Title: Schools, Families, and Response to Intervention
1Schools, Families, and Response to Intervention
- A module for pre-service and in-service
professional development - MN RTI Center
- Module author Amy Reschly, PhD
- www.scred.k12.mn.us click on RTI Center
2MN RTI Center Training Modules
- This module was developed with funding from the
MN legislature - It is part of a series of modules available from
the MN RTI Center for use in preservice and
inservice training
2
3Overview
- Background
- Systems theory student learning in context
- Response to Intervention
- Current trends in the family engagement
literature - RTI-Family Engagement Model
4Background Questions
- Who is responsible for student learning?
- What does No Child Left Behind imply about
responsibility? - When a student isnt doing well at school, to
what do we attribute this? - Differences in how families and schools would
answer this question? - What supports student learning at home? At
school? - Are there differences in how families and schools
would answer this question?
5Ecological Systems Theory
Bronfenbrenner
6Three-Legged Stool Students, Families, and
Schools
7Ecological Systems Theory Families and Schools
- Many studies and policies (re. families and
schools) were developed without a theoretical
framework - Needed to advance research and guide practice
- Jordan et al., 2001
- Systems Theory
- Provides the theoretical foundation for working
across families and schools to promote student
success - Focus on understanding child development
(learning and behavior) in context - Reciprocal interactions and relationships among
these contexts (families and schools)
over time
Reschly Christenson, 2009
8Learning Context
- An interwoven structure of circumstances and
people that surround the child across systems at
a given point in time and over time. - Consider the affordance value of this
contextor how the learning context facilitates
or impedes child adaptation to challenges and
demands of schooling. - Question should be
- How does the social context support or thwart the
development of student competence (behavior,
academics, socially) for students across settings
and time?
Christenson Anderson, 2002
9(No Transcript)
10Implications
- We cannot understand student competence or
difficulties as a function of home or school
must consider the entire system (children,
family, school, community, peers) - Schools and homes are the primary socializing and
learning contexts for students. Relationships
between families and school personnel are
important for promoting competence -gt Mesosystem
11Implications (Contd)
- Risk is not located within student, home, or
school systems, but distributed across systems
and represented in interactions.
- Pianta Walsh, 1996
- High risk lack of congruence, poor relationships
between home and school - Low risk family and school systems are
well-functioning, positive relationships promote
congruence and shared responsibility
12Assessment Intervention Questions
- What are typical assessment practices?
- Where are interventions implemented?
- What does our understanding of ecological systems
theory mean for assessment? What about
intervention?
13Response to Intervention
- Calls for reform over many years to address
- Within child conceptualizations of educational
difficulties - Too little time for prevention and early
intervention - More rhetoric than action in creating meaningful
opportunities for parent engagement - Assessment conducted for the purpose of
eligibility determination rather than
intervention - Reliance on special education placement as a
means of addressing student difficulties
Reschly, Chaffin, Christenson, Gutkin, 2007
14Promise of RTI
- May address many of these criticisms
- Focus on all students
- Contexts essential to success implications for
assessment and intervention - Families are necessary, not optional
- Changes inherent in RTI creating an opportunity
to meaningfully engage families - Prevention, screening, and early intervention
- Frequent systematic data collection
- Focus on Problem-Solving
- Change from where to teach to how, what and is it
working? to produce optimal student learning
Reschly et al., 2007
15Working with Families
- The evidence is consistent, positive, and
convincing families have a major influence on
their childrens achievement in school and
through - Henderson Mapp, 2002 (p. 7)
16Out of School Time
- From birth to the age of 18, students spend more
than 90 of their time outside of schools. - Walberg
- Efforts to improve student achievement, and close
the achievement gap among various groups of
students (e.g., those in poverty, racial/ethnic
groups, English learners), must take into account
the power of out-of-school time. - Weiss, Little, Bouffard, 2005
-
17Families
- Families have an enormous impact on student
outcomes but what they do is more important than
who they are - Family process variables account for a much
greater portion of the variance in achievement
(60) than those related to status (25) - Kellaghan et al., 1993
18Mesosystem Families Schools
- When schools, families, and community groups work
together to support learning, children tend to do
better in school, stay in school longer, and like
school more. - Henderson Mapp, 2002 (p. 7)
- There has been a gradual deconstruction of the
notion that families and schools have separate
responsibilities for student learning. - Reschly Christenson, 2009
19Mesosystem Congruence
- The processes and characteristics that enhance
academic achievement are essentially the same -
whether found in the home or in the school - Chall
- Home predictors of school learningwork habits of
the home, academic guidance and support,
stimulation to explore and discuss ideas and
events, language environment, and academic
aspirations and expectationsare comparable to
school factors that enhance achievement - Kellaghan, Sloane, Alvarez, Bloom, 1993
20Common Factors Across Home-School-Community
Related to Student Competence
- Shared Standards and Expectations
- The level of expected performance held by key
adults for the student is congruent across home
and school, and reflects a belief that the
student can learn. - Consistent Structure
- The overall routine and monitoring provided by
key adults for the student have been discussed
and are congruent across home and school. - Cross-setting Opportunity to Learn
- The variety of learning options available to the
youth during school hours and outside of school
time (i.e., home and community) supports the
students learning. - (Contd on next slide)
Christenson Peterson, 2006
Ysseldyke Christenson, 2002
21Common Factors Across Home-School-Community
Related to Student Competence (Contd)
- Mutual Support
- The guidance provided by, the communication
between, and the interest shown by adults to
facilitate student progress in school is
effective. It is what adults do on an ongoing
basis to help the student learn and achieve. - Positive, Trusting Relationships
- The amount of warmth and friendliness praise and
recognition and the degree to which the
adult-youth relationship is positive and
respectful. It includes how adults in the home,
in the school, and in the community work together
to help the student be a learner. - Modeling
- Parents and teachers demonstrate desired
behaviors and commitment and value toward
learning and working hard in their daily lives to
the student.
Christenson Peterson, 2006 Ysseldyke
Christenson, 2002
22Family Involvement
A Universally Endorsed Ideal
- Initiatives, position statements from national
organizations (e.g., PTA, NASP), and legislation
(e.g., NCLB, IDEA) related to family involvement - Not only ensuring family rights but a universal
goal of encouraging family engagement and
involvement in education - Not there yet. Vision of partnerships among
educators and families not reached
22
23Status of Family Engagement Field
Reschly, 2008a Reschly Christenson, 2009
24Families, Schools and RTIEvidence-Based
Interventions
- NCLB, IDEA, Task Forces within APA Divisions
- What works, for whom, and under what conditions?
- Various recent literature reviews and
meta-analyses examining family and family-school
interventions - E.g., Division 16 Task Force (Carlson
Christenson, 2005) Nye, Turner, Schwartz,
2007 Henderson Mapp, 2002.
25Carlson Christenson, 2005
- Areas reviewed parent training and therapy,
consultation, involvement, and family focused
early childhood interventions - Moderate to large effect sizes across areas
- Most effective interventions were those with a
systems orientation - Collaboration interventions w/ two-way
communication, monitoring and dialogue - Focused parent education programs (specific
behavior or learning outcomes) - Parent involvement programs with parents as
tutors in specific subjects - Parent consultation
26Meta-Analysis Example Nye et al., 2007
- Effects of parent involvement programs on
academic performance of elementary students - Overall positive, significant effects
- Most studies in area of reading stable,
moderate effect sizes - Significant moderate effect sizes in math, more
variable - Moderator analyses
- Large effects for intervention programs in which
parents provided some reward or incentive for
student performance, followed by those with
parent education/training components
27Caveats
- Much more research needed
- Directions and issues outlined in Carlson
Christenson, 2005 Epstein Sheldon, 2006
Ginsburg-Block, Manz, McWayne, in press Jordan
et al., 2001 Sheridan, 2005, among others. - Effective practices vary across sites
- Depending on the unique needs of families,
students, and schools and the resources available
to families, schools, and communities - Particular programs or strategies may have
different effects at different ages - Jordan et al., 2001
Reschly, 2008a Reschly Christenson, 2009
28Family-School Co-Roles Partnerships in RTI
Reschly (2008b), RTI Action Network
29References
- Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human
development. Cambridge, MA Harvard University
Press. - Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems
theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child
development Six theories of child development
Revised formulations and current issues (pp.
187-249). London Jessica Kingsley. - Chall, J. S. (2000). The academic achievement
challenge What really works in the classroom?
New York Guilford Press. - Christenson, S.L., Anderson, A.R. (2002).
Commentary The centrality of the learning
context for students' academic enabler skills.
School Psychology Review, 31(3), 378-393. - Christenson, S. L., Carlson, C. (2005).
Evidence-based parent and family interventions in
school psychology State of scientifically based
practice. School Psychology Quarterly, 20,
525-528. Christenson, S. L., Sheridan, S. M.
(2001). School and families Creating essential
connections for learning. NY Guilford Press. - Christenson, S. L., Peterson, C. J. (2006).
Family, school, and community influences on
childrens learning A literature review. All
Parents Are Teachers Project. Minneapolis, MN
University of Minnesota Extension Service.
www.parenting.umn.edu
30References (Contd)
- Christenson, S. L., Sheridan, S. M. (2001).
School and families Creating essential
connections for learning. NY Guilford Press. - Epstein, J. L., Sheldon, S. B. (2006). Moving
forward Ideas for research on school, family,
and community partnerships. In C. F. Conrad R.
Serlin (Eds.), SAGE handbook for research in
education Engaging ideas and enriching inquiry
(pp. 117-137). Thousand Oaks, CA Sage. - Ginsburg-Block, M., Manz, P. H., McWayne, C.
(in press). Partnering to foster achievement in
reading and mathematics. In S.L. Christenson and
A.L. Reschly (Eds). Handbook of School Family
Partnerships. New York Routledge. - Henderson, A. T., Mapp, K. L. (2002). A new
wave of evidence The impact of school,family,
and community connections on student achievement.
Austin, TX Southwest Educational Development
Laboratory. - Jordan, C., Orzco, E., Averett, A. (2001).
Emerging issues in school, family, and community
connections. Austin, TX Southwest Educational
Development Laboratory. - Kellaghan, T., Sloane, K., Alvarez, B., Bloom,
B. S. (1993). The home environment and school
learning Promoting parental involvement in the
education of children. San Francisco
Jossey-Bass.
31References (Contd)
- Moles, O. (1993). Building school-family
partnerships for learning Workshops for urban
educators. Washington, DC Office of Educational
Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department
of Education. - Nye, C., Turner, H., Schwartz, J. (2007).
Approaches to parent involvement for improving
the academic performance of elementary school age
children. Retrieved April 17, 2008 from
http//www.campbellcollaboration.org/frontend2.asp
?ID9 - Pianta, R., Walsh, D. B. (1996). High-risk
children in schools Constructing sustaining
relationships. NY Routledge. - Reschly, A.L. (2008a). Ecological approaches to
working with families. Symposium with Gutkin,
T.B., Doll, B.J., Reschly, A.L., Stoiber, K.C.,
Hintze, J.M., Conoley, J.C. (2008, August).
Ecological Approaches to School Psychological
Services Putting Theory Into Action. Held at the
2008 annual meeting of the American Psychological
Association. Boston, MA. - Reschly, A.L. (2008b). Schools, families and
response to intervention. Invited piece for the
RTI Action Network, National Center on Learning
Disabilities. Available on-line at
http//www.rtinetwork.org/Essential/Family/ar/Scho
ols-Familes-and-Response-to-Intervention
32References (Contd)
- Reschly, A., Coolong, M. A., Christenson, S. L.,
Gutkin, T. B. (2007). Contextual influences and
RTI Critical issues and strategies. In S. R.
Jimerson, M. K. Burns , A. M. VanDerHeyden
(Eds.), The handbook of response to intervention
The science and practice of assessment and
intervention. New York Springer - Reschly, A. L, Christenson, S. L. (2009).
Parents as essential partners for fostering
students learning outcomes. In R. Gilman, E. S.
Huebner, M. Furlong (Eds). A handbook of
positive psychology in schools (pp. 257-272). New
York Routledge. - Sheridan, S. M. (2005). Commentary on
evidence-based parent and family interventions
Will what we know now influence what we do in the
future? School Psychology Quarterly, 20, 518-524.
- Walberg, H. J. (1984). Families as partners in
educational productivity. Phi Delta Kappan, 65,
397-400. - Weiss, H. B., Little, P. M. D., Bouffard, S.
(2005). Participation in youth programs
Enrollment, attendance, and engagement. Special
Issue New Directions for Youth Development, 105.
- Ysseldyke, J. E., Christenson, S. L. (2002).
FAAB Functional Assessment of Academic Behavior.
Longmont, CO Sopris West.
33Resources
- All Parents Are Teachers Project. Minneapolis,
MN University of Minnesota Extension Service.
www.parenting.umn.edu - RTI Action Network, National Center on Learning
Disabilities. www.rtinetwork.org - Harvard Family Research Project
- http//www.hfrp.org/
- Conjoint Behavioral Consultation, Dr. Susan
Sheridan, University of Nebraska.
http//cehs.unl.edu/edpsych/graduate/spCbc.shtml
34Quiz
- 1.) Systems theory does what?
- A.) Provides a theoretical foundation for working
across families and schools - B.) Focuses on understanding child development
- C.) Studies learning and behavior in context
- D.) Looks at reciprocal interactions and
relationships among families and schools over
time - E.) All of the above
35Quiz (Contd)
- 2.) A promise of Response to Intervention is that
families are ________not _________. - 3.) Name three out of the six common factors
across home-school-community related to student
competence.
36Quiz (Contd)
- 4.) Caveats of RTI True or False
- 1- Much more research is needed
- 2- Effective practices do not vary by site
- 3- Particular programs/strategies may have the
same effects at different ages
37The End ?
- Note The MN RTI Center does not endorse any
particular product. Examples used are for
instructional purposes only. - Special Thanks
- Thank you to Dr. Ann Casey, director of the MN
RTI Center, for her leadership - Thank you to Aimee Hochstein, Kristen Bouwman,
and Nathan Rowe, Minnesota State University
Moorhead graduate students, for editing work,
writing quizzes, and enhancing the quality of
these training materials