RTI Overview and Problem Solving for Small Schools

Transcription

1 Vision: Every child in every district receives the instruction that they need and deserve every day. RTI Overview and Problem Solving for Small Schools Dean Richards Bend-La Pine Schools Oregon Response to Intervention

2 Session Purposes The participant will be able to: Have awareness of the basics of a RTI System Have awareness of the problem solving process and how it can relate to practice in your school Oregon Response to I t ti Anita Archer

3 Oregon RTI Project Tenth year of the grant from ODE Awarded to Tigard Tualatin who partners with Roseburg, Bend-La Pine, and Ontario for regional support throughout Oregon. It is an application process for full inclusion in the grant. Districts receive free professional development and money to seed RTI programs. Oregon Response to I t ti

4 Cadre 1: Tigard-Tualatin Pendleton Sherida n Ontario Rosebur g # of Districts: 4 4.7% % of Oregon Student Population 0% 50% 100%

5 Cadre 9.2: # of Districts: 73 % of Oregon 38.9% Student Population* *Projected 0% 50% 100%

6

7 In The Past General Education Some Fell Through Title Reading or Other Reading Support Some Fell Through Special Education

8 Full Continuum of Support General Education I I I I Title Reading & Reading Support, Gifted Ed. I I I I Special Education, Gifted Ed. I = all along the continuum!

9 Importance of early reading proficiency (Hernandez, 2011) Odds of dropping out of high school based on reading skills in 3 rd grade Proficient reader by 3 rd grade 4% or 1 out of 25 Non-proficient reader by 3 rd grade 16% or 1 out of 6 Non-proficient reader by 3 rd grade AND from poverty 26% or 1 out of 4

10 Consequence of Low Literacy 75% of students who drop out end up incarcerated (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2007) 85% of all juvenile offenders rate as functionally or marginally illiterate (National Institute for Literacy) 43% of those who literacy skills are the lowest, live in poverty (National Institute for Literacy) Oregon Response to I t ti

11 Implications for Adolescent Readers 69% of 8th grade students fall below the proficient level in their ability to comprehend the meaning of text at their grade level. (Doing What Works, 2009) 40% of high school students cannot read well enough to benefit from their textbooks. (NAPE, 2003) Oregon Response to I t ti

12 RTI Essential Components Standards of Practice Data-Based Decision Making with Decision Rules Training Coaching Fidelity Leadership Teaming/Data- Based Decision Making Professional Learning & Support Culture

13 Leadership Leadership is an action not a person ESD Support Teacher Oregon Response to I t ti

14 Data Based Decision Making Data guides the decision making Who gets additional support? What does that support look like? What triggers the support? Oregon Response to I t ti

15 Culture Do we believe all kids can learn? Do we believe we can impact powerful educational outcomes for our students? Do we have a culture of learning? Do we believe it s ok to make mistakes, as long as we don t continue to make the same mistakes? Do we believe what we do matters? Oregon Response to I t ti

16 Professional Learning AND Support Components of Training Presentation/Lectur e know how to do it 10% % of Learners who will be able to do it do it consistently in daily practice 5% 0% +Presenter Modeling 30% 20% 0% +Participant Practice & Feedback +Ongoing Coaching & Admin Support 60% 60% 5% 95% 95% 95% Joyce & Showers, 2002

17 RTI Essential Components SLD Decision Making Progress Monitoring Interventions Screening Core

18 Core Program 1. Sufficient Time 90/110 Min 2. Research-based core materials Includes The Big 5 of Reading Pacing and scope & sequence of adopted research-based core curriculum Aligned with Common Core State Standards 3. Effective instructional strategies Comprehension Vocabulary Fluency Phonics Phonemic Awareness

19 Universal Screening Tools Robust indicator of academic health Efficient, valid, reliable, unbiased and overidentifies Brief and easy to administer Must have multiple, equivalent forms Must be sensitive to growth Outcomes 1. Determine the overall health of the core 2. Which students might need additional intervention Oregon Response to I t ti

20 Interventions Must be designed to match identified needs Is in addition to and aligns with the district core curriculum Provides more intensity Additional modeling and guided feedback Immediacy of feedback Does NOT replace core Oregon Response to I t ti

21 Interventions Tier 2 (Some) beyond the comprehensive core explicit instruction guided practice in targeted, key areas smaller groups use of additional instructional time Tier 3 (Few) significantly behind critical reading skills guided by a specific intervention program two or more of the key foundational areas relatively small percentage of students Oregon Response to I t ti

22 Progress Monitoring Are the children learning? How can we tell? Tools Must Be: Brief Valid Reliable Repeatable Easy to Administer Frequency: Every 2 weeks (minimum) Every week (ideal) Oregon Response to I t ti

23 Three key questions for SLD Low Skills Slow Progre ss Instruction al Need = SPED Entitlement Decision Is the student significantly different from peers? Does the student make less than adequate progress despite interventions? Does the student need specially designed instruction? Oregon Response to I t ti

24 Benefits of an RTI System RTI will help you to: Knowing what each and every student needs Create a system to deliver what students need Prevent reading problems before they occur Raise student achievement for all students Oregon Response to I t ti

25 Overview of Individual Problem Solving Oregon Response to I t ti

26 ICEL I Instruction C Curriculum E Environment L Learner 26 Oregon Response to I t ti

27 Who are students that require individual problem solving? Students with identified disabilities Students who may have a disability Students with significant deficits 27 Oregon Response to I t ti

28 The Problem Solving Process How is it working? 1. Problem Identification What is the problem? What are we going to do about the problem? 4. Plan Implementation & Evaluation Improved Student Achievement 3. Plan Development Problem Analysis Why is the problem occurring?

29 Step 1: Problem Identification 1. Problem Identification What is the problem? Improved Student Achievement 29

30 Step 1: Problem Identification A problem is defined as a discrepancy, using data/evidence, between: Expected performance Current performance Problem Definition 30

31 Step 1: Problem Identification Calculating magnitude of discrepancy Absolute discrepancy: Expected performance Discrepancy Ratio: Larger Number Current performance 72 wcpm (Winter 2 nd Grade) 32 wcpm Smaller Number 72 wcpm (Winter 2 nn Grade) 32 wcpm 31 = -40 wcp m = 2.25 times discrepant

32 Step 1: Problem Identification Replacement Skill or Target Behavior What would it look like if this student were successful? What would we prefer the student do, instead of the problem behavior? 32 Oregon Response to I t ti

33 The Problem Solving Process 1. Problem Identification Improved Student Achievement 2. Problem Analysis Why is the problem occurring?

34 Student Learning Instruction: Curriculum: How you teach What you teach Environment: Where you teach Learner: Who you teach

35 We can control the how, what, and where. We don t have much control over the who. Oregon Response to I t ti 35

36 What impacts student achievement? Effective teaching variables Effect size Other variables Effect size Formative Evaluation Socioeconomic Status Comprehensive interventions for students with LD Teacher Clarity Parental Involvement Computer based instruction* Feedback School Finances Teacher-Student Relationships Aptitude by Treatment Interactions* Repeated Reading Programs Family Structure Direct Instruction Retention John Hattie, Visible Learning, 2009

37 Hypothesis Development Instruction: Curriculum:?? Environment: Learner:?? 37

38 RIOT R I - Review - Interview O T - Observe -Test 38 Oregon Response to I t ti

39 Hypothesis Development Instruction: Curriculum: Environment: Learner: 39

40 INSTRUCTION Instruction: Curriculum:?? Environment: Learner:?? 40

41 When it comes to interventions It is clear that the program is less important than how it is delivered, with the most impressive gains associated with more intensity and an explicit, systematic delivery Fletcher & colleagues, Oregon Response to I t ti

42 Instruction: Examples Who knows? Targets for Intervention I do, we do, y all do, you do 1-2 OTR s/min 8-12 OTR s/min <50% errors corrected % errors corrected Oregon Response to I t ti 42

43 Evaluating INSTRUCTION 1-2 OTR s/min 8-12 OTR s/min Is instruction explicit? Is there a high rate of student opportunities to respond? Is corrective feedback consistently provided? OBSERVE 43 Oregon Response to I t ti

44 Domain Relevant Known Information Core Interventions Instruction Is attendance consistent? Is instruction explicit enough? How is the pacing? How many student opportunities to respond? Is corrective feedback provided? % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Pacing: 25 OTR s during 10 min observation = 2.5 /min % of student errors corrected: % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Pacing: 82 OTR s during 10 min observation = 8.2 /min % of student errors corrected: 17% Curriculum Is curriculum taught with fidelity? Are skills taught matched to student need? Is curriculum the right level of difficulty? Targets for Intervention (INSTRUCTION) Consistent corrective feedback More opportunities to respond during Core Environment Physical setup conducive to learning? Does behavior management system support student learning? Do peer or other distractions impede learning? Learner Are there health/developmental concerns? Parental concerns? English language difficulties? Current and past academic skills?

45

46 CURRICULUM Instruction: Curriculum:?? Environment: Learner:?? 46

47 Curriculum: Examples Targets for Change Not matched to need Matched to need Frustrational (<80%) Instructional (>80-90%) Weak (<80%) Strong (>80%) Oregon Response to I t ti 47

48 Right Difficulty Level? Frustrational Level (<80%) Instructional Level (>80-90%) core instruction (small group) Intervention Oregon Response to I t ti

49 Student Accuracy: Work Sample REVIEW Oregon Response to I t ti

50 Right Difficulty Level If the student is not accurate, determine if the cause is the instruction, the curriculum or both. Curriculum Matched to student need? Instruction Is instruction explicit? Modeling Guided practice? Corrective feedback? Independent practice? Oregon Response to I t ti

51 Domain Relevant Known Information Core Interventions Instruction for example Is attendance consistent? Is instruction explicit enough? How is the pacing? How many student opportunities to respond? Is corrective feedback provided? Curriculum for example Are skills taught matched to student need? Is curriculum the right level of difficulty? Is curriculum taught with fidelity? % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Pacing: 25 OTR s during 10 min observation = 2.5 /min % of student errors corrected: Student Instructional Need: Phonics Small Group Instruct. Focus: None % of correct student answers: Low Fidelity data: No Small group % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Pacing: 82 OTR s during 10 min observation = 8.2 /min % of student errors corrected: 17% Student Instructional Need: Phonics Intervention Instruct. Focus: Phonics % of correct student answers: 71% Fidelity data: 85% (No corrective feedback) Environment for example Physical setup conducive to learning? Does behavior management system support student learning? Do peer or other distractions impede learning? Learner for example Are there health/developmental concerns? Parental concerns? English language difficulties? Current and past academic skills? Targets for Intervention (CURRICULUM) More small group during core (focused on phonics) Follow error correction procedure in curriculum Ensure appropriate instructional level of curriculum placement

52

53 ENVIRONMENT Instruction: Curriculum:?? Environment: Learner:?? 53

54 The Difference: Typical vs. Effective Schools Variable Allocated Noninstructional Time Engagement Rate Typical School 25% (15 min/hr) Effectiv e School 15% (9 min/hr) Time gained +84 more hours 75% 90% +86 more hours Success Rate 80% 90% +30 more hours Academic Learning time 375 hours 575 hours 54 months!) How the time is gained Teaching expectations, teaching transitions, managing appropriate and inappropriate behavior efficiently Better management of groups, pacing Appropriate placement, effective teaching = 200 more hours (53% more) OR 95 more school days (4-5

55 Environment: Examples Not defined Targets for Intervention Explicitly taught & reinforced Low rate of reinforcement Mostly positive (4:1) Chaotic & distracting Organized & distraction-free Oregon Response to I t ti 55

56 Physical Arrangement Can the teacher easily monitor the students? Is the instructional area free from distractions? Can students easily share answers with each other? Oregon Response to I t ti

57 Behavior Management System Are the expectations clear? Are expectations followed through? Are students receiving enough reinforcement (at least 4:1 positive ratio)? Oregon Response to I t ti

58 Domain Relevant Known Information Core Interventions Instruction for example Is attendance consistent? Is instruction explicit enough? How is the pacing? How many student opportunities to respond? Is corrective feedback provided? Curriculum for example Are skills taught matched to student need? Is curriculum the right level of difficulty? Is curriculum taught with fidelity? % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Pacing: 25 OTR s during 10 min observation = 2.5 /min % of student errors corrected: Student Instructional Need: Phonics Small Group Instruct. Focus: None % of correct student answers: Fidelity data: No Small group % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Pacing: 82 OTR s during 10 min observation = 8.2 /min % of student errors corrected: 17% Student Instructional Need: Phonics Intervention Instruct. Focus: Phonics % of correct student answers: 71% Fidelity data: 85% (No corrective feedback) Environment for example Physical setup conducive to learning? Does behavior management system support student learning? Learner for example Are there health/developmental concerns? Parental concerns? English language difficulties? Current and past academic skills? Physical Setup: Organized, no distractions Behavior Management System: Schoolwide PBIS Physical Setup: Organized, no distractions Behavior Management System: None Targets for Intervention (ENVIRONMENT) Create behavior management system to improve student motivation

59

60 LEARNER Instruction: Curriculum:?? Environment: Learner:?? 60

61 Learner: Examples No English Advanced English speaker Well below benchmarks At benchmarks Off-task, disruptive, disengaged Oregon Response to I t ti 61 Focused & attentive

62 Evaluating LEARNER 1. Are there health/developmental concerns? Developmental history Health and vision records REVIEW REVIEW 62 Oregon Response to I t ti

63 Evaluating LEARNER 2. Parental Concerns? Behavior issues? What are the parents concerned about? What can they tell you about the student s history? Do significant behavioral issues interfere with student learning? Is a Functional Behavior Assessment needed? INTERVIEW INTERVIEW 63 Oregon Response to I t ti

64 Evaluating LEARNER 3. English language difficulties? 4. Current and past academic skills? TEST What is the student s native language? Primary language spoken at home? Level of acculturation? What skills does the student have and what skills are they missing? TEST TEST 64 Oregon Response to I t ti

65 Domain Core Relevant Known Information Interventions Instruction for example Is attendance consistent? Is instruction explicit enough? How is the pacing? How many student opportunities to respond? Is corrective feedback provided? Curriculum for example Are skills taught matched to student need? Is curriculum the right level of difficulty? Is curriculum taught with fidelity? % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Pacing: 25 OTR s during 10 min observation = 2.5 /min % of student errors corrected: Student Instructional Need: Phonics Small Group Instruct. Focus: None % of correct student answers: Fidelity data: No Small group % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Pacing: 82 OTR s during 10 min observation = 8.2 /min % of student errors corrected: 17% Student Instructional Need: Phonics Intervention Instruct. Focus: Phonics % of correct student answers: 71% Fidelity data: 85% (No corrective feedback) Environment for example Physical setup conducive to learning? Does behavior management system support student learning? Learner for example Are there health/developmental concerns? Parental concerns? Behavior concerns? English language difficulties? Current and past academic skills? Physical Setup: Organized, no distractions Behavior Management System: Schoolwide PBIS Physical Setup: Organized, no distractions Behavior Management System: None Health/Developmental Concerns: None Parental Concerns: No preschool or consistent kindergarten Behavior Concerns: None significant CBM Scores: Intensive (12 th %ile) Core Assess: Bottom 10% of class Student Test Scores OAKS: 10 th %ile in reading Interv. Checkouts: Passes regularly Diagnostic Assessments: Missing several phonics patterns Progress Monitoring: Moderate progress but not catching up

66

67 Step 3: Plan Development 1. Problem Identification Improved Student Achievement 2. Problem Analysis What are we going to do about the problem? 3. Plan Development 67

68 Domain Instruction for example Is attendance consistent? Is instruction explicit enough? How is the pacing? How many student opportunities to respond? Is corrective feedback provided? Curriculum for example Are skills taught matched to student need? Is curriculum the right level of difficulty? Is curriculum taught with fidelity? Environment for example Physical setup conducive to learning? Does behavior management system support student learning? Learner for example Are there health/developmental concerns? Parental concerns? Behavior concerns? English language difficulties? Current and past academic skills? Core % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Relevant Known Information Interventions % of days attended: 97% Explicitness of Instruction: Good Consistent corrective feedback Pacing: 25 OTR s during 10 min Pacing: 82 OTR s during 10 min More opportunities to respond during observation = 2.5 /min observation = 8.2 /min Core % of student errors corrected: % of student errors corrected: 17% Student Instructional Need: Phonics Small Group Instruct. Focus: None % of correct student answers: Fidelity data: No Small group Physical Setup: Organized, no distractions Behavior Management System: Schoolwide PBIS Student Instructional Need: Phonics Intervention Instruct. Focus: Phonics % of correct student answers: 71% Fidelity data: 85% (No corrective feedback) More small group during core (focused on phonics) Follow error correction procedure in curriculum Ensure appropriate instructional level of curriculum placement Physical Setup: Organized, no distractions Behavior Management System: None Create behavior management system to improve student motivation Health/Developmental Concerns: None Parental Concerns: No preschool or consistent kindergarten Behavior Concerns: Target None instruction significant on identified missing skills Accelerate progress Student by Test providing Scores more of current CBM Scores: Intensive (12 th %ile) Core Assess: Bottom 10% of class intervention OAKS: 10 th %ile in reading Interv. Checkouts: Passes regularly Diagnostic Assessments: Doesn t know silent e, consonant blends. Progress Monitoring: Moderate progress but not catching up

69 Step 4: Plan Implementation & Evaluation How is it working? 1. Problem Identification 4. Plan Implementation & Evaluation Improved Student Achievement 2. Problem Analysis 3. Plan Development Oregon Response to I t ti 69

70 Logistics: Timeline Intervention Review Team Initial Problem Referra Solving Intervene l Meeting 1-2 weeks Steps weeks Problem Solving Review Meeting Step 4 Notify Parent (Parent Brochure) Implement Intervention Core PS Team: Ensure Fidelity Compiles data Determines additional data needed Collects additional data 70

71 Logistics: Timeline Intervention Review Team Initial Problem Referra Solving l Meeting 1-2 weeks Steps weeks Problem Solving Review Meeting Step 4 Notify Parent (Parent Brochure) Implement Intervention Core PS Team: Ensure Fidelity Compiles data Determines additional data needed Collects additional data Who will be responsible for: Observation: Instruction/Curriculum/Environment/Learner Developmental history Record review Additional diagnostic assessment