Using Response to Intervention for Washington Students

1
Using Response to Intervention for Washington
Students

• Ken Howell, Ph.D.
• Department of Special Education
• Western Washington University
• Steve Hirsch, Ph.D.
• School Psychology Program, Washington State
  University
• School Psychologist, East Valley School District
• Mike Jacobsen
• Assessment and Curriculum Director, White River
  SD
• Paul Alig
• OSPI, Special Education, Program Supervisor
• Tonya Middling
• OSPI, Special Education, Learning Improvement
  Coordinator

2
RTI Manual Overview

• Outlines principle components of RTI
• Guidance on RTI decision making
• Recommendations on using RTI data to identify
  specific learning disabilities (SLD)
• Answers common questions
• Includes additional resources and practical
  appendices

3
How this manual came about

• Early Intervening Services and RTI committee
• SLD committee
• Other sources (in and outside OSPI)

4
How to use this manual

• Recommendations NOT regulations
• Readiness checklist
• Each district and school design their own RTI
  system depending on curriculum decisions and
  resources
• NOTE An RTI system is a combined general
  education and special education approach

5
Response to Intervention What are the big ideas?

• RTI is the practice of providing high-quality
  instruction and/or intervention matched to
  student needs and using learning rate over time
  and level of performance to make important
  educational decisions
• National Association of State Directors of
  Special Education Inc, 2005

6
Response to Intervention What are the big ideas?

• High quality instruction/intervention
  Instruction or intervention matched to student
  need that has been demonstrated empirically and
  by practice to demonstrate high learning rates
  for most students
• Learning rate and level of performance Learning
  rate refers to students growth in academic or
  behavioral skills over time in comparison to
  prior levels and peer growth rates. Level of
  performance refers to a students relative
  standing (growth) on some critical dimension of
  academic or behavioral skills compared to
  expected/predicted growth.
• Important educational decisions Decisions about
  intensity and duration of interventions are based
  upon data across multiple tiers of intervention.

7
Response to Intervention Core Principles

• We can effectively teach all children
• Intervene early
• Use mult-tier model of service delivery
• Use a problem solving model to make decisions

8
Response to Intervention Core Principles

• Monitor student progress to inform instruction
• Use data to make decisions
• Assessment is used for multiple purposes
• Screening
• Diagnosing
• Progress monitoring

9
Response to Intervention Background and Research
Support

• Stan Denos data-based decision program
  modification model
• (Deno, 1985 Deno Mirkin, 1977)
• Bergans behavioral consultation model
• (Bergan, 1977)
• Problems in the traditional system
• Integration between general and special education
• Undocumented benefits of special education
• Variability and accuracy of eligibility
  determination
• Integration of eligibility determination with
  instruction

10
Response to Intervention Background and Research
Support

• Policy and research supports
• National Institutes for Child Health and
  Development Studies www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/g
  eneral_info/future_children.html
• National Reading Panel www.nationalreadingpanel.o
  rg
• National Research Council Panel on Minority
  Overrepresentation
• National Summit on Learning Disabilities
• Presidents Commission on Excellence in Special
  Education www.ed.gov/inits/commisionsboards/whspe
  cialeducation/index.html

11
Why Universal Academic Screening?

• -Analogous to vision screening
• -Identifies those who are not on track
• -On track for what?
• to be a successful reader?
• to pass the WASL?

12
How to use benchmarks in RTI

• Following the universal screening
• Those At-Risk are targeted for Tier 1
  interventions (below benchmarks with no current
  services e.g. IEP)
• Classroom teacher tries an intervention
• Progress monitored while intervention being
  conducted
• 3 or 4 other students (not At-Risk) monitored as
  well to provide comparison

13
Continued use of Benchmarks

• Universal screening typically occurs three
  times/year (fall/winter/spring)
• We have benchmarks to document whether a child is
  on track three times/year
• The students data at benchmark testing periods
  can be utilized to validate the effectiveness of
  intervention. Is the gap closing?

14
Characteristics of scientific, research-based
interventions

• Offer as soon as it is clear the student is
  lagging behind
• Increase intensity of instruction and practice
• Opportunity for explicit and systematic
  instruction/practice and cumulative review
• Provide skillful instruction with good error
  correction, immediate feedback
• Guided by and in response to progress monitoring
  data
• Must provide a supportive atmosphere for learning

15
Reviewing Classroom Performance
5 of your students should be here
15 of your students should be here
80 of your students should be here
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
Words Read Correct
X
X
X
19
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Words Read Correct
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
20
Designing Instruction to Meet Student Needs
Standardized Assessments
Benchmarking or Screening

Instructional Problem Solving
Requires taking multiple sources of evidence and
selecting appropriate instructional interventions
based on identified student needs
Progress Monitoring
Performance or Criterion Assessments
21
Targeted Assessment

• Targeted assessment means shifting to evaluations
  that are designed around the specific targeted
  concerns of the student.
• In other words, we select assessments that
  measure the area of concern rather than
  administering an assessment and then trying to
  determine what it means.

22
Targeted Assessment
Non-targeted Assessment
The Problem is that we end up with data that we
dont need and we havent even confirmed the
actual problem! (data rich and analysis poor
phenomenon)
23
A Problem Solving Process
24
Domains of Influence
25
R.I.O.T.
26
Evaluation Planning
27
RTI and Child Find

• Anyone, including parents and teachers, can make
  a referral at any time in a RTI system.
• A student cannot be required to go all the way
  through Tier III before being evaluated if
  evidence exists to suspect a disability.

28
When should a student be suspected of having a
disability due to a lack of responsiveness?

• Students who are performing significantly less
  than their peers and have been provided two or
  more Tier III interventions that did not
  significantly decrease the gap in achievement
  should be suspected as having SLD and evaluated
  absent other evidence.

29
Parent Involvement in RTI

• In a RTI system parents must be provided progress
  monitoring data. 34 CFR Sec. 300.309(b)(2).
• Parents must also be informed of
• State policies regarding the amount and nature of
  student performance data that is collected and
  the general education services that are provided
• The strategies for increasing the students rate
  of learning and
• Their right to request an evaluation.
• 34 CFR Sec. 300.311(a)(7).

30
Is consent required before conducting screenings
or CBMs?

• Teachers or specialists do not need to obtain
  consent to evaluate when administering universal
  screening, CBMs, or targeted assessments to a
  student in order to determine appropriate
  instructional strategies for curriculum
  implementation.
• 20 USC Sec. 1414(a)(1)(E).

31
Same players new roles I

• The New Psychologist Role
• Data Manager
• Data Analyzer
• Data Synthesizer
• Detective Extraordinaire
• Progress Monitoring?
• The New Sped Teacher Role
• Data Provider
• Targeted Assessment
• Progress Monitoring
• Intervention opportunities

32
Same players new roles II

• The New Parent Role
• Data Provider (FAAB)
• Interventionist
• Progress Monitoring
• The New General Ed.Teacher Role
• Tier 1 Tier 2 interventions
• Progress Monitoring
• Data provider (FAAB) for Learning Env.
• Be ready for intervention

33
Same players new roles III

• The New Principal Role
• As goes the principals attitude, so goes the
  team
• Providing for the assessment of intervention
  fidelity
• The New Attitude
• We are not looking at the child as broken
• Focus is on Why isnt the general education
  curriculum working for this child?

34
Using RTI data to identify SLD

• District procedures set out criteria for using
  RTI data to establish SLD.
• District criteria must incorporate new federal
  regulations on SLD.
• 34 CFR Sections 300.309 through 300.311

35
Adopt an established approach for using RTI data
to identify SLD

• Districts are strongly encouraged to use
  established approaches for using RTI data to
  identify SLD.
• Criteria determines if a student is not making
  sufficient progress to meet age or State-approved
  grade-level standards in one or more of the SLD
  areas. 34 CFR Sec. 300.309(a)(2)(i).

36
Recommended criteria for identifying SLD using
RTI Question 1

• Where at least two phases of intensive
  interventions implemented in the general
  education curriculum with fidelity, which did not
  affect the students achievement and does
  evidence of the students non-responsiveness at
  Tier III reflect that he or she is learning at a
  rate significantly less that her or his peers?

37
Recommended criteria for identifying SLD using
RTI Question 2

• Do RTI and other existing data (including
  observation) meet at least two of the following
  four criteria
• 1)CBM scores showing the student is performing at
  or below the 7th percentile of current
  grade-level or at or below the 16th percentile of
  a previous grade-level
• 2)A standardized assessment score that is 1.75
  standard deviations below the mean (within test
  protocols)
• 3)CBM scores and other data demonstrate the
  students median performance is at or below his
  or her grade placement peers by a discrepancy
  ratio of at least 2
• 4)The students instructional performance level
  is two or more grade levels below her or his
  current grade placement determined by CBM scores,
  classroom performance, observation and, if
  appropriate, standardized assessments?

38
Recommended criteria for identifying SLD using
RTI Question 3

• Does the evaluation group (including the parent)
  believe the student requires resources that are
  not available in the general education setting,
  with or without accommodations, in order to
  participate or progress in the general education
  curriculum at a level equal to his or her peers?
• Evidence of this criterion would show that the
  student requires specially designed instruction
  or Tier III interventions for an extended period
  of time that is not available in the general
  education curriculum.

39
Evaluation Report

• To establish SLD, under recommended approach, the
  report must reflect a yes to all three
  questions (sample in Appendix H).
• Also need to rule out (1) visual, hearing , or
  motor disability (2) mental retardation (3)
  emotional disturbance (4) cultural factors and
  (5) limited English proficiency. 34 CFR Sec.
  300.309(a)(3).

40
For All Evaluation Reports Even When Severe
Discrepancy Tables Are Used

• Appropriate Math and Reading Instruction 34 CFR
  300.309(b) requires an evaluation group ensure
  underachievement shown by a student suspected of
  having SLD is not due to a lack of appropriate
  instruction in math and reading and must
  consider
• Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as part
  of, the referral process the student was provided
  appropriate instruction in general education
  settings, delivered by qualified personnel and
• Data-based documentation of repeated assessments
  of achievement at reasonable intervals,
  reflecting formal assessment of student progress
  during instruction.

41
Special Education Eligibility

• To be eligible for special education, the
  evaluation group for students with SLD must find
  an adverse educational impact and the need for
  specially designed instruction (SDI).
• The evaluation report for eligible students
  should include recommendations about the SDI and
  any related services, program modifications,
  accommodations and other supports the student
  needs with enough specificity to develop an IEP.
• In a RTI system, the SDI provided should
  supplement the scientific-based interventions and
  high quality instruction the student was already
  receiving in general education.

42
EIS

• Early Intervening Services are
• Activities that support students that have not
  been determined eligible for special education,
  but that need
• additional academic and behavioral supports to
  be successful in the
• general education curriculum
• 34 CFR 300.226

43
EIS Allowable Activities

• EIS activities may include
• Professional development on scientific, research
  based interventions
• Behavioral evaluations and services
• Instruction on use of assistive technology
• Setting up financial infrastructures with other
  funds used under ESEA (i.e., Reading First, Title
  1)

44
Disproportionate Representation

• States must require LEAs to reserve maximum
  amount of EIS funds to address any issues of
  disproportionate representation of minority
  students in special education
• Currently, LEAs are identified through the state
  monitoring system (routine, focused, targeted)
  looking at both numerical data and policies and
  procedures (may change with final federal
  regulations which allow states to require EIS set
  aside based on disproportionate numerical data
  only
• 34 CFR 300.

45
Alignment of District Resources and RTI

• Basic Education
• LAP/Title
• Reading First (NCLB, 2001)
• School Improvement Plan
• Student Learning Plans (H.S. Level)
• Special Education (IDEA 2004)
• Other resources available to the
  building/district

46
Next Steps

• Further technical assistance (SLD Committee)
• Website resources regularly updated
• ESD Pilot sites
• Professional Development
• Conferences
• Higher Education
• Initiatives
• Development of state regulations