Slide 1

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 2

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 3

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 4

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 5

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 6

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 7

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 8

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 9

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 10

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 11

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 12

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 13

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 14

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 15

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 16

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 17

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 18

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 19

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 20

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 21

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 22

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 23

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.


Slide 24

Opportunities and Challenges
with RTI Implementation:
A Secondary Teacher’s
Perspective
Christy Khan
University of Kansas
December 15, 2008
Supported by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. Cooperative agreement #H326E07004.
Project Officers: Grace Durán and Tina Diamond.

Presentation Objectives
• Understand benefits and challenges of
RTI implementation in middle/secondary
schools
• Understand one school’s approach to
effective intervention in a content area
• Discuss how to apply intervention to
your own school

Challenges to Implementing
RTI in Secondary Schools
• Collaboration
• Time
• Shared Underlying
Values
– Every child can respond
to instruction
– Every staff member is
responsive to student
needs

Collaboration in RTI
• Stakeholders
– General education
teachers
– Special education
teachers
– Support staff (e.g.,
reading specialists,
paraprofessionals, school
psychologists, speech
and language
pathologists)
– Administrators
– Parents
– Student

Communication is Key
• General education and special education
teachers
– Regularly share modifications and instructional
techniques
– At primary and secondary prevention levels

• General educators, special educators, and
administration
– Share progress monitoring data to determine
appropriate placement of students

• School staff, parents and students
– Keep well-informed of student progress and
placement

Choosing methods,
programs, and interventions
As a team, review:
• Federal, state, and local district policy
initiatives
• Research in relevant academic areas
• Literature on
– effective schools
– system reform
– effective teaching for diverse students

Fidelity of Implementation
• Ensures all components of RTI
implemented and delivered as intended
• All staff must understand what is
required and included in RTI
• Staff must be assured that the fidelity
process is one of observation and
feedback, NOT evaluation

Benefits of Fidelity of
Implementation
Fidelity of
Implementation

Increased staff
motivation

Increased program
credibility

More consistent
student outcomes

Percentage increase in BVWHS 11th grade
reading assessment scores from 06-07
school year to 07-08 school year

Identify the Area of Need
• Based on data from previous years’
Kansas Reading Assessment scores
• Used “Red, White, and Blue” exercise to
determine indicators needing the most
improvement

Identify the Students
• Based on test scores
– 10th grade MAP scores
– 8th grade Reading Assessment scores

• Targeted students who scored below 50%
RIT on MAP scores

• Cross-referenced with SPED, 504, and
Reading Strategies enrollment

Met as 11th Grade PLC Team
Entire day – all members present
•
•
•
•

What do we want students to learn?
How do we know if they learned it?
What do we do with kids who don’t get it?
What do we do with kids who already know
it?

What do we want students to
learn?
• Aligned with standards and benchmarks
• Determined indicators already taught in
curriculum
• Determined sequence of remaining
skills to be emphasized

How do we know if they
learned it?
• Implement “Friday Reads” for 6 weeks
prior to State Assessment
– Developed from released practice exams

• Each test assessed 2-4 indicators
• Students required to score 80% or
higher

What do we do with
kids who don’t get it?
• Tuesday JAG Intervention
– 45 minutes
– Re-teach/review target skills
– Offer additional practice

• Thursday JAG Intervention
– 20-30 minutes
– Re-test target skills

• SPED and Reading Strategies classes also
focused on target skills

What do we do with kids who
know it already?
• Did not have to attend intervention
– Determined on a week-by-week basis

• Students who met standard (regular) or
above standard (AP) on state
assessment were exempt from final
exam in CA

Proposal
•
•
•
•

What we wanted to do
Resources needed
People needed
Time required

Keys to Success
• Teacher buy-in
• Common formative assessments
• Administrative support
– Classroom coverage

•
•
•
•
•

JAG Time
Mastery Manager
Database
Teacher Aides
Money for treats

Most of all…
• Quick turnaround of assessment data
• COMMUNICATION to all parties
involved
– Students
– Teachers
– Administrators
– Parents

Next Steps
• Expand intervention to all year
– “Friday Reads” every 3 weeks 1st Semester
– Weekly during 3rd Quarter

• Develop “Friday Reads” at all grade
levels
– Build on skills previously assessed

Challenges to Fidelity
• Change in personnel
• Time to prepare
• Training for staff

Q&A
• Contact Information:
– Christy Khan, NBCT, M.S.Ed.
The University of Kansas
[email protected]

References
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising
standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan,
80(2), 139-148.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging
alternative. Exceptional Children, 52(3), 219-232.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a “professional learning community”?
Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Fuchs, L. S., D. L. Compton, et al. (2005). "Responsiveness to
intervention: Preventing and identifying mathematics
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(4): 60-63.
Johnson, E., Mellard, D.F., Fuchs, D., & McKnight, M.A. (2006).
Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS:
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.

References (continued)
Mellard, D. & Johnson, E. (2008). RTI: A practitioner’s guide to
implementing response to intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Mellard, D.F., & Layland, D.A. with Parsons, B. (2008). RTI at the
secondary level: A review of the literature. Lawrence KS: National
Center on Response to Intervention.
Mellard, D., McKnight, M.A., & Deshler, D.D. (2007). The ABCs of
RTI; A guide for parents. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center
on Learning Disabilities.
Power, T.J., Blom-Hoffman, J., Clarke, A.T., Riley-Tillman, T.C.,
Kelleher, C., & Manz, P.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing
intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for
linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5),
495-507.