Path to Reading Excellence in School Sites: Implementation, Effects, and Implications for K 3 Literacy in Urban Schools Objectives Describe how tiered instructional interventions can be targeted to the needs of students in grades 1-3 Describe essential roles and relationships between the components of the PRESS MTSS model Progress monitoring Data-based decision-making Problem solving 1
The Problem: Struggling readers are not likely to read proficiently in later grades have negative experiences with reading Fewer opportunities to practice reading build vocabulary develop comprehension skills 4x as likely to drop out as their proficient peers A Solution: Tiered Interventions What we know research evidence indicates that intervention is effective when it is systematic highly explicit highly interactive 2
Tiered Interventions The PRESS Model Quality Core Instruction Student Proficiency in Reading DATA Professional Learning Communities What is Tiered Intervention? Cascade of services first referenced by Evelyn Deno (1970) Other terms: Response to Intervention (RTI) Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) 3
Tiered Interventions and Supports ~5% ~20% ~15% ~80% Different Schools + Different Needs = Need for a responsive and flexible model 5% 15% 100 students 250 students 30% 80% 20% 50% 4
How We Do It: The MTSS Model in Action One Year s Growth for Every Student Reading At Grade Level by Grade 3 Quality Core Instruction Based on the National Reading Panel (NRP) core elements: Phonemic Awareness Phonics Fluency Vocabulary/Oral Language Comprehension Phonemic Awareness Phonics Fluency Reading Vocabulary Comprehension Differentiated Instruction! 5
Professional Learning Communities Purpose: Develop a culture of data-based decision making Focused commitment to collaboration and implementation of evidence-based intervention across tiered supports Ensure quality core instruction through ongoing, embedded professional development Data Based Decision Making Curriculum Based Measurement (CBM) Uses Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) Sensitive to Student Growth in Reading Reliable Strong indicator of student s reading abilities Can predict performance on high-stakes assessments Quick and Efficient Student reads a text-controlled passage for 60 seconds Words Read Correct and Errors are counted Other data is also collected more on that! Data Meetings! 6
Systematic Data Collection Screening Determine Need: School, Classwide, Student Intervention/ Instruction Tier 1 School or Classwide Instructional Focus Tier 2 Interventions Targeted to Specific Skill Deficit Tier 3 Individualized Interventions Targeted to Specific Skill Deficit Monitoring Next Screening GOM (e/o week) Subskill Measure GOM (weekly) Subskill Measure Screening Data Benchmark Cut Score 7
Tiered Interventions: Data Collection Tier II and III All Students: Benchmarked Fall, Winter, Spring TIER III TIER I I Bi-Weekly General Outcome Measure Weekly Subskill Progress Monitor TIER I Decoding inventory 1 st page 8
Progress Monitoring for Tier II & III Student Growth: Weekly Slope Criteria Grade LSF NWF ORF Kindergarten First Second Third 0.97 sounds/min 1.25 sounds/min 1.25 sounds/min 1.6 words/min 1.5 words/min 1.25 words/min * How we determine if students are on track to make a year s growth in reading Tier 1: Ensure Quality and Efficient Allocation of Resources Classwide median benchmark assessment score is below grade level Targeted classwide interventions; All students make desired levels of progress No Some students (< half) scored below grade level o the benchmark assessment Targeted small group intervention; student makes desired level of progress No No No supplemental interventions necessary Assess further to target intervention to individualized student need 9
Fall 70 Winter 91 Spring 109 WRC Student 1 48 Student 2 122 Student 3 126 Student 4 82 Student 5 102 Student 6 77 Student 7 51 Student 8 84 Student 9 80 Student 10 102 Student 11 83 Student 12 38 Student 13 104 Student 14 152 Student 15 143 Student 16 115 Student 17 142 Student 18 114 Student 19 13 Student 20 75 Student 21 141 Student 22 87 Student 23 49 Median 87 Tier 2: Targeted Interventions Classwide median benchmark assessment score is below grade level Targeted classwide interventions; All students make desired levels of progress No Some students (< half) scored below grade level on the benchmark assessment No Targeted small group intervention; student makes desired level of progress No No supplemental interventions necessary Assess further to target intervention to individualized student need 10
Matching Interventions to Student Need What is the category of the problem? Prescriptive literacy assessment What intervention is right for the student? Decision making tools Supplemental, Intervention and Advanced Instructional Materials for General Education Students by Reading Area Words Their Way DECODING DECODING Population Phonemic Awareness Phonics Core Good Habits, Great Readers K 5 * * *** *** ** Y Y Y Y N N Leveled Classroom Libraries K 5 *** *** *** Y Y Y Y N N Words Their Way 4 th Edition & Stages Books K 5 ** ** Y Y Y Y Y Y Words Their Way Decodable Readers K 1 ** ** Y Y Y Y N N Houghton Mifflin Invitations to Literacy K 3 * ** *** *** ** N N N N Y Y SRA Reading Mastery K 3 *** *** ** Y Y Supplemental/Tier 2 Catching Readers (EIR) K ** ** ** *** ** N Y N N K PALS K 1 *** * N N Y N Y Y PALS 1 6 *** *** * N N Y Y Y Elements of Reading (PA & Phonics) K 2 *** *** Y Y Y K 1 N N Mondo Oral Language Program K 3& ELL *** *** N N Y N N Aprendamos a Leer (Spanish) K *** *** N N Y N N Words Their Way Decodable Readers K 1 *** * Y Y Y N N N Text Talk K 2 * *** ** N Y Y N N MN Reading Corps Phoneme Blending K 3 ** Y Y Y Y Y Y MN Reading Corps Phoneme Segmenting K 3 ** Y Y Y Y Y Y MN Reading Corps Letter Sound Correspondence K 3 ** Y Y Y Y Y Y * = few aspects of this component taught and/or practiced *** = all aspects of this component taught and/or practiced ** = most aspects of this component taught and/or practiced n/a = Not Addressed in this program and/or not a goal of this program. Fluency Comprehension Vocabulary Oral Language ANNISHINABE MARCY PILLSBURY SULLIVAN HARVEST PREP BEST ACADEMY Information adapted from the Florida Center for Reading Research 8/20/2012 11
> 9/10: Test digraphs/vowels 8/10: Do P-1 or P-2 12
Tier 3: Targeted Intervention at Individual Level Classwide median benchmark assessment score is below grade level Targeted classwide interventions; All students make desired levels of progress No Some students (< half) scored below grade level on the benchmark assessment Targeted small group intervention; student makes desired level of progress No No No supplemental interventions necessary Assess further to target intervention to individualized student need 13
Tier 3 Data-Based Decisions Systematic intervention targeted to the individual student s needs Brief Experimental Analysis (BEA) - can systematically assess what intervention conditions are most beneficial for a specific student. 14
Brief Experimental Analysis (BEA) Directly tests student responding under different intervention conditions Uses multi-element design Hypothesis testing Maintenance Acquisition Hypothesis Generalization Acquisition LSF Acquisition 8 7 Say it move it Focus on fewer exemplars more intensively Letters Corrct Per Minute 6 5 4 3 2 Letter Boxes 1 BEA: Test conditions randomly: Vary Intervention or Intervention components 0 1 2 3 4 5 Session Can vary conditions such as: Reinforcement Prompting strategies Different interventions 15
80 Maintenance Increased repetition Shorter, more frequent sessions Words Correct Per Minute 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Duet Reading Repeated Reading 1 2 3 4 5 Test retention at later period of the day Can vary conditions such as: Reinforcement Prompting strategies Different interventions IR + gen. Generalization 70 60 /mp/ /ng/ 50 /mp/ 40 Use a variety of stimuli to generalize skills Could include different activities within intervention 30 20 10 0 Baseline Words in Isolation 1 2 3 4 5 6 Can vary conditions such as: Reinforcement Prompting strategies Different interventions /ng/ 16
Effectiveness of the PRESS Model Word Read Correctly Per Minute 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 Tier 2 Tier 1 Tier 1 Tier 2 0 Fall Winter Fall Winter Second Grade Third Grade Seasonal Benchmark Curriculum Based Measurement Scores for Students Receiving Tier 2 Interventions and Tier 1 Instruction 17
Tier 3 In MTSS BEA used for 17 students in 5 of the participating schools Implemented indicated intervention to address acquisition, maintenance, or generalization for 4 weeks Slopes growth indicated a reliable change in slopes both pre-post BEA (McComas, Burns, Helman, Maki & Klingbell, 2013). 18
Tiered Interventions The PRESS Model YOUR SCHOOL HERE Quality Core Instruction Student Proficiency in Reading DATA Professional Learning Communities 19
THANK YOU! PRESS Website: http://www.cehd.umn.edu/reading/pre SS/ QUESTIONS? Stephanie Hammerschmidt-Snidarich snida009@umn.edu Jessica Simacek sima0034@umn.edu References Burns, M. & Gibbons, K. (2012). Implementing response to intervention in elementary and secondary schools: Procedures to assure scientific based practices (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. Deno, E. (1970). Special education as capital. Exceptional Children, 229 237. Francis, D.J., Shaywitz, S.E., Stuebing, K.K., Shaywitz, B.A., & Fletcher, J.M. (1996). Developmental lag versus deficit models of reading dis ability: A longitudinal, individual growth curves analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 3 17. Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, С.М., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., & Linan Thompson, S. (2009). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to intervention (Rtl) and multi tier intervention in the primary grades (NCEE 2009 4045). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. Hernandez, D. J. (2011). Double jeopardy: How third grade reading skills and poverty influence high school graduation.annie E. Casey Foundation. 701 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore, MD 21202. Stanovich, K.E. (l986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360 406. Torgeson, J. K. (1998). Catch them before they fall: Identification and assessment to prevent reading failure in young children. American Educator/American Federation of Teachers, Spring/Summer, 1 8. 20