for weekly
common planning/PLC time for content teams and for cross
content teams at least monthly
Intervention teachers plan with core content teachers and align
intervention strategies with core instruction
School leadership team members monitor and participate in the
work of all other school teams
Evaluating the Impact of Our
Instruction and Interventions
Early Warning System Data
84%
90%
75%
80%
71%
72%
Percentage of Students
70%
60%
50%
Grad Plan 11
40%
Grad Plan 10
30%
11%
20%
Grad Plan 09
9%
5%
Grad Plan 08
10%
6%
1%
10%
4%
5%
10%
10%
Grad Plan 08
4%
9%
4%
7%
0%
On Track
2%
At Risk
Off Track
Highly Off
Track
Risk Category
1%
Grad Plan 09
Grad Plan 10
Grad Plan 11
Extremely Off
Track
E.W.S Over Time – Cohort 2007- 08: Seniors
84
90
80
60
70
60
51
50
Jan-10
40
Jul-10
23
30
27
Jan-11
9
5
20
9
1
1
6
10
8
Jan-11
11
2
0
Jul-10
On Track
3
At Risk for off track
Jan-10
Off Track
High Off Track
Extreme Off Track
E.W.S. Over Time - Cohort 2008-09: Juniors
75%
80%
70%
58%
60%
49%
50%
40%
35%
Jan-10
30%
21%
10%
20%
6%
Aug-11
10%
Jan-11
9%
10%
4%
5%
9%
2%
6%
0%
On Track
At Risk
1%
Off Track
Highly Off Track
Jan-11
Aug-11
Jan-10
Extremely Off
Track
E.W.S. Over Time - Cohort 2009-10
71%
80%
65%
70%
62%
60%
50%
40%
Jan-10
30%
Aug-11
11%
20%
14%
10%
15%
8%
10%
Jan-11
4%
14%
4%
6%
5%
Jan-11
7%
0%
On Track
3%
At Risk
Off Track
Highly Off Track
Aug-11
Jan-10
Extremely Off
Track
Percentage of students passing all
classes in Quarter 3
2009-2010
11th - 69%
10th – 62%
9th – 54%
12th – 79%
11th – 76%
10th – 72%
9th – 68%
2010-2011
Percentage of Students Assigned ISS
30%
25%
20%
15%
2009-10 Semester 1
2010-11 Semester 1
10%
2009-10 Quarter 3
2010-11 Quarter 3
5%
0%
9th Students 10th Students 11th Students 12th Students Total Percent
2009-10 Semester 1
27%
24%
20%
13%
21%
2010-11 Semester 1
16%
8%
12%
5%
9%
2009-10 Quarter 3
21%
13%
7%
5%
13%
2010-11 Quarter 3
13%
10%
6%
4%
7%
Number of Students Assigned ISS by Grade (Not Cohort)
180
160
140
120
100
9th Students
80
10th Students
11th Students
60
12th Students
40
20
0
2009-10 Semester 1
2010-11 Semester 1
2009-10 Quarter 3
2010-11 Quarter 3
9th Students
155
38
120
32
10th Students
107
26
57
32
11th Students
88
33
31
16
12th Students
50
19
21
15
1530 Days of Lost Instructional Time
Number of ISS Days Assigned for Quarters 1-3 by Grade
Cohort)
Recouped with(Not
only
Tier 1 Supports
2500
2000
1500
2009-10 Quarters 1-3
2010-11 Quarters 1-3
1000
500
0
2009-10 Quarters 1-3
9th Grade
997
10th Grade
472
11th Grade
304
12th Grade
138
Total
1911
2010-11 Quarters 1-3
119
89
109
64
381
Percentage of Students Assigned OSS by Grade
12%
10%
8%
6%
2009-10 Sem 1
2010-11 Sem 1
2009-10 Quarter 3
4%
2010-11 Quarter 3
2%
0%
2009-10 Sem 1
9th Students
9%
10th Students
11%
11th Students
5%
12th Students
5%
Total
7%
2010-11 Sem 1
9%
6%
7%
2%
6%
2009-10 Quarter 3
7%
4%
3%
1%
4%
2010-11 Quarter 3
7%
2%
1%
2%
3%
of now
Students
Assigned
OSSintervention
by Grade
TheNumber
school is
designing
tiered
60
supports for
this group of students and reviewing their data to determine
missed early warning signs that would have allowed
the school to provide prevention services.
50
40
30
9th Students
10th Students
11th Students
20
12th Students
10
0
9th Students
2009-10 Semester 1
49
2010-11 Semester 1
21
2009-10 Quarter 3
40
2010-11 Quarter 3
17
10th Students
46
19
19
8
11th Students
21
21
10
4
12th Students
21
10
4
6
315
Days
ofDays
Lost
Instructional
Time
Number
of OSS
Assigned
- Quarters 1-3 By
Grade
Cohort)
Recouped as a(Not
Result
of Tier 1 Supports
450
400
350
300
250
2009-10 Quarters 1-3
200
2010-11 Quarters 1-3
150
100
50
0
2009-10 Quarters 1-3
9th Grade
383
10th Grade
256
11th Grade
137
12th Grade
80
2010-11 Quarters 1-3
175
133
147
86
Percentage of students with 5 or more
absences in any period during Quarter
3
2009-2010
11th% - 68%
10th – 75%
9th – 74%
12th – 65%
11th – 78%
10th – 41%
9th – 54%
2010-2011
Program Evaluation
Impact on Graduation Rate
Graduation Rate PM
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
86%
77%
53%
2006
58%
Graduation Rate
2007
2008
2009
More To Come on Secondary PS/RtI



Intensive training on Early Warning Systems
Day 2 training on conducting an Educational System’s Review
and utilizing the process to inform school improvement efforts
Day 3 training on data-informed Master Schedule development
and more effective use of existing schedule to serve students

Educational System’s Review Procedural Guide and Toolkit

Summer Mathematics Institute

Continued technical assistance and dissemination of secondary
MTSSS information
“We can, whenever we choose, successfully
teach ALL children whose schooling is of
interest to us. We already know more than
we need to know to do that. Whether or not
we do it must finally depend on how we feel
about the fact that we haven’t so far.”
~Ron Edmonds, 1982
Thank You!

Rebecca Sarlo, Ph.D.
[email protected]

Shelby Robertson, Ph.D
[email protected]

Pamela Sudduth, MA
[email protected]