RTI

1
RTI MTI Building the Foundation
TTSD RTI Site Visit October 21, 2008
2
Objectives

• Provide an overview of RTI and MTI and their
  importance
• Describe the importance of Tier I instruction in
  the RTI system
• Describe RTI implementation
• Questions and discussion

3
(No Transcript)
4
TTSD Demographics

• 17 Schools, 12,000 students
• 10 elementary, 3 middle, 2 high, 1 alternative,
  1 charter
• Special Programs participation
• 1,200 Special Education (10)
• 1,800 English Language Learners (15)
• 1,500 Talented and Gifted (12)
• Socio-economic status
• Title 1 in 5 elementary schools
• Free/Reduced ranges from 7 to 62

5
Tigard-Tualatins EBIS Implementation Timeline
EBIS OSEP Grant Reading Special Education
initiatives incorporated
Board adopts EBS district-wide 5 more schools
implement
TTSD Develops the RTI Technical Assistance Manual
for ODE
1998-2000
2005-2008
1996
2003
1997
2001
2005
ODE Contracts with TTSD to Train 23 School Oregon
Districts to Develop Implement RTI
7 pilot elementary schools implement EBS
Remaining (2) schools implement ongoing training
leadership
Secondary School focus utilizing Title IVa
6
BIG RTI Support for All Learners
little rti
(SLD Assessment Under IDEA)
Effective Teaming Data-based Decision Making
7
Defining Terms
Response to Intervention (little rti)
Multi-Tiered Instruction (MTI)

• Is an evaluation procedure identified in IDEA for
  identifying learning disabilities
• Is a special education procedure that is limited
  to assessment
• Applies only to children suspected of having LD
• Cannot be implemented without a system like MTI
  in place

• Is a system of organizing gen. ed. curriculum and
  instruction to meet the needs of all students
• Integrates all support programs to use resources
  more efficiently
• Applies to all students
• Can exist without using RTI

8
Designing School-Wide Systems for Student Success
1-5
1-5
5-10
5-10
80-90
80-90
9
Tiers of Instruction

• The three-tiered model assumes that
• 80 of students or more will meet benchmarks
• About 20 of students will need something more
• About 5 will need intensive support

10
Differences Learning to ReadEstimates from NICHD
research (NC Dept. of Public Education)
11
We cant intervene one by one. . .

• Overall, national longitudinal studies show that
  more than 17.5 percent of the nation's
  children--about 10 million children--will
  encounter reading problems in the crucial first
  three years of their schooling"
• (National Reading Panel Progress Report, 2000).
• In a 500 student school
• 400 students will do fine with a good core
  curriculum
• 75 students will need systematic, ongoing
  specialized instruction
• 25 students will need intensive, individualized
  intervention

12
Tier I

• All students receive Tier I
• Research-based core curriculum
• Strong fidelity and professional development
• Universal screening

13
If the 80 criterion is not being met

• 90 minutes of reading daily?
• Protected allocated reading time each day?
• Skill grouping by class or grade?
• Core and supplemental programs implemented with
  fidelity?
• More professional development needed?

14
Tiers II and III

• Tier II Core plus strategic intervention
• Research-based program
• Small group
• 20-30 min. daily
• Tier III Core plus intensive intervention
• Research-based program
• Small group
• 45 min. daily

15
Think, Pair, Share

• Does this description of reading match your
  experience and perspective?
• How is instruction currently organized at your
  school to meet the diverse needs of developing
  readers?
• How might it be organized differently?

16
RTI Systems Requirements

• Leadership
• Universal screening
• Progress monitoring
• Teaming
• Research-based core reading curriculum
• Research-based interventions
• Standard Policies and Procedures (e.g. decision
  rules)
• Professional development including fidelity of
  implementation

17
Universal Screening

• Quick measures of key academic skills
• Should occur for ALL students 3x per year
• Used for data-based decision making about
• How to create instructional change for ALL
• Which students need a closer look and/or
  intervention

18
Progress Monitoring

• Quick measure of skills in area of need
• All students needing intervention are progress
  monitored
• Frequency is determined by district decision
  rules
• Monthly
• Twice per month
• Weekly
• Twice per week

19
Effects of Progress Monitoring

• Progress monitoring has been extensively
  researched in SPED (Fuchs Fuchs, 1986)
• Students showed improved reading scores when
  teachers
• MONITORED their progress .70 effect size (
  25th ? 50th ile)
• GRAPHED their reading scores (.80 effect size)
• used DECISIONS RULES to determine whether to make
  a change in instruction while monitoring student
  progress (.90 effect size)

20
Teaming

• Purpose
• Review data
• Plan interventions
• Partner with parents
• Refer for special education evaluation when
  indicated

21
Teaming

• Team Members
• Principal-Critical to the teams effectiveness
• Literacy Specialist/Title I
• Counselor/Psychologist
• ELL teacher
• Special Ed. Teacher
• Grade Level Teachers

22
Teaming

• Logistics
• Typically a core team meets ONCE a week
• Sort screening data into tiers 3 TIMES PER YEAR
• Review progress monitoring data on students in
  interventions
• Each grade-level team meets with the core team
  ONCE every 4-6 weeks

23
A Tale of Two Teams

• Does the child find the system, or does the
  system find the child?

24
Daisy participates in the general curriculum
Daisys teacher does his best to differentiate
instruction and keeps anecdotal data
Daisy isnt doing well
Teacher tries again
Daisy improves
Daisy doesnt improve
The pre referral/discrepancy approach
Pre-referral team reviews what teacher has
tried
Resumes regular program
Teachers effort is deemed sufficient
Teacher is told to try again
Special Education referral is initiated by the
teacher
Daisy is tested, usually by special education
personnel, using IQ, achievement, and other tests
25
Daisy participates in the general curriculum
EBIS Team reviews screening data and places
Daisy in group intervention
Daisy isnt doing well
Second Group Intervention
Daisy improves
Daisy doesnt improve
How RTI Works from a Students Perspective
EBIS Team designs individualized intervention
Resumes general program
Daisy improves
Daisy doesnt improve
Improvement is good and other factors are
suspected as cause
Intervention is intense and LD is suspected
Special Education referral is initiated
Parents Notified
26
Think, Pair, Share

• How do the two team processes differ?
• How are teams currently organized in your
  district?
• How would your team process look different in a
  multi-tiered, RTI system?

27
Why change?

• Does your current approach enhance outcomes for
  all students?
• Does it promote collaboration, or categorization?
• Does your system find the student, or does the
  student find the system?
• Do your current special education evaluations
  provide instructionally relevant information?
• Does the approach systematically rule out
  exclusionary factors such as language
  acquisition, lack of instruction, and poverty ?
• Are you identifying students with learning
  disabilities early enough? (1st or 2nd grade)

28
Why change?

• It works!
• Remember the research on progress monitoring?
• Data from OrRTI Districts

29
District A, Currently Year 3 of OrRTI
Kindergarten PSF, 2001-2007
30
District A, Currently Year 3 of OrRTI DIBELS
1st Grade NWF, 2001-2007
31
District A, Currently Year 3 of OrRTI DIBELS
2nd Grade ORF, 2001-2007
32
A closing thought

• RTI is, first and foremost, about good teaching
  Even before students are formally classified as
  having learning disabilities, those who need
  more assistance receive additional
  interventionsSo RTI is as much a prevention
  model as an identification model.
• -Michael Hock, WestEd

33
Contacts and Resources

• Dean Richards
• drichards_at_ttsd.k12.or.us
• 503-431-4135

• www.ttsd.k12.or.us

• Erin Lolich
• elolich_at_ttsd.k12.or.us
• 503-431-4136